East Lombok — The expiration of a Mining Business License (IUP) held by an iron sand mining company in the coastal area of East Lombok has reopened an important question: once mining ends, who gets to determine the future of the community’s living space?
For communities that have lived alongside mining activities for years, the expiration of a mining license does not mean that all problems disappear. Conflicts, changes to the landscape, impacts on coastal areas and water sources, as well as issues surrounding access and livelihoods, leave lasting consequences that do not simply disappear when mining activities cease.
[image] Community meeting initiated by the Lingkar Tambang Pasir Besi Community in Pohgading Village, which resulted in demands for environmental restoration and community rights to manage their living space. (Photo: CFP 2026 – WALHI NTB)
For this reason, community members have proposed that former mining areas should not once again be designated for extractive activities. Instead, the areas should first be restored and then managed sustainably for the benefit of local communities. This idea was among the issues discussed during a community meeting initiated by the Lingkar Tambang Pasir Besi Community in Pohgading Village, Pringgabaya District, East Lombok, on August 10, 2026.
The call for post-mining environmental restoration and community-based management is not without reason. It is driven by the need to strengthen local livelihoods and economic opportunities through sustainable activities rather than extractive ones.
From Extractive Space to Community-Managed Space
For years, the area has been viewed primarily through an extractive economic lens. Land, iron sand, and coastal spaces have been treated primarily as resources to be exploited. For the community, however, the area is much more than land containing mineral resources.
It is a living space that encompasses agricultural land, coastal areas, water sources, community access routes, and various social and economic activities that existed long before mining arrived.
Therefore, when mining activities end, communities do not want the area to once again be treated merely as an object of extractive economic activity. They want to become active subjects in determining the future of their own territory.
This became one of the key ideas emerging from the community discussion: how to shift the management of the area from a space of exploitation to a space managed by and for the community. This is not simply a rejection of mining, but part of an effort to create sustainable alternatives for the future of the area.
The License Has Expired, But the Problems Have Not
Communities understand that the expiration of a mining business license held by the mineral mining company does not automatically resolve the various problems left behind by mining activities.
During the mining period, communities identified a range of impacts, including impacts on land, coastal conditions, water sources, agricultural activities, dust generated by mining traffic, and problems with community access roads.
The damage and changes to the landscape left behind by mining do not simply disappear once mining activities stop. For the community, therefore, the expiration of the license must be followed by meaningful restoration.
Restoration should not be understood merely as an administrative obligation for companies to close mining pits or carry out replanting. It must be understood more broadly as an effort to restore the ecological functions of the area while ensuring that communities can once again benefit from and manage their living space. In other words, mining may end, but responsibility for the environmental damage must not end with it.
Mining Ends. Don’t Let It Start Again!
As the discussion evolved, one of the most important concerns was ensuring that the area formerly covered by the mining license is not handed over to another mining company.
Communities do not want to experience the same cycle again: one company leaves, only for another company to arrive with a new license, forcing communities to once again confront potential conflicts and environmental damage.
Communities are therefore urging the government to take a more decisive approach to determining the future of the former mining area.
They are calling on the government to ensure that the former mining concession is no longer designated or reopened as a new mining area, nor granted to companies, business entities, or other parties for extractive activities.
For communities, their experience serves as an important lesson: the management of the area should not once again follow the same development model.
Sustainable Alternatives and the Role of Young People
Among the ideas discussed, one particularly interesting proposal was to transform the former mining area, once restoration has been completed, into a tourism destination managed by local residents or young people.
Given the village’s geographical location, communities believe that the area has the potential to be developed as a tourism space if it is properly restored and managed. But this should not be tourism dominated by large investors or corporate capital. Instead, it should be community-based tourism, with local youth playing a central role in its management.
In this way, an area that once generated economic value through the exploitation of natural resources—with negative impacts on the environment—could instead become a space that generates economic benefits through community-based management.
Communities living around mining areas have often been positioned primarily as those affected by mining activities or as workers within economic activities controlled by investors or large companies.
Through the idea of community-based tourism, this position can be transformed. Young people can become managers of their own spaces and economic actors in their own territories.
They can play roles in various aspects, from landscape planning and destination management to promotion, tourism services, local product development, environmental education, and creative economy initiatives.
In this way, tourism development is not simply about attracting visitors. More importantly, it can become a means of creating alternative livelihoods for local communities, particularly for younger generations.
Restoration Must Come First
At the same time, the community recognizes that a former mining area cannot simply be turned into a tourism destination. The area must first be deemed safe, its environmental conditions must be restored, and damaged areas must be properly rehabilitated.
Therefore, the idea of tourism must not be used as a substitute for the company’s obligations to carry out reclamation and post-mining activities. The company must remain responsible for fulfilling its environmental obligations arising from the impacts of its mining operations. Meanwhile, communities can begin planning how the restored area can be utilized for the collective benefit of local residents.
Through this approach, degraded areas can be rehabilitated, vegetation restored, open spaces developed, coastal areas protected, and the ecological value of the area introduced and made accessible to visitors.
Authors: Ariyansah NK & WALHI NTB
Reviewer: Meliana Lumbantoruan