Source: China Institute of Land and Resources Economics | Release Date: 2018-01-17

The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China pointed out that the principal social contradiction in our country has transformed into the contradiction between the people’s ever-growing need for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development. It is urgently necessary to discuss how we should view the contradictory issues facing China’s mining industry. Guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, and drawing on Comrade Mao Zedong’s “On Contradiction,” this article examines the contradictions and their evolution in the development of China’s mining industry.

　　First, contradictions are universal; China’s mining industry is advancing amidst these contradictions.

　　1. The contradictions in China's mining industry are widespread.

　　Over the past four decades of reform and opening-up, the development of the mining industry has consistently been fraught with contradictions—some large, others small; some primary, others secondary; some representing the dominant aspect of a contradiction, others the subordinate one. As soon as one set of contradictions is resolved, new ones inevitably emerge. The contradictions facing China’s mining sector encompass such issues as the conflict between economic development and demand for mineral resources, the tension between mining development and regulatory order, domestic versus international tensions, the rift between central and local authorities, and the clash between state-owned and private capital, among others. However, overall, mining administration has placed particular emphasis on the following five major contradictions. ——

　　First is the contradiction between supply and demand. Within this supply-demand contradiction, the primary issue is the difficulty of resource supply in meeting resource demand. This includes both aggregate-level contradictions—such as the high degree of external dependence on most bulk minerals—and structural contradictions—for example, the high proportion of coal in the energy mix, coupled with a relatively low share of cleaner energy sources like natural gas.

　　Second, there are contradictions in the production order. In the early stages, these contradictions in the production order were primarily caused by property rights issues. Historically, this has been evident in mineral resource development— “ Mine within a mine ”、 “ Building within a building ” There is a dispute over mineral resources between township mining operations and state-owned enterprises. The current conflicts in production order stem from insufficient regulatory capacity or ambiguities in historical responsibilities—for example, issues such as illegal mining and overlying/overboundary extraction in certain mining areas.

　　Third is the contradiction between mineral resource development and the ecological environment. Since mineral development inevitably disturbs the ecological environment, the conflict between mineral development and the ecological environment has always existed—for example, environmental pollution, ecological damage, and geological hazards triggered by mineral development.

　　Fourth is the contradiction in safe production. Most mineral resources are buried underground, and China itself has a relatively complex geological environment. As a result, the risk of safe production in mineral development is high. At the same time, labor costs are low, making the contradictions in safe production in mineral development particularly prominent—especially in underground mines, where the contradictions are most acute and primarily manifest as casualties among workers.

　　Fifth, conflicts within mining communities. These conflicts primarily arise from the inability of stakeholders to share in the benefits generated by mining activities. A fundamental characteristic of mineral resource development is that public interests tend to be concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. Mineral extraction is a process that depletes mineral resources, consumes land resources, disrupts environmental resources, and impacts socio-cultural resources—each of these resource depletions constitutes a cost of the mined products. If property rights and pricing for public resources remain unclear, the depletion of these公共资源 cannot be compensated through revenues from the sale of mined products, thereby leading to the concentration of public interests in the hands of mining companies. Furthermore, “ Resource curse ” The issue is also an external factor that triggers conflicts within the mining community.

　　2. The philosophical contradiction in mining is closely linked to the externalities of mineral resource development in economics.

　　Contradiction is a philosophical concept. In economics, negative externalities represent contradiction, while positive externalities represent identity. When mineral development gives rise to negative externalities, contradictions inevitably emerge—for instance, the conflict between mineral development on the one hand and environmental protection, safe production, and community governance on the other. Moreover, the failure of mineral development to meet the needs of economic growth also constitutes a contradiction—the tension between scarcity and security, as well as the conflict between mineral development and overall economic development. By adopting the philosophical methodology of contradiction theory and identifying the primary contradictions currently facing China’s mining sector, we can proceed with confidence and clarity of mind, make scientifically sound analyses and judgments of the situation, formulate correct policy recommendations, and develop effective management decision-making strategies. Comrade Xi Jinping has emphasized that reform must be problem-oriented—that is, we must focus on salient and principal contradictions. The same principle applies to reform in mineral resource management: we must remain firmly focused on addressing specific problems.

　　II. In different eras, the principal contradiction and the principal aspect of the contradiction in the mining industry have continuously evolved.

