With an NGO that I lead, we are launching a project aimed at bringing much-needed transparency to the global mining sector, especially now, given the massive surge in mining for critical metals driven by the energy transition and the rise of data centers.
The problem we’re facing
Right now, while some mining polygon data exists, the most valuable information (who the operator is, exactly what metals are being extracted, operational status, where are the materials going after) is highly centralized. It is locked behind expensive, private licenses. This data monopoly blocks NGOs, civil society, researchers, and even responsible industry players from having a clear view of the sector. Furthermore, many open datasets are lagging; for example, many polygons we currently look at are outdated because they were mapped from 2019 satellite imagery.
Our Project Idea
We are building an open platform that merges mining polygons from various open sources (definitely including OSM!). Crucially, we want to create a feedback loop: our platform will highlight polygons that have missing attributes or look outdated, and redirect users directly to the OSM editor so they can update the source data for everyone.
Where we need your help & expertise
We want to do this right and be good citizens of the OSM ecosystem. We would love to get your feedback, advice, or even your help if you are interested in this space. Specifically, we have a few questions for the community:
Expanding Mining Schema: Currently, OSM tags for mines feel relatively limited (mostly landuse=industrial + industrial=mine with name, operator, and resource). Has there been previous discussion or standard proposals for mapping more granular mining data (e.g., specific target minerals, extraction methods, or concession boundaries)?
Current Community Mapping: Are there existing OSM Wiki Projects or working groups focused on mining or heavy industry that we should connect with?
Data Freshness: Are there known strategies or challenges within the OSM community regarding tracking the fast-expanding footprints of new critical-metal mines?
Integration Pitfalls: For those who have built tools that redirect users to ID or JOSM to fill in specific data gaps, what are the biggest “gotchas” we should avoid to ensure high-quality contributions?
If this sounds like something you’d want to collaborate on, or if you have any advice on how we can better leverage and enrich OSM data without reinventing the wheel, please reply below!
The limitation of this endeavour might be our “on the ground rule” which requires that information you add to OSM must be visible on the ground. It is not required that you actually go somewhere to record it in OSM - you can do “armchair mapping” based on imagery - but if things like the operator or the extraction method or what exactly is being mined aren’t obvious to an observer then this information does not belong in OSM. Same for a potential underground extent of the mining operation - if there are no overground markers, then no mapping in OSM,
Sometimes the “on the ground” rule is loosened a little to include information that can easily be verified online - e.g. someone might add a telephone number to a restaurant based on their own web site, rather than visiting in person. But this is really the exception; if, as you say, the interesting data is locked behind paywalls, then the only data we can add to OSM is what we see when we visit the place.
Keep this in mind if you want to be a good OSM citizen, and do not try to dodge responsibility. Don’t, for example, make non-verifiable third-party data available as a map background in an editor and then run a MapRoulette challenge about getting this data into OSM - that would be considered foul play (and yes, there are people trying this route to then say “why, it wasn’t me who added this data, see here the 2-point disclaimer that says don’t add data without verification”).
Hi woodpeck, thanks a lot for that. But if this third party data is visually verifiable, like the mining polygons, then it’s ok to run challenges to bring them to OSM no?
Then I wonder about all the data related to resources extracted and operator names that are already on OSM regarding the mines and quarry, does this mean that for every of those, some people went on site to see what ressource was extracted and the name of the operator?
Then, some people on the french forum said it would be better to work with wikidata and link the mining polygons to the relevant wikidata for more info that can’t be proven “visually”, do you confirm that approach?
I agree that Wikidata would be more suitable to track information about individual mines because of its better support for references.
At least where I map in the United States, ESRI imagery is updated more or less yearly. I don’t know if there are any that update any more frequently than that. You could probably have a recurring task for either a volunteer or someone in your org to check the vintage of whatever you find the best imagery for any area to be and then to activate remapping challenges as appropriate.