Approvals reform gathers pace giving miners faster pathways fewer bottlenecks and clearer rules to keep rigs turning and projects moving

Approvals in mining have long been described as a maze of red tape and delays, but at AMEC’s Nature Positive and Environmental Regulation Forum in Perth, regulators signalled that change is finally starting to cut through.

For mining professionals and practitioners, this shift matters. Faster, clearer, and more predictable approvals translate directly into earlier land access, smoother project scheduling, and more certainty in investment decisions. The forum highlighted how reforms to environmental regulation, biodiversity offsets, and greenhouse gas reporting are now converging into a single reality: the mining sector must prepare for an era of higher expectations but also sharper tools to navigate them.

A new customer-focused approach

Alistair Jones, Director General of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER), framed the cultural change underway in his agency. Too often in the past, he said, proponents were told “we don’t have customers, we’re regulators.” That mindset is shifting.

“Our product is our regulatory decision,” Alistair explained. “If we don’t treat proponents as customers and provide transparent, timely, and accountable processes, we undermine the credibility of our decisions.”

This recognition has shaped the creation of DWER’s Priority Approvals Unit, a dedicated team designed to provide a single entry point for significant projects. Instead of projects disappearing into a maze of 80 different email addresses, proponents will now have a clear point of contact and case manager.

The agency has also begun offering parallel approvals, allowing different permits to be assessed simultaneously rather than sequentially. This change has already begun to shave months, if not years, off assessment timelines. “Fast-tracking does not mean cutting corners,” Alistair stressed. “Environmental standards remain rigorous, but we’re reducing unnecessary duplication and delay.”

For drillers and explorers, these changes could reshape how quickly exploration programs move from planning to execution. The message was clear: if you haven’t noticed yet, expect your dealings with regulators to start looking different.

The green energy test case

The Green Energy Approvals Initiative provided an early test of these reforms. Launched in 2023, the program has already processed more than 70 assessments, including lithium, rare earths, and wind projects.

Some approvals that previously would have taken two years were finalised in just a few months. For the mining sector, particularly critical minerals developers, this has been a proof point that regulatory machinery can move faster without sacrificing environmental integrity.

While not every project will qualify as “green energy,” the principles being applied—priority case management, upfront guidance, and parallel processing—are expected to flow into broader approvals processes.

Tackling offsets with greater flexibility

No conversation about environmental approvals in Western Australia is complete without reference to the Pilbara Environmental Offsets Fund (PEOF). At the forum, it was clear that PEOF has become both a symbol of progress and a lightning rod for criticism.

Jessica Richings, Senior Manager – Nature Programs at DWER, acknowledged that PEOF has been constrained by rigid policy definitions around additionality, security, and like-for-like requirements. “We’ve lacked clarity, and we’ve applied principles too rigidly. That has limited flexibility and slowed delivery,” she admitted.

The department is now reviewing settings and considering how PEOF can better accommodate restoration and research offsets, not just land-based measures. “If we’re not already doing something in a landscape, even if it’s DBCA-managed land, then I would argue that should be considered additional,” Jessica said.

Industry voices reinforced the need for reform. Kiera Mews, Principal Environmental Adviser at Northern Star Resources, described the difficulty of finding offsets in the Goldfields where freehold land is scarce and most of the area is under competing Crown tenures. “Regional offset funds and collaborative strategies would deliver greater benefits than forcing each company to act in isolation,” she said.

Shaun Meredith, Head of Environment & Heritage at BCI Minerals, highlighted duplication between state and Commonwealth systems. “Proponents often have to prepare two separate offset packages. It’s a textbook case of duplication. A bilateral process allowing a single offset agreement would be a game changer.”

Kristy Sell, Managing Director of MBS Environmental, reminded the audience that offsets cannot succeed without stakeholder buy-in. “Too often we focus on calculators and targets and overlook community engagement. Long-term success depends on trust and flexibility. Plans need to adapt when conditions change—like drought affecting tree density—without tying companies up in years of negotiation.”

Greenhouse gas: Designing for the Future

Approvals reform does not stop at land use and biodiversity. Climate regulation is fast becoming embedded in project design and financing.

Karien Eramus, Director – ESG and Climate Services at RSM, explained that mandatory corporate reporting requirements now extend beyond emissions numbers. “Investors want to know how carbon factors into your governance, your strategy, and your risk management. Scope 1 and 2 reporting is just the start—supply chain emissions are next.”

Neil Foster, external relations consultant for Azure Minerals, added that unpredictability is the challenge. “If you’re developing a project today, assume you’ll be judged against best-practice benchmarks, not existing industry averages. You have to design as though the highest standards will apply, even if the rules aren’t final yet.”

Both agreed that greenhouse gas reporting is now directly linked to financing and customer demand. Asian trading partners, banks, and rating agencies are all pressing for credible transition plans. For miners, this means that emissions management must be embedded from feasibility through to commissioning.

Social Performance and Community Trust

While much of the discussion focused on technical reforms, Ali Mollinger-Sahba, Associate Director – Social Impact at Regen Strategic, reminded the audience that approvals are not the same as acceptance.

“Successful approvals don’t guarantee social licence,” she said. “Communities measure us not just by environmental compliance but by trust, transparency, and whether the benefits are shared equitably.”

Ali argued that social performance must be embedded across the project life cycle—anticipating risks, engaging inclusively, and planning for closure from the start. She cautioned that environmental gains achieved at the expense of community wellbeing risk undermining long-term success.

Her message was clear: nature positive legislation should be seen as an opportunity to strengthen relationships, not just a regulatory hurdle.

What this means for industry

For mining professionals and practitioners, the forum underscored several practical points:

• Approvals reform is real. Regulators are changing processes and culture. Expect faster, clearer, and more customer-focused pathways.

• Offsets policy is shifting. PEOF and state reforms aim to allow more flexible, research-driven offsets, though scrutiny will remain high.

• Climate obligations are rising. Greenhouse gas reporting is now central to financing and approvals. Design projects with best practice in mind.

• Communities matter. Social performance is becoming inseparable from environmental performance. Engaging early and respectfully will reduce conflict and delays.

In short, the landscape is changing. The reforms discussed at the AMEC forum won’t eliminate complexity, but they are beginning to cut through long-standing bottlenecks.

For drillers, explorers, and project developers, that could mean shorter approval times, more predictable offsets, and clearer expectations around climate and social obligations. In an industry where time on the ground is tied directly to value, that’s more than rhetoric—it’s an operational advantage.