　　1. The three evolutionary stages of the principal contradiction in China’s mining industry.

　　The evolution of contradictions is a process of game and evolution. By examining the central leadership’s focus on the mineral resources sector, we can identify China’s primary contradiction in mining. Since the reform and opening-up, the primary contradiction in the mining sector has undergone three distinct stages. ——

　　First, the last century. 80 The primary contradiction in China's mining industry during that era was the supply-demand contradiction. At the time, central leaders proposed... “ Water flows quickly. ”， “ Large mines open widely; small mines open sparingly. ”， “ Workers, peasants, soldiers, and intellectuals—let’s all head to the mines! ” This was because one of the main contradictions in China’s economy at the time was the lack of initial capital accumulation among township and village enterprises, which urgently required the exploitation of mineral resources to rapidly achieve capital accumulation in the township and village economies. At that time, the primary contradiction in China’s mining sector was the gap between the supply of mined resources and the growing demand for mineral products driven by economic growth.

　　Second, the last century 90 For decades, the primary contradiction in China’s mining sector has been one of order—a contradiction that arises from the need to balance supply and demand. Especially since the beginning of the new century, the State Council has issued multiple rounds of directives aimed at rectifying mining order at the township level, streamlining mineral development practices, and consolidating mineral resource exploitation. This was driven by the escalating conflict between the positive externalities—such as the economic contributions of mineral development—and the negative externalities—such as environmental risks and social harm. In the early days of the establishment of the Mineral Resources Administration, numerous industrial regulatory agencies were abolished, leading to a weakening of oversight over mine safety, resource conservation, and integrated resource utilization. As the capacity for mining governance could no longer keep pace with the rapid growth of the mining industry, the only option left was to rely continually on phased, campaign-style governance efforts to strike a balance between resource demand and the orderly management of mining activities.

　　Third, since the onset of the “new normal,” the primary contradiction in China’s mining sector has been the conflict between resource development and ecological environmental protection. On the one hand, the shift from relying primarily on domestic resources supplemented by foreign sources to a global resource allocation strategy has relegated domestic supply-demand contradictions to a secondary position. Currently, China’s dependence on foreign sources for critical minerals such as oil, natural gas, iron, copper, aluminum, and potash remains high. However, with robust foreign exchange reserves and steadily increasing investments in overseas mineral rights, the longstanding contradiction between resource supply and economic development is undergoing new transformations.

　　On the other hand, traditional mineral development leaves a legacy... “ Clumsy, big, and rough ” the impression. However, for a considerable period of time, the principal contradiction in our country was between the people’s growing material and cultural needs and the backward state of social productive forces. In the field of mineral resource development, the supply-demand contradiction still remained the primary one. Since the ecological carrying capacity for mineral development still had considerable room to accommodate further growth, this contradiction had not yet become particularly prominent. Now, however, China’s resource and environmental carrying capacity has reached a bottleneck, and the principal contradiction in society has shifted to one between the people’s ever-growing aspirations for a better life and the imbalance and inadequacy of development. Only when we have clear waters and lush mountains can we truly turn them into mountains of gold and silver; thus, the ecological and environmental contradictions arising from mineral development are gradually rising to a new and critical position. Specifically, there is immense pressure from historically accumulated environmental problems left over from past mineral development activities, and the transition toward a green development model in mineral resource exploration and extraction needs to be significantly intensified. The environmental protection issues surrounding mineral development in the Qilian Mountains have prompted the withdrawal of mining rights from protected areas nationwide. This highlights that the institutional framework for ecological civilization construction has yet to take shape, that the property rights system for natural resource assets and the system of land-use control remain unclear, and that there are multiple authorities involved in natural resource management—these are all indicative of ongoing systemic contradictions.

　　The degree of conflict between resource development and ecological environmental protection is reflected precisely on the possibility frontier between resource production and ecological environmental quality. The ecological protection red line, the environmental quality bottom line, and the upper limit for resource utilization—points highlighted by General Secretary Xi Jinping—are aimed at resolving the contradiction between resource development and ecological environmental protection and identifying the optimal solution for the possibility frontier between resource production and ecological environmental quality.

