Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42907781›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2026

Protecting public health in mining: a Q-methodology examination of policy space and reform pathways in Tanzania.

Joschka J Proksik, Fritz Brugger, Gregory Kabadi, Isaac Lyatuu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joschka J ProksikDepartment of Humanities, Social and Pol. Sc., Development Economics Group, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8092, Switzerland.
Fritz BruggerDepartment of Humanities, Social and Pol. Sc., Development Economics Group, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8092, Switzerland. bruggerf@ethz.ch.
Gregory KabadiIfakara Health Institute, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
Isaac LyatuuIfakara Health Institute, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMining is a driver of economic development in low and lower-middle-income countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. In Tanzania, the mining sector's contribution to GDP is rising rapidly; digitalisation and the energy transition are driving demand. This growth entails significant risks to the environment, social well-being, and public health. Despite mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments, environmental outcomes remain weak and public health receives limited attention. Drawing on the expertise and experience of stakeholders involved in implementing impact assessment in Tanzania, this study identifies measures to improve outcomes.

methodsQ-methodology is used to elicit stakeholder perspectives on the most effective measures to advance public health protection within Tanzania's industrial mining sector. Stakeholders were selected across different sectors to reflect a wide range of expertise, experience and viewpoints. Data were analysed to identify areas of consensus and divergence among stakeholders.

resultsThe study finds a shared recognition of the need for reform to strengthen public health regulation. Yet, study participants do not see merit in broad legal reforms such as introducing mandatory health impact assessments or overhauling environmental impact assessment legislation. The emphasis is on making the existing rules work as intended. Three perspectives dominate: The Compliance Perspective prioritises stronger public monitoring, enforcement, and sanctions regimes, with mining companies bearing the costs. The Local Perspective emphasises the need to shift resources and competences for monitoring to subnational authorities and to strengthen accountability towards communities. The Partnership Perspective, representing the smallest number of study participants, favours operational guidance documents on addressing public health in impact assessments and the active involvement of companies in the delivery of health services.

conclusionsStakeholders identify a clear policy space for reform to strengthen public health protection in Tanzania's mining sector and favour measures that improve the implementation of existing regulations. Priority actions include baseline health data collection, stronger consultation and grievance mechanisms, transparent monitoring and reporting, improved inter-agency coordination, and closer collaboration between mining companies and local health services. These findings suggest that implementation-focused reforms are more politically feasible and promise better outcomes than comprehensive regulatory change.

Indexed as

MiningPublic HealthHumansTanzaniaCorporate ResponsibilityEnvironmental Impact AssessmentHealth Impact AssessmentIndustrial miningPublic healthQ-methodologyTanzania

Identifiers

PMID42907781
PMCPMC13688855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.