Anthropogenic Processes and Ecosystem Functioning in Post-Mining Landscapes: The Role of Employee Behavior

Authors

  • Seno Aji

    Environmental Science Department, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Marlon Ivanhoe Aipassa

    Environmental Science Department, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia ; Faculty of Forestry and Tropical Environment, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Ndan Imang

    Environmental Science Department, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia; Faculty of Agriculture, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Jawatir Pardosi

    Environmental Science Department, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia; Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Rochadi Kristiningrum

    Faculty of Forestry and Tropical Environment, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Wulan Iyhig Ratna Sari

    Accounting Department, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Martha Ekawati Siahaya

    Environmental Pollution Control Engineering Technology Department, Samarinda State Agricultural Polytechnic, Samarinda 75131, Indonesia
  • Yosep Ruslim

    Faculty of Forestry and Tropical Environment, Mulawarman University, Samarinda 75123, Indonesia
  • Fitriansyah

    Regional Research and Innovation Agency of East Kalimantan Province, Samarinda 75124, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/re.v8i3.12947
Received: 30 December 2026 | Revised: 24 February 2026 | Accepted: 2 March 2026 | Published Online: 25 May 2026

Abstract

Ecosystem recovery in post-mining landscapes represents a complex process shaped by dynamic interactions between biophysical dynamics and sustained anthropogenic inputs. This study examines employee ecological behavior as a functional anthropogenic factor influencing ecosystem functioning in a tropical post-mining landscape in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Using an integrated empirical approach combining behavioral survey data from 136 mining employees with long-term ecosystem performance records of mining companies, we evaluate how sustained human-mediated actions relate to vegetation recovery, carbon sequestration, and landscape stabilization. Results indicate that while technical ecological knowledge among employees is moderate (mean score 3.2/5.0), the stability and continuity of employee pro-environmental behaviors show strong positive associations with measurable ecosystem recovery outcomes, including extensive land reclamation (1,875 ha over five years), increased vegetation cover (2.25 million trees planted), and significant carbon sequestration (33,800 tCO2e annually). These findings suggest that repeated employee interventions, when sustained over time and embedded within supportive organizational systems, may operate as cumulative anthropogenic processes contributing to recovery trajectories in degraded landscapes. However, we acknowledge that current data cannot isolate the independent causal effect of employee behavior from other organizational factors, including capital investment, technological infrastructure, and management systems. By conceptualizing employee behavior as an embedded anthropogenic factor rather than an external social variable, this study contributes to applied ecology by proposing a conceptual framework for understanding how employee actions may contribute to ecosystem functioning in post-mining contexts. The mechanistic pathways proposed require further validation through integrated social-ecological research designs.

Keywords:

Anthropogenic Processes; Post-Mining Ecosystems; Ecological Restoration; Vegetation Recovery; Carbon Cycling

References

[1] Hilson, G., Maconachie, R., 2020. Artisanal and small-scale mining and the Sustainable Development Goals: Opportunities and new directions for sub-Saharan Africa. Geoforum. 111, 125–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.09.006

[2] Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., 2010. The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli, D.G., Frid, C.L.J. (Eds.). Ecosystem Ecology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 110–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750458.007

[3] Bruckmeier, K., 2020. Economics and Sustainability: Social-Ecological Perspectives. Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56627-2

[4] Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., et al., 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science. 347(6223), 1259855. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

[5] Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., et al., 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science. 294(5543), 804–808. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11672608_Biodiversity_and_Ecosystem_Functioning_Current_Knowledge_and_Future_Challenges?__cf_chl_rt_tk=3XewhiE2Zubje0wJL.4dpaY3CaUidoZrCS4uila1S90-1776399072-1.0.1.1-Im6MG6xnee5IkQei0rBYYWKrf5WrZrrTVcxaU0gxNJc

[6] Hooper, D.U., Chapin, F.S., Ewel, J.J., et al., 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs. 75(1), 3–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/04-0922

[7] Tilman, D., Isbell, F., Cowles, J.M., 2014. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 45(1), 471–493. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091917

[8] Macellari, M., Gusmerotti, N.M., Frey, M., et al., 2018. Embedding biodiversity and ecosystem services in corporate sustainability: A strategy to enable Sustainable Development Goals. Business Strategy & Development. 1(4), 244–255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.34