　　2. The five major contradictions in the mining industry can be mutually converted.

　　Contradictions have their own unique laws, and wherever contradictions exist, game-theoretic analysis becomes applicable. In different eras, supply-demand contradictions, contradictions in production order, ecological-environmental contradictions, occupational safety contradictions, and conflicts between mining communities and local societies have all coexisted. As external economic and social conditions vary, different contradictions assume varying degrees of importance. When the conditions underlying these contradictions change, the primary aspect of the contradiction shifts as well, and consequently, the main contradiction in mineral resource development also undergoes transformation. Specifically, this manifests itself in the fact that the five major contradictions in the mining sector can mutually transform into one another.

　　First, the contradictions in the order of mineral resource development and the supply-demand contradictions mutually transform into one another. The contradictions in the order of mineral resource development are influenced by the pace of economic growth. For a considerable period, some comrades believed that mineral resource management was fraught with chaos. As one expert once put it, when... GDP Growth rate exceeds 10% At times, no matter what measures are taken, the mining industry is plagued by a series of incidents and rampant chaos; when growth slows down below... 7% At times, if you don't exert much effort to manage it, there probably won't be any major problems. This reflects a systematic understanding of the dynamics governing mining order and economic growth. A deeper analysis reveals that, under certain conditions, mining order and mineral demand tend to evolve in opposite directions—meaning that the contradictions within the mining order and those between supply and demand achieve unity precisely through their mutual opposition.

　　Second, the contradictions between safe production and ecological environment can be mutually transformed. When I was working at the local level, I observed that in some areas, in order to reduce safety production accidents, certain shallow underground mines were converted into open-pit mines. As a result, while safety production accidents decreased, the amount of waste rock, tailings, and mine residues increased—thus transforming the original contradiction over safe production into a conflict between mineral development and the ecological environment.

　　Third, ecological and environmental contradictions and supply-demand contradictions can be mutually transformed. Our research found that in many regions, in order to protect the ecological environment and reduce safety production accidents, a large number of coal mines have been shut down. As a result, even though these provinces were once major coal producers, they now have to purchase coal from other provinces to ensure sufficient supplies for winter heating. In this way, the ecological and environmental contradictions arising from mineral resource development have been transformed into supply-demand contradictions for mineral resources.

　　Fourth, ecological and environmental conflicts and community conflicts can be mutually transformative. In many mining areas, community conflicts arise from local residents' opposition to mineral development due to environmental damage caused by such activities. For example, the situation that occurred in Xilingol League, Inner Mongolia... “May 11” and “May 15” Incidents and disputes in mining areas.

　　Third, we must uphold the viewpoint of unity of opposites and insist that reform is the fundamental path to resolving contradictions.

　　1. The contradiction between mineral development and the ecological environment can be transformed from a contradiction into unity.

　　Mineral resources are an integral part of the ecosystem—they are symbiotic and unified. However, when these resources are exploited in a crude or excessive manner, they turn into sources of conflict. Yet by setting upper limits on resource exploitation, establishing ecological protection redlines, and defining environmental quality baselines, and by promoting green exploration and high-standard development—ensuring that emissions remain within the carrying capacity of the resource and environment—and by maintaining the environmental status of mining areas before and after development unchanged despite mining activities—we can effectively transform these conflicts into opportunities for sustainable coexistence.

　　By transforming the negative externalities of mineral development into positive externalities, we can achieve a win-win situation that simultaneously boosts economic and ecological benefits. In some regions, mineral development has even turned barren hills into oases and rocky mountains into fertile farmland. For example, Zhejiang Province has issued regulations requiring that sand, gravel, and soil mining must completely clear the mountaintops and relevel mining areas into fertile farmland or usable land; otherwise, the mining rights will be reassessed. The mining development models in areas such as Wulanmulun New Village in Ordos, Inner Mongolia, and Hanying New Village in Kunming, Yunnan, not only have avoided environmental damage but have also reshaped, improved, and benefited local communities. Through mine reclamation, bald mountains have been transformed into mining parks, effectively converting the negative externalities of mineral development into positive ones and turning what were once conflicting aspects into a harmonious unity. Hebei Province uses... “ The Saihanba Spirit ” Promoting mine environmental remediation can transform the contradiction between mineral development and ecological environment into a unity.

