Mine ecological restoration is an essential component of comprehensively advancing ecological civilization. In recent years, localities have actively promoted the protection and restoration of mine ecosystems in line with green development principles. However, overall, China’s mine ecological restoration still faces challenges such as an incomplete institutional framework, limited depth and sophistication, and difficulties in scaling up new technologies. Moreover, destructive mining practices continue to impose severe impacts on the geological environment of mining areas. To implement the new development philosophy and accelerate ecological civilization, mine ecological restoration must be given a more prominent position. In accordance with the goal of “establishing a modern environmental governance system featuring Party leadership, government guidance, enterprise responsibility, and the joint participation of social organizations and the public,” we should enhance the level of mine ecological restoration and integrated management through scientific governance, market‑oriented operations, and broad social engagement.
　　
　　Implement a science-based governance model. Ecological restoration of mines is a complex, system‑wide undertaking that must be guided by the new development philosophy and pursued through scientifically grounded management. First, establish a scientific restoration framework. (1) An approach tailored to local conditions: prioritize ecology, applying the principles of “agriculture where suitable, construction where appropriate, water management where fitting, and preservation where warranted,” and devising site‑specific restoration strategies. (2) A nature‑inspired restoration approach: respect the laws governing natural ecosystems by conducting nature‑based reshaping of landforms, soil reconstruction, and plant selection, thereby fostering harmonious integration and self‑regulation among mountains, waters, forests, farmland, lakes, grasslands, and sandlands. (3) A simultaneous mining–restoration strategy: in contrast to traditional end‑of‑pipe remediation, this approach emphasizes source control and process‑level management, effectively boosting mine land reclamation rates and waste recycling levels. Second, establish a full‑process restoration mechanism covering pre‑, during‑, and post‑intervention phases. At the pre‑intervention stage, advance legislation and standard‑setting for mine ecological restoration; subject to national land‑use planning, comprehensively develop mine geological environmental protection and remediation plans at all administrative levels; and implement the “three simultaneities” system—simultaneous preparation of mineral resource development and utilization plans, mine geological environmental protection and remediation recovery plans, and land reclamation plans—along with public disclosure requirements. During the intervention phase, standardize the identification of both “new” and “legacy” mine‑related environmental issues; coordinate remediation efforts for historically abandoned mines under the leadership of local governments at all levels; and ensure that mining enterprises earnestly fulfill their responsibilities for ecological restoration of active and operating mines, while gradually establishing a nationwide dynamic monitoring system for mine geological environments. In the post‑intervention phase, refine the performance assessment and evaluation framework for mine ecological restoration, and explore the establishment of corporate ecological restoration integrity records and credit‑accumulation systems. Finally, strengthen technological support for restoration. Vigorously promote research and development on key technologies for mine ecological restoration, including green mining, scientific diagnosis of ecological damage, ecological restoration planning, landform reshaping and soil reconstruction, as well as vegetation restoration and biodiversity enhancement. Accelerate the adoption and application of these new technologies through targeted subsidies, tax incentives, and other measures.
　　
　　Leveraging market‑based approaches. To address the longstanding backlog in mine‑site ecological restoration and insufficient funding, it is essential to harness market logic and policy incentives to mobilize concerted efforts from all stakeholders. First, establish a diversified investment mechanism. On the one hand, increase fiscal allocations and strengthen the integrated use of policy‑driven and project‑specific funds to provide indispensable support for historically legacy‑affected mine sites. On the other hand, leverage the catalytic role of public finance by adopting the “whoever restores, whoever benefits” principle, and by creating financing platforms, procuring services, and fostering public–private partnerships to open up channels for private capital participation. Second, develop a mechanism for assetizing existing resources. First, revitalize idle construction land associated with mines. By coordinating policies such as the linkage between increases and reductions in urban–rural construction land, the reclamation of abandoned industrial and mining sites, and the balance between occupied and replenished farmland, allow construction land quotas released through mine reclamation to be traded and utilized within the province, thereby channeling the resulting revenues back into mine‑site ecological restoration. Second, make rational use of excavated soil and rock from abandoned mines. In accordance with the “one mine, one plan” approach, concurrently formulate utilization plans for these materials alongside ecological restoration strategies; upon review and approval by the relevant authorities, both newly generated materials—resulting from slope‑cutting and load reduction or hazard mitigation—and those remaining on site may be allocated free of charge to the ongoing restoration project. Any surplus may be sold externally, with proceeds channeled through the county‑level people’s government’s public resource trading platform, with all revenue earmarked for local ecological restoration while ensuring reasonable returns for social investors undertaking the restoration work. Third, establish a mechanism for integrated industrial development. Based on the ecological sensitivity of mining areas and their spatial planning, for mines that meet the conditions for comprehensive utilization and transformation, explore an “use‑drives‑remediation” model of ecological restoration. On the one hand, assess and map the latent value of products derived from mine‑site restoration, and through open competitive processes, select qualified investors to undertake overall planning and design for the integrated use and restoration of mined sites, implementing restoration projects accordingly to promote synergistic development among ecological restoration, real estate development, cultural tourism, elderly care and health services, and agriculture and animal husbandry. On the other hand, support and guide the sustainable operation of market‑oriented projects; in response to challenges such as the high complexity of market‑based management and long investment payback periods in mine‑site restoration, continuously refine preferential policies related to land, finance, taxation, and insurance, and appropriately set phased performance indicators and tolerance‑for‑error incentive mechanisms.
　　
　　Improve channels for social participation. Ecological civilization is a cause that the people build, govern, and share together, and ecological restoration of mining areas cannot succeed without the joint involvement of social organizations and the public. First, harness the positive role of social organizations. These organizations should serve as bridges and linkages between government and enterprises, promoting industry self‑regulation through measures such as formulating and implementing sector‑specific codes of conduct and conducting green certification for ecological restoration projects. At the same time, strengthen the management and guidance of social organizations, encouraging qualified environmental groups to carry out public interest litigation and other activities related to mine‑site ecological environments in accordance with the law, and fully leverage the contributions of environmental volunteers. Second, refine mechanisms for public participation. To begin with, it is essential to mobilize public enthusiasm for engagement. By respecting the needs of local communities in mining areas—through enhanced information disclosure, community consultations, expert reviews, and public hearings—we can promptly incorporate legitimate public demands while also fostering local employment, thereby better aligning ecological restoration with the coordinated development of residents’ livelihoods and production. Furthermore, we must continuously enhance the public’s capacity to participate. This can be achieved by distributing educational materials, organizing knowledge contests, and holding training sessions on geology and mining, thus raising awareness among local residents about mine‑site ecological protection and restoration, encouraging them to monitor these efforts, and engaging them in the ongoing dynamic monitoring of the mining‑area geological environment, while continually improving mechanisms for public oversight and feedback on reported issues. Third, ensure smooth channels for third‑party participation. To enhance governance effectiveness, local governments, mining enterprises, leading companies in the sector, and research institutes should jointly establish platforms for government‑industry‑university‑research collaboration. Adopting a model of “the responsible party pays, professional institutions manage,” they can entrust ecological restoration tasks to specialized agencies, while also encouraging enterprises and research institutions to co‑establish R&D centers and practical demonstration sites, accelerating the cultivation of skilled professionals in this field and providing a robust talent pool to support high‑quality ecological restoration and comprehensive remediation of mining areas.