By Karl Ocampo
If the past year has underscored anything, it is that mining’s fortunes are not reflected in stock charts or production tables alone. They climb and tumble just as decisively in the court of public opinion.
On paper and in policy circles, the sector recorded meaningful gains. Metal mining output rose by nearly 15 percent in value during this year's nine-month period, buoyed largely by stronger gold and nickel prices.
The government, too, struck a more encouraging tone with the passage of the Enhanced Fiscal Regime for Large-Scale Metallic Mining Act, which aims to standardize and extend permit terms to draw in long-term investment.
Rising policy friction
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s presence at this year's Mining Philippines sent a clear signal that this administration sees the industry as more than a revenue generator—recognizing its role in the clean energy transition and in responsible, inclusive nation-building.
Still, 2025 was anything but smooth sailing.
In Palawan, the provincial council’s unanimous approval of a 50-year moratorium on new mining permits reignited national debate.
Supporters hailed it as a necessary safeguard for one of the country’s most fragile ecological frontiers, while critics warned of declining mineral output unless innovation fills the gap.
Elsewhere, proposals to cap small-scale mining operations and restrict quarrying—spurred by environmental anxieties following successive natural disasters—added to growing unease on the ground.
Together, these developments reflected deepening friction within mining communities and a widening trust gap between stakeholders and authorities.
Battle of narratives
Throughout these debates, media and communications were central, not peripheral.
Narratives around mining’s environmental impact —from biodiversity loss to runoff and flooding concerns — often traveled faster online than technical explanations or regulatory context could keep pace with.
For communicators in both industry and the government, the lesson was unmistakable: the story matters as much as the substance.
Silence or delayed responses invite speculation, while clear, timely communication can prevent misinformation from hardening into belief.
More than mining
Meaningful engagement is not about cheerleading for mining; it is about grounding conversations in verifiable facts, acknowledging legitimate concerns, and listening to voices beyond the boardroom.
Responsible mining cannot be defined by compliance checklists or quarterly earnings alone. It must be articulated through the lived realities of host communities, the condition of local ecosystems, and the credibility of those tasked with telling the industry’s story.
Then as now, mining’s fate in the Philippines is never decided by geology alone. It is shaped by how the industry and its critics communicate, how well they listen, and how effectively they bridge economic promise with environmental stewardship.
If 2025 marks a year of policy pivot and economic nuance, 2026 will demand narrative accountability, and this is an opportunity that those in the industry should embrace.
Mining must not only extract minerals—it must also earn trust.
Karl Ocampo is a former business journalist for the Philippine Daily Inquirer and now serves as the media and communications manager at Nickel Asia Corp.
