Comparative Analysis of Compliance and Cost–Benefit Performance of Air Pollution Mitigation in Mining

Mining operations are vital for socio-economic development, yet they generate harmful particulate emissions during extraction processes. As a result, Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) and regulatory thresholds have been established to regulate these environmental impacts. Although these frameworks are aimed at ensuring operational compliance with stipulated pollution thresholds, they do not capture the degree of compliance or the cost-effectiveness of mitigation efforts. This limitation creates an efficiency paradox that limits meaningful comparison of environmental performance across mines. To address this gap, this study utilizes compliance performance evaluation system that translates particulate emission reduction outcomes into financial metrics and cost–benefit ratios. Using two limestone quarry case studies (L1 and L2), annual average PM₁₀ concentrations were gauged against regulatory threshold, and the resulting emission reductions were economically valued using social cost proxies. The results show that L1 achieved PM₁₀ reduction of 280.13 tons (85.3% reduction below pollution threshold), corresponding to a cost–benefit ratio of 11.4, while L2 reduced 245.01 tons (74.6%), with a cost–benefit ratio of 3.5. These findings demonstrate that compliance performance can be extended into economic evaluation systems which can facilitate transparent comparison of compliance and cost-effectiveness across mining operations. This approach therefore provides a practical decision-support tool for enhancing regulatory compliance, investment decision and ESG in the mining sector.