1116 Considering this, the overall objective of the research is to analyze the Peruvian legal and institutional framework applicable to land use after mining operations, to propose legal guidelines to guide territorial planning and the allocation of long-term socio-environmental responsibilities for rehabilitated mining areas. To this end, it is important to guide the research according to the following specific objectives: (i) examine current legislation and identify legal gaps related to the research topic; (ii) evaluate community participation and access mechanisms through a comparative analysis; and (iii) propose an integrative legal model based on sustainability and shared responsibility. The methodology adopted is qualitative, descriptive, and comparative. The study is based on a doctrinal and regulatory review of mining, environmental, and territorial law, complemented by an analysis of emblematic cases of post-mining transition—including the Ruhr basin in Germany and Las Médulas in Spain—which allow for the identification of patterns, gaps, and good practices in the governance of postmining territories. On this basis, the article formulates public policy proposals aimed at strengthening integrated legal frameworks that articulate mine closure, post-mining land use, and territorial justice. 2. STATE-OF-THE-ART: POST-MINING TRANSITIONS AND THE LIMITS OF CURRENT APPROACHES 2.1 Analysis of current legislation on mine closure and mining environmental liabilities: legal gaps for the governance of post-mining territories The Peruvian legal framework governing mine closure and the remediation of mining environmental liabilities is structured around two regulatory systems: Law No. 28090 governing mine closure (hereinafter, LCM), and Law No. 28271, which regulates mining environmental liabilities (hereinafter LPAM), together with their regulations, Supreme Decree No. 033-2005-EM and Supreme Decree No. 059-2005-EM, respectively. Although both regulatory frameworks have been strengthened by recent amendments—such as Law No. 31347; Supreme Decree No. 014-2024-EM; Supreme Decree No. 006-2025-EM; Legislative Decree No. 1670—their systematic analysis reveals significant legal gaps in the governance of post-mining territories, particularly concerning the use of rehabilitated land, the allocation of long-term responsibilities, and post-closure territorial and social integration, as detailed below: Table 1. Regulatory gaps in national legislation on mine closure and environmental liabilities HIGHLIGHTS ANALYSIS AND IDENTIFIED GAPS Technical and environmental approach to mine closure and lack of territorial governance The LCM defines mine closure as a set of measures aimed at rehabilitating disturbed areas and preventing risks to health and the environment. In this regard, Article 3 of the law and Article 5 of the regulations establish that the Mine Closure Plan (PCM) must ensure the physical, geochemical, and hydrological stability of mining components; however, they do not incorporate the future use of the territory or its articulation with land use planning or regional development instruments as a regulatory objective. Despite the amendments introduced by Law 31347, closure continues to be legally conceived as a technical-administrative event, aimed at ensuring environmental compliance and releasing the owner's liability, without a clear vision of territorial transition. Legal gap: The closure regulations do not recognize the post-mining stage as an autonomous phase of territorial governance, nor do they establish binding legal criteria for defining, approving, or monitoring subsequent land uses. Regulatory fragmentation between mine closures and Mining environmental A structural feature of the Peruvian framework is the existence of one regime for mine closure and another for the management of mining environmental liabilities (pasivos ambientales mineros, in Spanish), as specified in Article 2 of Supreme Decree 033-2005-EM, which excludes PAM from its scope of
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2