In the report to the 19th National Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that the Chinese nation is facing a brand-new stage and an unprecedented development situation. Based on practical realities, he made the major strategic judgment that socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a new era—a new historical orientation for China’s development, representing a significant theoretical and practical innovation. From the moment it was introduced, the concept of “new era” has resonated widely across all sectors of Chinese society and drawn intense attention from the international community. Recognizing the responsibilities and positioning of land and resource management in the new era from a strategic perspective is the highest guiding principle for carrying out work in this new era, as well as the fundamental starting point and crucial prerequisite for embarking on new endeavors in land and resource management going forward. This concept also holds immense guiding significance for land and resource management itself: strategic tasks, developmental coordinates, key areas of focus, and specific measures must all be directly aligned with the judgment of the “new era.” The new era, with its new concepts, new goals, and new blueprint, places even higher demands on the supervision and management of mineral resource exploration and development.

　　In the new era, as we embark on a new development cycle, there is a pressing need for new institutional arrangements. Strengthening the construction of regulatory systems has become a key theme in China’s current economic and social governance. The regulatory system for exploration, development, and supervision of mineral resources is one of the core components of the legal and regulatory framework governing mineral resources, and it also plays an important role in the country’s overall governance system. In the new era, the regulatory system for mineral resource exploration and development must be centered around this critical judgment; all top-level designs, guiding principles, and strategic pathways for regulatory systems should reflect the distinctive characteristics and missions of the “new era.” However, based on current practices, mineral resource exploration and development regulation still faces numerous new challenges in areas such as institutional frameworks, market rules, responsible entities, and grassroots enforcement capabilities. There is thus a pressing need to further refine and improve regulatory systems, enhance public participation, optimize operational mechanisms, and innovate regulatory approaches—so as to adapt to, grasp, and lead the new era of mineral resource exploration and development regulation. Faced with the evolving landscape of the new era, the land and resources sector must firmly embrace its mission and responsibilities in this new era, proactively align itself with the new development coordinates, take reform as the main thread, forge new paths for reform, and highlight innovative measures for comprehensively deepening reform. In mineral resource management, we must continue to strengthen and improve the regulatory framework for exploration and development of mineral resources, treating regulatory oversight as a crucial lever for advancing reform, innovating regulatory approaches, keeping pace with the times, and enhancing service quality. This is of paramount importance for promoting the sustainable and orderly development of the mining industry.

　　I. Issues in the Construction of the Supervision and Management System for Mineral Resource Exploration and Development in the New Era

　　1. The regulatory framework for the exploration and development of mineral resources is relatively comprehensive, yet gaps and shortcomings still remain.

　　Regulatory oversight of mineral resource exploration and development is an essential component of mineral resource management. This is a critical function and responsibility entrusted to the competent authorities for mineral resources by national laws. Maintaining an orderly regime for mineral resource exploration and development hinges on effective regulation. Currently, the “four pillars and eight supporting structures” of the regulatory system and its accompanying regulations have been established. The central government and various ministries have successively issued numerous administrative laws and regulations, multiple departmental rules and policy provisions, as well as supplementary regulatory systems implemented by provinces (autonomous regions, and municipalities) tailored to local mineral resource conditions. However, due to various factors, certain regulatory loopholes and shortcomings still persist—for instance, the phenomenon of dormancy in the mineral resource exploration and development regulatory system remains relatively serious; the effectiveness of public disclosure in mineral resource exploration and development regulation is not high enough; the regulatory framework itself is too lenient; the supporting systems and standards for mineral resource exploration and development regulation are insufficiently refined; and regulators often exhibit passive or self-limiting behaviors. These issues also, to varying degrees, highlight defects in the design of the mineral resource exploration and development regulatory system. Therefore, overall, China’s current regulatory system—comprising both administrative regulations and specialized technical provisions—is basically complete and provides a comprehensive, multi-level regulatory framework with clear guidelines. Yet the real challenge does not lie in the technical regulations themselves; rather, what needs improvement is the selection process under the conditions of the new era—choosing the most effective regulatory approaches so that the original intent of establishing the regulatory system can be fully realized. This is also a necessary condition for achieving effective regulation. The mineral resource exploration and development regulatory system itself is not flawed; rather, the regulatory loopholes and shortcomings that have become apparent in the course of mining economic development are precisely the root cause behind the difficulty in realizing the intended regulatory vision. Thus, carrying out deep-level reforms of China’s mineral resource exploration and development regulatory system is an indispensable path toward establishing robust regulatory authority.

　　2. The market rules for mineral resource exploration and development have taken initial shape but still need to be further refined.