　　2. Further advancing property rights reform is the breakthrough for resolving the current principal contradiction.

　　The transformation of contradictions requires certain conditions. As stated in "The Old Regime and the Revolution," many contradictions evolve in this way: “ A river flows into the desert and disappears—but it doesn’t truly perish. Instead, it sinks underground, only to re-emerge from the surface again not far from where it first disappeared. ” The conflict between mineral resource development and ecological environment constitutes a negative externality problem from an economic perspective. A key approach to addressing negative externalities is to clarify property rights—specifically, clearly defining the property rights over minerals, water, forests, farmland, grasslands, and marine resources throughout the mineral resource development process. Reforms related to mining rights must be seamlessly integrated with reforms of other natural resource property rights, ensuring that all stakeholders can assert their interests based on property rights during mineral development, receive appropriate rewards, and achieve win-win outcomes in mineral resource exploitation, thereby promoting sustainable development. From a specific management and technical standpoint, it is essential to implement green management across the entire lifecycle of mineral resource development—from initial planning and mid-term approval, registration, and supervision to post-mining land reclamation.

　　3. We must quickly propose policy solutions in response to changes in contradictions.

　　Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out in "On Contradiction": “ The formulation of the work plan must be suited to the changing circumstances. During the revolutionary period, conditions change at a rapid pace. If the revolutionaries’ understanding fails to keep pace with these rapid changes, they will be unable to guide the revolution toward victory. ” When formulating the reform plan for the transfer of mining rights, the transfer of prospecting rights has undergone a transition from... “ High risk equals high reward; low risk equals low return. ” To “ Market assessments of risks shall, in principle, be publicly offered through tendering, auction, and listing procedures. ” The change is due to shifts in the external environment, particularly the evolving methods for granting exploration rights across provinces. The vast majority of provinces have proactively adopted competitive bidding procedures for granting exploration rights. The reform of mineral resource management presents a strategic window of opportunity; if we miss this window, we’ll find ourselves in a passive position. We must firmly seize the opportunities presented by the times and continue to push forward with reforms, achieving ever greater and more remarkable accomplishments.

　　4. Adhere to the view that contradictions are universally interconnected, and ensure smooth coordination between the reform of mineral resource property rights systems and the reform of natural resource asset property rights systems.

　　Those who fail to consider the overall situation are incapable of effectively managing even a single region. This was proposed by the Party Leadership Group of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Land. “ Grasp the big picture, plan for major undertakings, understand the overall situation, and manage your own field effectively. ” This precisely aligns with the working principle of the Theory of Contradiction. As the Theory of Contradiction points out, the combination of conditional and relative identity with unconditional and absolute struggle constitutes the contradictory movement inherent in all things. In the contradiction between mineral resource development and the ecological environment, on the one hand, there is the powerful property entity—the mining rights holder—in the realm of mineral resources; on the other hand, in the realm of the ecological environment, the lack of clear property rights over the ecological environment means that there is no identifiable property entity responsible for its protection, thus depriving ecological conservation efforts of the necessary impetus derived from property rights. When these two forces come into conflict, the situation... “ There is ” To “ None ” If we can't put up a fight, we won't be able to achieve what's affirmed in "On the Contradiction." “ Contrary yet complementary ”。

　　The reform of the property rights system for mineral resources aims to address the conflict between mineral resource development and ecological environment protection. Adhering to a green development orientation, an important aspect is to coordinate and advance the reform of the property rights system for natural resource assets—especially the reform of the system for paid use of these assets. The report of the 19th National Congress proposed establishing state-owned institutions responsible for managing natural resource assets and overseeing the natural ecological environment. “ Unified exercise of the responsibilities of the owner of natural resource assets owned by all the people; unified exercise of responsibilities for the control of land use and ecological protection and restoration across all territorial spaces; and unified exercise of responsibilities for supervising various types of pollution emissions in urban and rural areas as well as for administrative law enforcement. ” The goal is to clarify the property rights holders of the ecological environment, enabling it to achieve balance amid conflicts and contradictions with various development activities. “ Contrary yet complementary ” The reform of the property rights system for mineral resources should be closely coordinated with the reform of the property rights system for natural resource assets, truly enabling mineral development and ecological environment protection to move from conflict toward integration and achieving sustainable development. This will lay a solid institutional foundation for China’s transition from a major mining country to a powerful mining nation. (Author: Zhu Qing; Affiliation: China Institute of Land and Resources Economics)