1. INTRODUCTION Mine closure has historically been approached as a technical phase of the mining cycle focused on environmental rehabilitation, physical stability, and regulatory compliance. However, recent literature shows that this approach is insufficient to manage the social, economic, and institutional impacts that emerge in territories highly dependent on extractive activity (Bainton and Holcombe, 2018; Owen and Kemp, 2018). When closure is not planned in advance and in an integrated manner, it tends to deepen structural vulnerabilities and reproduce post-extractive dependency dynamics. In the current context of energy transition, characterized by the progressive reduction of coal and the expansion of critical minerals, closure takes on a strategic dimension. Beyond the mitigation of residual risks, it involves leading processes of territorial reconfiguration in areas where mining has shaped the productive, fiscal, and institutional structure for decades. This article analyzes recent experiences in Peru and Colombia in a comparative manner in order to identify the gaps between regulatory compliance with closure and long-term territorial sustainability. Based on this analysis, a strategic social management model is proposed that incorporates socioeconomic transition from the early stages of the mining cycle, articulates closure with territorial development, and establishes mechanisms of co-responsibility between companies, the state, and local actors aimed at building resilience and territorial legacy. 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Mine closure has traditionally been approached from a perspective focused on environmental rehabilitation, physical stability, and legal compliance, conceiving it as the final stage of the mining cycle. Owen and Kemp (2018) point out that this approach has tended to disconnect closure from broader social and territorial dynamics by treating social impacts as residual aspects and limiting corporate responsibility to regulatory compliance. This understanding reduces closure to a predominantly technical problem and prevents its strategic integration. Bainton and Holcombe (2018) show that the literature has privileged biophysical aspects to the detriment of social ones, which increases risks in territories with high extractive dependence. In these contexts, closure can deepen structural vulnerabilities if it is not articulated with sustained social management processes. Therefore, closure planning must be integrated in advance throughout the mining cycle, recognizing its political, institutional, and territorial dimensions. This reconceptualization finds operational support in the ICMM's Social Performance approach (2022, 2025), which proposes continuous social management, with early identification of risks and opportunities, meaningful participation, and articulation of closure with long-term 115
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2