[9] Williams, S., Schaefer, A., 2013. Small and Medium‐Sized Enterprises and Sustainability: Managers’ Values and Engagement with Environmental and Climate Change Issues. Business Strategy and the Environment. 22(3), 173–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1740

[10] Ye, J., Zhang, X., Zhou, L., et al., 2022. Psychological mechanism linking green human resource management to green behavior. International Journal of Manpower. 43(3), 844–861. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-11-2020-0508

[11] ElAlfy, A., Palaschuk, N., El-Bassiouny, D., et al., 2020. Scoping the Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Research in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Era. Sustainability. 12(14), 5544. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145544

[12] Schaefer, A., Williams, S., Blundel, R., 2020. Individual Values and SME Environmental Engagement. Business & Society. 59(4), 642–675. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317750134

[13] Farrukh, M., Ansari, N., Raza, A., et al., 2022. Fostering employee’s pro-environmental behavior through green transformational leadership, green human resource management and environmental knowledge. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 179, 121643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121643

[14] Miah, M., Rahman, S.M.M., Biswas, S., et al., 2026. Effects of green human resource management practices on employee green behavior: the role of employee’s environmental knowledge management and green self-efficacy for greening workplace. International Journal of Organizational Analysis. 34(4), 1174–1208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2024-4462

[15] Lange, F., Dewitte, S., 2019. Measuring pro-environmental behavior: Review and recommendations. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 63, 92–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.04.009

[16] Pouresmaieli, M., Ataei, M., Nouri Qarahasanlou, A., et al., 2024. Building ecological literacy in mining communities: A sustainable development perspective. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering. 9, 100554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100554

[17] Pratiwi, I., Saefudin, A., Sari, G.I., et al., 2025. Green human capital and organizational performance: The role of employee environmental awareness and sustainable innovation in achieving organizational sustainability. Innovation and Green Development. 4(3), 100244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.igd.2025.100244

[18] Novotný, R., Huttmanová, E., Valentiny, T., et al., 2021. Evaluation of Environmental Awareness of University Students: the Case of the University of Presov, Slovakia. European Journal of Sustainable Development. 10(2), 59–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2021.v10n2p59

[19] Islam, M.M., Pranto, M.A., Shabab, M.R., et al., 2024. Revitalizing the Land: Ecosystem Restoration in Post-Mining Areas. North American Academic Research.

[20] Tam, K.-P., 2025. Culture and pro-environmental behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 62, 101986. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101986

[21] Creswell, J.W., Plano-Clark, V.L., 2017. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.

[22] Kollmuss, A., Agyeman, J., 2002. Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research. 8(3), 239–260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401

[23] PT Kaltim Prima Coal, 2022. Sustainable Report: A Sustainable Future with Responsible Mining. PT Kaltim Prima Coal: Sangatta, Indonesia.

[24] PT Kaltim Prima Coal, 2023. Sustainable Report: Transforming Coal Mining with Balancing Economic Growth, Environmental Protection, and Community Strengthening. PT Kaltim Prima Coal: Sangatta, Indonesia.

[25] Alrifae, A.A.M., 2026. Green human resource management and sustainable performance: A systematic literature review. Sustainable Futures. 11, 101580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101580

[26] Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA.

[27] Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2019. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 11(4), 589–597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

[28] Bebbington, J., Larrinaga, C., 2014. Accounting and sustainable development: An exploration. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 39(6), 395–413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.01.003

[29] Ellis, E.C., Klein Goldewijk, K., Siebert, S., et al., 2010. Anthropogenic transformation of the biomes, 1700 to 2000. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 19(5), 589–606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00540.x

[30] Hobbs, R.J., Higgs, E., Harris, J.A., 2009. Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 24(11), 599–605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.05.012

[31] Mace, G.M., Reyers, B., Alkemade, R., et al., 2014. Approaches to defining a planetary boundary for biodiversity. Global Environmental Change. 28, 289–297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.009

[32] Tölgyesi, C., Csikós, N., Temperton, V.M., et al., 2025. Limited carbon sequestration potential from global ecosystem restoration. Nature Geoscience. 18(8), 761–768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-025-01742-z

[33] Boulot, E., 2025. The environmental statehood of ecological restoration: An institutional analysis of three regulatory case studies. Global Environmental Change. 91, 102982. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.102982

[34] Kappes, P.J., Benkwitt, C.E., Spatz, D.R., et al., 2021. Do Invasive Mammal Eradications from Islands Support Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation? Climate. 9(12), 172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9120172

