This article offers valuable insights into the critical topic of Temporality and Justice in Mining Impacted Regions. However, to fully realize its potential, several key areas need refinement and expansion as outlined below.
1. The paper could strengthen its analytical rigor by explicitly linking the temporal and justice dimensions through a robust framework. This framework should clearly delineate how temporal aspects (historical, present, and future) interact with justice dimensions (procedural, distributive, and intergenerational) across the studied regions.
2. While the study covers multiple regions, the discussion on each case remains superficial. The paper should include a deeper comparative analysis that highlights specific socio-environmental dynamics, community responses, and policy outcomes in each context. More detailed data and examples would enhance the richness of the discussion.
3. The study should integrate localized, community-driven perspectives, particularly from Indigenous groups and marginalized populations. Incorporating qualitative insights or narratives can provide depth to the understanding of justice issues and amplify voices often excluded from mining discourses.
4. The methodology section requires more detail on how the selected cases were identified and analyzed. Clarify the criteria for inclusion and discuss how diverse data sources (e.g., policy documents, reports, and interviews) were synthesized to support findings. A mixed-methods approach or clear justification of qualitative reliance could strengthen the study's credibility.
5. The paper should more explicitly situate its findings within broader global debates on mining governance, environmental justice, and sustainability transitions. Drawing comparisons with other mining-impacted regions worldwide or aligning with global frameworks (e.g., Sustainable Development Goals) could add to its relevance and scholarly impact