Anticipated economic benefits play a central role in justifying approval of mining projects in British Columbia. Mines’ projected jobs, tax revenue, and community investments form the basis of their social licence to operate and are often used to justify environmental and social trade-offs. It is crucial, therefore, that these benefit projections are realistic. Yet no government agency or ministry systematically audits or verifies how much of these benefits are delivered. Research finds that benefit forecasts are overinflated in regulatory processes, particularly in environmental assessment (EA). Further, studies show that economic underperformance and mine delays post-EA are common, with delays typically resulting from economic factors, not government regulations.

If no action is taken, BC risks continued economic underperformance of mines, misinformed decision-making, erosion of public trust, and perpetuation of “red tape” narratives that are not based on evidence. With no designated agency or legislative mandate to track economic performance of mines, policymakers lack the tools to assess whether the province is receiving a fair return on resource extraction.

Based on this research, the authors recommend strengthening economic accountability in BC’s mining sector by:

1. Requiring economic benefit reporting in EA project conditions and creating a mandatory public registry to track economic performance,
2. Improving economic forecasting standards in the EA process, and
3. Ensuring government oversight and accountability mechanisms.