Chile glacier rules collided with ‘undone science’

undone science – A new study in Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology and Society traces how missing or contested knowledge—left “undone”—helped mining projects slip through glacier protection gaps in Chile. From Barrick Gold’s Pascua Lama, closed in 2020, to Anglo Americ

When the Andes project known as Pascua Lama moved from pitch to permit. Chile’s authorities acted as if they were arriving at glaciers for the first time. In the mid-2000s. Barrick Gold proposed removing and relocating parts of three glaciers to make room for an open-pit mine. The environmental permit was approved in 2006—and later, the case became a scandal.

State authorities. at the time. said they “really knew nothing” about the glaciers and that it was a new topic for them. That line landed in the public imagination for a reason: it implied a regulatory system looking past the very features it would later be forced to confront. Public pressure grew, and the mine was ultimately closed in 2020.

The years since have not just been about one glacier fight. In a study published in Tapuya: Latin American Science. Technology and Society. Javiera Barandiarán—an associate professor in global studies at the University of California. Santa Barbara—and colleagues trace how “undone science” has shaped conflicts between mining and glacier conservation over the past two decades in Chile.

In the study’s framework. undone science is research intentionally or unintentionally left unfunded. incomplete. or ignored because of political. economic. or industry pressure. The concept can also include research systematically distorted to generate public ignorance around key policy issues. In Chile. the authors argue. undone science has been a defining force in glacier protection politics—shifting glacier management from a question of science to a question of power.

Barandiarán and coauthors point to three drivers that allow science to remain undone: a lack of pluralism that excludes certain ways of knowing; a loss of autonomy when scientific agendas are shaped by powerful funders; and contested validation procedures over what counts as authoritative. They find undone science both in the absence of information and in the contestation of scientific knowledge—conditions that. they argue. let glaciers remain outside regulatory concern and environmental review for many years.

After Pascua Lama, the public response and demonstrations pushed the state toward acknowledging that glacier regulation had been missing. The first attempt to enact a glacier protection law in Chile was made in response to the Pascua Lama project. Other efforts followed as well: in 2008. Chile created a dedicated glaciology and snow unit within the country’s General Directorate of Water. and in 2014 it produced the country’s first National Glacier Inventory.

But the study also stresses that these moves were not a simple fix for undone science. When the state and regulators call for more science. it can quietly assume the problem is merely a lack of data. The authors argue the conflict is more complex: it involves a struggle over whose interests control how glaciers are used and how scientific production is shaped.

That tension isn’t just theoretical. In an interview with GlacierHub. Ajit Subramaniam—an oceanographer and research professor at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. part of the Columbia Climate School—described what frustrates decision-makers. “Often it is not a matter of uncertainty in the science that is confounding to policymakers so much as the difficulty in balancing opposing needs and who has a voice in that decision.”.

The second case in the study shows how undone science can evolve. While Pascua Lama involved an absence of knowledge—at least from the perspective of state readiness—Los Bronces involved something different. It was a copper mine expansion just north of Santiago, Chile’s capital. Its environmental permit was approved in 2023.

A major point of contention was the impact of mining dust on nearby glaciers. Particulate matter from mining activity settles on glaciers. darkening their surfaces and causing them to absorb more heat and melt faster. The Environmental Impact Service (SEA) rejected the permit for the expansion and argued that Anglo American had not accounted for dust impacts on nearby glaciers in its assessment.

Still, the Committee of Ministers overrode SEA’s rejection and pointed to uncertainty in quantifying those impacts. Research on dust impacts exists. but the study highlights that studies have differed on how much melt can be attributed to mining dust based on methods of analysis. Some findings attributed 82% of glacier loss to mining, while others stated up to a 99% loss.

The study argues that focusing on these methodological debates sidelined the broader question of what the mine’s impacts would mean.

Even so, the permit path didn’t stop at rejection. Although state agencies objected and the permit was rejected. an appeals council overrode those decisions after Anglo American agreed to offset 150% of its air pollution emissions and assured the council that the project was designed to “not affect any glaciers or protected areas.” As a condition of approval. the council required Anglo American to model dust impacts and implement an early warning system for glaciers.

The authors draw a direct line from that sequence back to Pascua Lama. In both cases, they argue, officials asked for more science to validate decisions.

The battle over glacier protections also has an economic argument attached to it, one mining companies have pushed hard. The study notes that companies have lobbied against protections that would prohibit mining near glaciers. claiming such rules would end the mining industry in Chile. Barandiarán and coauthors argue that framing is a false choice. If glaciers disappear. they warn. the supply of water needed for agriculture. industry. and communities across the country would be severely reduced.

Taken together, the two cases show a shift in what drives undone science and how it operates. At Pascua Lama. a mining corporation sought to physically remove glaciers while the state lacked the regulations and data needed to reject the proposal. At Los Bronces. the expansion posed less immediate harm to glaciers than mining dust would cause over time—and evidence of those dust impacts existed—but the interpretation of the science was contested in ways that hindered strong regulatory action.

In both, undone science emerges as something shaped by political and economic interests: what gets studied, what gets disputed, and what gets ignored.

And the story doesn’t end with the growth of glaciological data. Even as scientific evidence has increased. the study warns that uncertainty and debate can be used to delay protections or justify environmentally unsafe projects. More research and better science. the authors argue. will not automatically translate into stronger environmental protections unless the forces that keep certain science undone—or strategically contested—are confronted.

undone science Chile glaciers glacier protection law mining dust Pascua Lama Los Bronces Environmental Impact Service SEA Committee of Ministers appeals council National Glacier Inventory glaciology unit