[35] Sisaye, S., 2022. The organizational ecological resource framework of sustainability reporting: Implications for corporate social reporting (CSR). Journal of Business and Socio-Economic Development. 2(2), 99–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JBSED-05-2021-0065

[36] Ciasullo, M.V., Chiarini, A., Palumbo, R., 2024. Mastering the interplay of organizational resilience and sustainability: Insights from a hybrid literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment. 33(2), 1418–1446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3530

[37] Ahmić, A., 2022. Strategic Sustainability Orientation Influence on Organizational Resilience: Moderating Effect of Firm Size. Business Systems Research Journal. 13(1), 169–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2022-0011

[38] Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S., 2002. Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press: Washington, DC, USA.

[39] Walters, G., Baruah, M., Karambiri, M., et al., 2021. The power of choice: How institutional selection influences restoration success in Africa. Land Use Policy. 104, 104090. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104090

[40] Saikanth, D.R.K., Prashanth, P., Kaviraju, S., et al., 2025. Advancing Ecosystem Recovery: Cutting-Edge Research in Restoration Science. In: Khan, Y.D.I., Goswami, M., Nautiyal, S. (Eds.). Ecosystem-Based Approaches for Resilience Building in Himalayan Landscapes, Disaster Resilience and Green Growth. Springer Nature: Singapore. pp. 395–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-2007-7_21

[41] Li, Y., Zhao, Z., Fu, B., et al., 2025. Ecological restorations enhance ecosystem stability by improving ecological resilience in a typical basin of the Yangtze River, China. Geography and Sustainability. 6(6), 100357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2025.100357

[42] McFarlane, S.L., Kochanski, J.M., Gratton, C., et al., 2023. Intervention intensity predicts the quality and duration of prairie restoration outcomes. Restoration Ecology. 31(8), e13993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13993

[43] Crossman, N.D., 2017. The Role of Ecological Restoration and Rehabilitation in Production Landscapes: An Enhanced Approach to Sustainable Development. United Nations Global Land Programme.

[44] Norton, L., Greene, S., Scholefield, P., et al., 2016. The importance of scale in the development of ecosystem service indicators? Ecological Indicators. 61, 130–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.051

[45] Hernández, F., 2020. Ecological Discord and the Importance of Scale in Scientific Inquiry. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 84(8), 1427–1434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.21942

[46] Straus, E., Unsworth, K.L., Korunka, C., 2024. Descriptive Norms, Personal Values, Organizational Pro-Environmental Support: Providing Intrinsic or Extrinsic Attributions to Increase Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Environment and Behavior. 56(9–10), 776–813. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00139165241311490

[47] Pontillo, H.R., Dominguez, S.M., Bustamante, A.R., et al., 2025. The Mediating Role of Green Human Capital in the Relationship Between Green Human Resource Management Practices and Green Employee Behavior for a Sustainable Future. Sustainability. 17(23), 10767. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su172310767

[48] Suding, K.N., 2011. Toward an Era of Restoration in Ecology: Successes, Failures, and Opportunities Ahead. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 42(1), 465–487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102710-145115

[49] Palmer, M.A., Hondula, K.L., Koch, B.J., 2014. Ecological Restoration of Streams and Rivers: Shifting Strategies and Shifting Goals. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 45(1), 247–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091935

[50] Levin, S.A., 1992. The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture. Ecology. 73(6), 1943–1967. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1941447

[51] Turner, M.G., 2010. Disturbance and landscape dynamics in a changing world. Ecology. 91(10), 2833–2849. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/10-0097.1

Downloads

How to Cite

Aji, S., Aipassa, M. I., Imang, N., Pardosi, J., Kristiningrum, R., Sari, W. I. R., Siahaya, M. E., Ruslim, Y., & Fitriansyah. (2026). Anthropogenic Processes and Ecosystem Functioning in Post-Mining Landscapes: The Role of Employee Behavior. Research in Ecology, 8(3), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.30564/re.v8i3.12947

Issue

Vol.8, Iss.3 (June 2026)(In Progress)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2026 Seno Aji, Marlon Ivanhoe Aipassa, Ndan Imang, Jawatir Pardosi, Rochadi Kristiningrum, Wulan Iyhig Ratna Sari, Martha Ekawati Siahaya, Yosep Ruslim, Fitriansyah

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC