Key points
- Juan Ignacio Guzmán, CEO of mining consultancy GEM, presents an epistemological framework for analyzing criticism of deep-sea polymetallic nodule mining, distinguishing justified beliefs from unsupported opinions and speculation.
- Guzmán’s team compiled 29 propositions drawn from literature, media and public debate covering ecosystem impacts, climate change, technology, economics and politics, then mapped how these beliefs support or connect to one another.
- The analysis sorts propositions by ‘truth likeness’ and proposes four types of response: strategic marketing, corrective or compensatory actions, further scientific studies, and refuting beliefs found to have low truth likeness.
- Guzmán says GEM concluded that nodule mining offers better economic and environmental terms than other deep-sea mining approaches it studied, and argues the path forward is case-by-case environmental studies with risk mitigation, starting at small scale before expanding.
