Mining and sustainability: why transparency makes a difference - Ben Peachey


Published on

Ben Peachey of the International Council on Mining & Metals discusses the importance of transp

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Mining and sustainability: why transparency makes a difference - Ben Peachey

  1. 1. Mining dMi i and sustainability: why t i bilit htransparency makes a differenceBen Peachey / Communications Director yReputation in oil gas and mining / 20 January 2011
  2. 2. Overview of presentation p  ICMM at a glance t l  Member commitments  Public reporting and independent assurance  Reputational benefits of transparency
  3. 3. ICMM at a glance g Global Gl b l CEO led 30 Association 18 member members companies p Over 800 sites in 54 countries
  4. 4. Where do we come from? 4 regional reports 23 global workshops 175 research projects 50,000 50 000 people involved
  5. 5. Member commitments 10 Principles1. Implement ethical business practices and apply good corporate governance2. Integrate SD in corporate decision-making 3. Uphold fundamental human rights4. Manage risks based on sound science 5/6. Improve EHS performance7. Conserve biodiversity & participate in integrated land use planning8.8 Encourage life cycle approach to materials management9. Contribute to community development10. Publicly report, independently assure and engage openly and transparently y p p y g g p y p y 6 Position Statements Mining d Protected A Mi i and P t t d Areas Mining: P t Mi i Partnerships f Development hi for D l t Climate Change Mining and Indigenous Peoples Mercury Risk Management Transparency of Mineral Revenues
  6. 6. Delivering on the commitments gRobust entry criteria Clear performance Reporting... and and process expectations redress?
  7. 7. ICMM member performance – 2009 reports p p Compliant member C li t b Reporting/assurance commitment companies Policy li P li alignment with principles t ith i i l 15 Assurance of policy alignment 9 10 - advanced 6 - intermediate G3 application level 1 - beginner Total: 17 Use of GRI sector supplement 16 Assurance of G3 application level 13
  8. 8. Multi-stakeholder initiatives A risk assessment framework for relations between EI companies and public and private security providers to ensure respect for human rights Multi- stake- holder initiatives Verification/publication of company payments and government revenues from EI sector. Civil society involvement to increase government accountability Mandatory principles, reporting and third party assuranceIndustry-led NGO calls to further toughen reporting & governance requirementsinitiatives IFC Performance standards: ‘do no harm’ social and environmental safeguardsGov’t / European Multi- Equator principles. Financial industry benchmark for social & environmental riskinter-i t Stakeholder assessment and management in project fi t d ti j t financing i Forum on CSRgov’tinitiatives Dodd-Frank Act. Reporting requirements for companies that source minerals from US government the DRC h l h and safety performance of coal companies; di l h DRC; health d f f f l i disclosure of payments f to governments
  9. 9. Why bother with assurance? yCompany benefits• Internal improvements Better• Trust and credibility reputation with stakeholders• M Meets requirements of SRI/SD i di i f indicesMain benefits• Demonstrates organisation’s commitment to SD, as basis for better stakeholder relationships• Increases confidence and credibility in the assured SD processes and information• Builds and protects market reputation through independent confirmation of compliance to stated standards/ guidelines Better decision-making decision making• Drives performance improvements and assists future strategic decision-making
  10. 10. Parties to assurance – company, assurance p yprovider & intended users
  11. 11. Do sell-side analysts give a XXXX? y g Investigated overall impact of CSR g p strategies on securities analysts recommendations (16yr horizon) Examined perceptions of analysts on value creation (or value destruction) potential of CSR strategies Initially, CSR strategies perceived as value-destructing. Later, CSR strengths seen as value-creating: shift from sell to buy recommendations Higher ability analysts more likely to reward CSR strengths
  12. 12. Licence to operate p Rio Tinto - Madagascar ADD Pics of each operation Xstrata - Peru
  13. 13. Reputational benefits “Strongly” + “Tend to Agree ” All Stakeholders, 2007–2010 Strongly Tend Agree, Stakeholders 2007 2010 71 Moving membersMov ing m e m be rs tow ards 2010 towards higher highe r standards standards 76 2007 “Major” + “Medium Contribution,” All Stakeholders, 2007–2010 67 Raising industry g y Raising industry sta da ds a s g dust y standards 2010 standards 61
  14. 14. Transition to Sustainable Development p “4” + “5 (Excellent) ” All Stakeholders, 2007 2010 4 5 (Excellent), Stakeholders 2007–2010 42 ICMM member companies 38 32 Forest 21 27 Mining 22 20 Electrical utilities 2010 17 19 Packaging 14 2007 15 Chemical 16 14 Oil & Gas 18 ICMM members’ better performance is evidence that the ICMM principles and guidelines have a very positive effect. In light of the recent oil and gas environmental disasters that have occurred (i.e., the Gulf of Mexico oil spill), it is perhaps not surprising that stakeholders have given the oil and gas industry the lowest rating of all industries tested. 2007 Subsample: Those who have heard of ICMM (n=623)
  15. 15. In the end... Better reputation Transparency and d accountability Better decision- making
  16. 16. For further informationplease contact: l t tBen Peachey, Communications