Regulatory regime on coal Mine Safety in China and Australia: Comparative analysis and overall findings

China and Australia are the world's largest coal producers and exporters respectively. Both countries have developed the separate regulatory regime to regulate their coal mine safety. But Australia is far ahead of China in terms of coal mine safety. It appears that there remains significant scope for improvement on China's separate regulatory regime. This article explores the similarities and differences between the regulatory regimes of China and Australia, and introduces a slice of the arguments used to explain the distinct gap in mine safety. The first and foremost, the mining Occupational Health & Safety (OHS) legislation in Australia is based upon duty of care, risk management principles and workforce representation, while in China the mining OHS legislation could be characterized as being uniformly prescriptive. Secondly, the regulatory agencies in China, namely the State Administration of Coal Mine Safety (SACMS) and local regulation department of coal mine safety possess a multiple of distinctive problems. Thirdly, coal mines in China are divided into the state-owned coal mines (SOCMs) and township and village coal mines (TVCMs) which differ quite widely, including the mine ownership, mine objectives, and coal pricing. In addition the mine workers are powerless in the matter of coal mine safety regulation.

Automated summary

Although both China and Australia have established coal mine safety regulatory regimes, Australia is far ahead in terms of mine safety. The main reasons include Australia's legislation being based on duty of care, risk management, and workforce representation principles, while China's legislation is more prescriptive. Additionally, differences in regulatory agencies and types of coal mines in China contribute to the distinct gap in mine safety.