　　Our country is still at an early stage of an imperfect market economic system. From a practical standpoint, the government-led economic development model has yet to undergo any fundamental transformation. At all levels, government agencies issue the greatest number of policy documents related to market regulation, and these documents are adjusted most frequently. Among them, only a relatively small number of provisions have reached a high degree of maturity and can easily be refined and elevated into laws and regulations—yet even these remain subject to ongoing debate. Meanwhile, the design of mineral rights trading under the existing legal framework also fails to adequately align with the new normal conditions and evolving realities of the mining economy in the new era. In some localities and institutions, the political environment has deteriorated precisely because those responsible for managing mineral resources simultaneously hold multiple roles: as owners of mineral assets, social managers, and administrative regulators—all combined in one person—thus lacking the necessary checks and balances and oversight mechanisms. In our mining regulatory and institutional framework, public participation in oversight remains inadequate; this is precisely the area that requires substantial effort and further research to address and strengthen. Whether it’s the regulation of resources owned by the entire people, or the representation qualifications within the ownership system; whether it’s the management of regions and communities where mineral deposits are located or potentially exist, or the comprehensive management and integrated remediation of mining areas; whether it’s before or after obtaining mining rights, or before or during exploration and development activities; whether it’s during the mine’s operational phase or its closure phase—effective public participation is essential at every stage. We cannot allow irregular practices to become the mainstream in the market.

　　3. Mineral resource exploration and development should place greater emphasis on ecological responsibility, and enforcement efforts still need to be stepped up.

　　Currently, the mining economy remains mired in a slump, and trends such as strained corporate funding chains and declining mine profitability have yet to reverse. This situation has had a certain impact on the establishment of保证金 for mine environmental restoration and remediation, as well as on the sources of funding for these efforts. As the primary perpetrators of mine environmental damage and pollution, mining enterprises often focus solely on “pulling the cart without looking at the road,” neglecting their inherent corporate and social responsibilities. From the start of mining operations through post-closure ecological restoration, these enterprises have failed to increase investment as stipulated in their mine development and utilization plans. Moreover, resource-development companies have “abandoned” the green covenants they previously signed regarding environmental governance, failing to honor their commitments to local governments and communities in mining areas. Additionally, the relevant legal and institutional frameworks provide insufficient protection for these green covenants and lack the necessary follow-up mechanisms and enforcement powers, resulting in a failure to uphold the enterprises’ positive responsibility for ecological conservation. Despite repeated emphases on strengthening oversight, illegal and non-compliant activities continue unabated. Public governance is an essential function within modern government and social management systems. In social governance, excessive attention is often paid to routine administrative directives, while oversight of some illegal and non-compliant behaviors remains overly lenient and soft. Environmental responsibilities that should rightfully be borne by mining enterprises are instead being directly assumed by these enterprises themselves, allowing them to “free-ride” on public efforts. In some cases, local governments have even transformed themselves into equal partners with mining enterprises in addressing both “new” and “old” environmental issues. The blurred distinction between the roles of government and mining enterprises as market entities makes it crucial to clarify the boundaries of ecological responsibility in the exploration and development of mineral resources—a step that is vital to successfully navigating the path of ecological regulation.

　　4. The regulatory system for mineral resource exploration and development has been basically streamlined, but the implementation of regulatory responsibilities still needs further strengthening.

　　For a long time, China’s oversight of mineral resource exploration and development has been conducted from multiple angles. In the process of exploration and development, ecological and safety aspects are overseen by several different agencies, leading to widespread phenomena of overlapping and fragmented regulation. There is considerable overlap and intersection in the functions of various institutions, and relevant measures often lack coordination among them, resulting in gaps and conflicts. Essentially, the situation remains one of “each entity investing its own resources, bearing its own responsibilities, performing its own duties, and being credited for its own achievements.” Some departments have actively stepped up their roles and proactively sought “decision-making power,” interpreting laws according to their own departmental interests and proposing their own regulatory policies and initiatives. This can effectively lead to “multiple management entities” and a lack of effective collaborative innovation mechanisms for coordinating regulatory responsibilities among different departments—precisely the factor that currently constrains the unity and efficiency of regulatory efforts. During mineral resource exploration and development, each department carries out its regulatory duties according to its own requirements without sufficient coordination, resulting in inconsistencies between responsibilities, rights, and authorities. Regulatory fragmentation and serious “blind spots” and “vacuums” in oversight have severely undermined regulatory effectiveness, making it difficult to achieve the synergistic effect of 1+1>2 in mineral resource exploration and development regulation.

　　5. The grassroots regulatory teams and their capabilities continue to grow, but there is still a need to enhance their corresponding staffing.

