71 frameworks lies in maintaining traceability of decisions and assumptions over time. Reprocessing tailings, reusing materials, or transitioning to alternative disposal technologies typically involves iterative decision‑making, evolving datasets, and changing risk profiles. Without structured mechanisms for documenting the technical basis, assumptions, and responsibilities associated with these decisions, organizations may struggle to demonstrate due diligence and compliance with governance requirements (Morgenstern et al., 2016; Franks et al., 2021). Integrated data and management systems can support alignment with GISTM principles by providing a structured environment that reinforces governance processes rather than substituting them. By enabling the consolidation of multidisciplinary data, these systems support clearer communication between technical teams, operational management, and decision‑makers. This integration facilitates the demonstration that circular economy options have been evaluated using consistent criteria, that associated risks have been identified and assessed, and that decisions are supported by documented technical justification. From a governance perspective, such structured environments contribute to several key GISTM expectations, including: • Clear accountability, by assigning ownership of data, decisions, and actions related to tailings modifications; • Transparency and traceability, by maintaining auditable records of design changes, risk assessments, and decision rationale; • Structured risk management, by supporting lifecycle‑based evaluation of how circular interventions affect tailings performance and failure modes; and • Informed oversight, by enabling senior management and boards to access consistent, decision‑relevant information (ICMM, 2020). It is important to note that alignment with the GISTM does not imply that circular economy strategies are intrinsically required or discouraged by the standard. Rather, the GISTM provides a governance and decision‑making framework within which such strategies can be evaluated responsibly. Circular initiatives that lack technical substantiation, clear accountability, or documented risk assessment are therefore inconsistent with the intent of the standard, regardless of their sustainability objectives. In this context, governance alignment should be viewed as a boundary condition for circular innovation in tailings management. The successful integration of circular economy principles depends on the organization’s ability to embed these initiatives within established governance frameworks that prioritize safety, technical competence, and long‑term risk management. When supported by integrated data structures and disciplined governance practices, circular strategies can be pursued in a manner that is consistent with GISTM principles and broader expectations for responsible tailings management. 6. PRATICAL APPLICATION OF INTEGRATED PLATFORMS IN
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2