　　Currently, a widespread issue in grassroots management is the heavy workload coupled with a relatively weak workforce and a clearly insufficient staffing level. As a result, the existing grassroots resources are simply unable to meet the regulatory tasks for exploration and development of mineral resources as stipulated by the relevant laws and regulations. Moreover, the supervisory legal framework struggles to keep pace with new situations and emerging challenges encountered in mineral resource exploration and development. The Mineral Resources Law, amended in 1996, along with its supporting regulations, has been in effect for nearly two decades, during which significant changes have occurred, rendering much of the original content ill-suited to the new realities of the current era. Similarly, many departmental rules and local regulations face identical challenges, creating obstacles in the investigation and handling of illegal or non-compliant exploration and development activities, as well as in responding to reports of such violations.

　　II. Recommendations for Building a Regulatory System for Mineral Resource Exploration and Development in the New Era

　　1. Improve and refine regulations to enhance the level of oversight over mineral resource exploration and development.

　　As an important lever for conscientiously protecting and efficiently and intensively utilizing mineral resources, the supervision of mineral resource exploration and development is a closely linked management system that needs to adapt to new circumstances, further deepen our understanding, standardize supervisory approaches, establish and improve oversight mechanisms, and explore new institutional growth dividends. First, laws and regulations serve as both the “tightening band” for mineral resource exploration and development and the “amulet” for effective supervision. We must promptly revise the relevant laws and regulations governing the supervision and management of mineral resource exploration and development, continuously refine the regulatory framework, make “diagnosis and treatment” a routine practice, and promptly address and eliminate persistent shortcomings in the regulatory system—providing sound remedies. We should strengthen the foundations and consolidate the basics by making necessary amendments to existing regulatory frameworks that have become ineffective or fail to keep pace with contemporary developments, thereby anchoring supervision firmly within a robust institutional framework and promoting the thorough resolution of issues and the precise implementation of responsibilities. Second, in the process of formulating and revising regulatory laws, we must ground ourselves in the industry, conduct in-depth investigations and studies, clarify the relationships among supervisory tasks, restructure institutional and regulatory frameworks, and seize upon the “marginal benefits” that well-designed systems can bring. Therefore, to meet the demands of mining development in the new era and new cycle, we should proactively prepare and promptly revise and improve the “Mineral Resources Law,” reducing the presence of idealistic, formalistic, and fragmented regulations. This will enable us to select and adopt the most appropriate “governance strategies,” establish long-term internal driving mechanisms for law enforcement and supervision, and uphold the principle of using institutions to ensure the legalization, institutionalization, and standardization of supervisory work. It is also critically important to ensure smooth coordination between the revised law and related regulations, further enhancing the authority of supervision.

　　2. Improve the regulatory system and establish an effective “public participation” mechanism for the supervision of mineral resource exploration and development.

　　The "Decision of the CPC Central Committee on Comprehensively Promoting the Rule of Law" points out: “We must comprehensively promote government transparency. We should adhere to the principle that openness is the norm and non-disclosure the exception, and advance transparency in decision-making, implementation, management, service delivery, and outcomes.” Under the long-standing condition in which the government has been acting alone, it has been difficult to fully resolve the many contradictions and problems in regulatory oversight. Therefore, we need to mobilize the power of the general public, thereby establishing a regulatory system characterized by public oversight and governance across society as a whole. Public disclosure of information related to mineral resource exploration and mining is an international practice and represents a fundamental pathway for public participation in democratic supervision. It is recommended that, without compromising national economic security or infringing upon the legitimate rights and interests of mining right holders, we should establish and improve a sound information disclosure system. By making regulatory matters open and transparent, we can enhance regulatory effectiveness and effectively safeguard the public’s rights to know, participate, and supervise mineral resource exploration and development. Historical lessons and contemporary practical experience have shown that implementing administrative information disclosure and establishing a well-functioning mechanism for “public participation”—relying on the people, including those subject to mining administration and stakeholders, to exercise their rights to defend and monitor—can indeed serve as the most effective “anti-corruption agent” in the reform and innovation of the mining administration system, and also prove to be a powerful tool for improving and strengthening administrative regulation.

　　3. Strengthen institutional development and improve ecological oversight of mineral resource exploration and development.

　　Today, ecological balance has become a core interest of nations, ethnic groups, and even all humanity, and the construction of an ecological civilization has already been established as a fundamental national policy in our country. “Observe customs in the wild”—a sound ecological environment is an essential component of the people’s ever-growing aspirations for a better life in the new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This poses higher demands on our country’s future approach to mining development. Regarding environmental and restoration issues in mining areas, guided by the principles of “responsibility before rights” and “protection before development,” we must clearly define the primary responsibility and obligations of mining right holders in environmental protection and remediation. The restoration and remediation of mine-site ecosystems are an ongoing process—there is no final endpoint. This effectively imposes a strict ecological “restraint” on mining enterprises, ensuring that the principle of “whoever develops is responsible, whoever damages is required to restore” becomes deeply embedded in their very DNA. By setting clear bottom-line thinking and strengthening both “behavioral accountability” and “consequence-based accountability” for mining enterprises, we can significantly enhance ecological oversight over mineral resource exploration and development. In the process of mine environmental restoration and remediation, the government must not only strengthen supervision and clarify responsibilities but also reduce its own burdens and leverage government investment more effectively, enabling mining enterprises to assume their rightful share of remediation responsibilities and striking a proper balance between government and market roles. At the same time, we need to address ecological shortcomings through reforms in the regulatory system. In the Mining Law and related regulations, we must explicitly define regulatory norms, standards, and scopes of authority, and ensure alignment with specific environmental laws and regulations pertaining to various environmental categories. This will foster a deeper integration of administrative regulation with the social nature of ecosystems and the natural dynamics of ecological systems, thereby adapting to the new realities of ecological development in the new era.

　　4. Reform the operational mechanisms to create synergistic oversight throughout the entire process of mineral resource exploration and development.

　　Defining the division of powers and responsibilities among regulatory bodies, addressing ambiguities in authority and overlapping functions, and accelerating the integration of internal and external regulatory efforts—these are crucial safeguards for the healthy development of the mining industry. By systematically mapping out the entire regulatory framework, clarifying the scope of responsibilities and establishing a coherent organizational structure, we can effectively address the issue of insufficient institutional supply on the supply side, optimize the institutional architecture, adjust the distribution of interests, and break down existing rigid barriers, thereby truly achieving seamless, comprehensive, and end-to-end regulatory coverage. It is recommended that the revision of the Mineral Resources Law should further clarify and refine the legal positioning of regulatory functions, and rationalize the allocation of responsibilities among multiple departments involved in regulation. In line with the overall requirements of the reform of the national natural resource asset management system, we must streamline relationships, transcend sector-specific and conventional thinking patterns, reposition regulatory responsibilities, and improve the regulatory institutional framework. By strengthening the fundamentals and addressing root causes, we should adopt a reform-oriented mindset to enhance and implement regulatory coordination, promptly resolve issues related to the allocation of powers both at specific points and across broader areas, and proactively build a new regulatory landscape characterized by clearly defined responsibilities, effective measures, and thorough oversight.

　　5. Improve regulatory approaches and enhance the efficiency of oversight over mineral resource exploration and development.

　　First, conduct a comprehensive survey of the staffing situation for mineral resource management teams at the provincial, municipal, and county levels. Consult with relevant authorities and local governments to address issues such as administrative staffing and funding for grassroots mineral resource management, thereby ensuring the stability of these teams and the legitimacy of their administrative status, as well as aligning the number and quality of mineral resource management personnel with the demands of their management tasks. Second, refine the inspector system, strengthen routine supervision and management of mineral resource development, improve the industry regulatory framework, separate regulatory functions from supervisory duties, establish specialized regulatory agencies, and explore mechanisms that rely primarily on third-party service procurement to enhance regulatory effectiveness. Third, intensify information technology development by using networked systems to dynamically monitor key stages in the exploration and development of mineral resources. Leveraging regulatory technology, build an integrated regulatory platform—a “single map”—for mineral resource exploration and development, pioneer a new “Internet-plus-regulation” model, enable online supervision, and establish sound incentive and punishment mechanisms based on a “blacklist,” as well as a robust social oversight and regulatory system.

　　III. Conclusion

　　As the ancients said, “There must be balance in regulation and moderation in implementation.” Effective and sound management must be grounded in well-established institutional standards and operational mechanisms. The supervision and oversight system for mineral resource exploration and development—serving as a normative framework that embodies the fundamental constraints of legal conduct—faces increasingly evident new changes, new circumstances, and new challenges in mineral resource exploration and development in the new era. It is essential to identify and analyze weak links in relevant laws, regulations, rules, and existing supervisory systems, pinpoint gaps and shortcomings in inadequate oversight, and promptly address these weaknesses in the regulatory framework for the new era. We must earnestly refine and improve the regulatory system, continuously innovate supervisory approaches, and comprehensively strengthen and tighten the “cage” of institutional controls, thereby making supervision more robust and further enhancing its effectiveness and authority. (Author’s affiliation: Zhang Xing, Consulting Research Center of the Ministry of Natural Resources)