CHAPTER 16 AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE - pubs.iied.orgpubs.iied.org/pdfs/G00908.pdf · CHAPTER 16 AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE ... AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE CHAPTER 16 ... no business case to justify

CHAPTER 16

AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE

388 Broad Conclusions

389 A Vision of the Minerals Sector

390 Supporting Sustainable Development in the MInerals Sector

391 Step One – Understanding Sustainable Development

393 Step Two – Creating Organizational Policies and Management Systems

395 Step Three – Achieving Cooperation Among Those With Similar Interests

399 Step Four – Building Capacity for Effective Actions at All Levels

410 A Final Thought

bens

The many people and organizations – in business,government, civil society, and elsewhere – whotogether constitute the minerals sector have differingroles, perspectives, and values. But there is moreconvergence than might be expected.There is a broadacceptance that the various costs and benefits do notfall equally on all.There is a strong desire for improvedperformance, a better quality of life, and constructiveengagement that produces results.There areexperienced and committed people throughout thesector, in government, labour unions, civil societyorganizations, companies, and elsewhere, with usefulideas and considerable energy.Yet there is frustrationabout how hard it is to make change, to put ideas andenergy into practice, or to produce concrete results.

The MMSD Project found from the beginning thatsustainable development could provide a usefulframework to guide the minerals sector. It also believedthat by setting out the challenges – from allperspectives, in a fair and balanced way – new waysforward would emerge. It has not been an easy process,given the low levels of trust in the sector on the onehand and the complexity of the issues on the other.

This final chapter contains the broad conclusions thatemerged from the MMSD process and an Agenda forChange. (See Box 16–1 for a description of the Projectthat formed the basis for this agenda.) The agenda setsout various actions for improving the mineral sector’scontribution to sustainable development. In all thediscussion the project has provoked, few quarrelledwith the basic definition of sustainable developmentcontained in the 1987 report of the WorldCommission on Environment and Development.The Agenda for Change assumes a broad set of goalsthat flow from that definition:• material and other needs for a better quality of life

have to be fulfilled for people of this generation• as equitably as possible• while respecting ecosystem limits and • building the basis on which future generations can

meet their own needs.

MMSD BREAKING NEW GROUND

THE MINING, MINERALS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MMSD386

MMSD has tried to do three things: provide a means for

surfacing ideas and information; offer some opportunity to

test those ideas with diverse, knowledgeable audiences; and

provide a ‘snapshot’ of where this evolution of ideas stands

and what conclusions can be drawn.

Box 16–1. The MMSD Project at a Glance

The project has surfaced ideas through working and engaging

with organizations and individuals from different regions of the

world. This has included:

• a review of existing knowledge;

• assimilation of suggestions submitted to MMSD by many

organizations and individuals;

• research conducted by staff of the International Institute for

Environment and Development;

• four regional processes that have, in turn, drawn on

contributions from many researchers to produce regional

reports; and

• the commissioning of 12 country baseline studies and more

than 100 expert studies on a range of topics.

It has tested those ideas as widely as possible through:

• posting important documents on the MMSD website and

asking for comment;

• the distribution of Bulletins detailing MMSD progress and

soliciting response sent to the MMSD database of over 5000

people;

• informal conversations with individuals and organizations

working in the field;

• responses received when these emerging ideas were

presented at meetings and conferences throughout the world;

• regional consultations in four key mineral-producing and

-consuming regions around the globe;

• national processes of consultation in several countries;

• peer review and comment on critical pieces of background

research;

• 23 global workshops on topics ranging from biological

diversity and corruption to managing mineral wealth and

indigenous concerns about mineral development, attended by

600–700 diverse stakeholders and interested parties;

• close work with a 25-member Assurance Group consisting

of people from a broad spectrum of backgrounds and

perspectives;

• wide publication of a draft report on 4 March 2002, with an

invitation to submit comments and criticisms, which resulted

in more than 100 sets of written comments as well as

numerous less formal suggestions and an intense effort to

evaluate, respond to, and where appropriate adopt the

comments into this final report; and

• four regional forums to discuss the draft report.

MMSD has not been able to reach every group that is concerned

about these issues or to engage all the relevant actors from all

interest groups. It has not completed the analytical task, nor has

it attempted to state a consensus where none exists.

AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE CHAPTER 16

MMSD THE MINING, MINERALS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 387

From this MMSD derived a framework based on a set of guiding principles, as described in Chapter 1.(See Table 16–1.)

This framework requires that most decisions be basedon multiple rather than single criteria. Choices, ortrade-offs, are needed where a decision cannot satisfyall criteria simultaneously. But there is a need tomaintain some limits with respect to parameters fortrade-offs.This agenda assumes that there are somevalues subscribed to by all, such as basic human rightsor honest justice systems, that cannot be cast aside.The idea of ‘critical natural capital’ should join this list once it has been more fully debated and is morewidely understood.

Decision-makers have to operate within certainconstraints. Different stakeholders emphasize differentpriorities: poverty alleviation and equity for thoseconcerned with development; the ‘triple bottom line’for industry; the integrity of ecosystems and theircontinued viability for environmentalists.To reachconsensus through negotiation – especially forindividuals such as the CEO of a company or thedirector of a non-governmental organization (NGO) –is a demanding task.This is complicated by the factthat not all groups have the same level of economicpower or influence.Time is another constraint: time isneeded to build trust, to even out power differentials,to learn to understand different perspectives andidentify commonalities.

The right incentives need to be in place to encouragedifferent actors to pursue their own objectives in waysthat contribute to the wider goals of sustainabledevelopment.What is appropriate for each to do willbe based on responsibilities and capacities. For each, itis important that actions:• be consistent with organizational objectives as well

as the objectives of sustainable development;• build on strengths; and• be measurable, so there must be some way to

distinguish success from failure.

The next section outlines some overall conclusionsfrom Part III, followed by a vision of the future for themining and minerals sector in a sustainable world thatprovides some guidance on the actions needed tomove this agenda forward.

Economic Sphere

• Maximize human well-being.

• Ensure efficient use of all resources, natural and otherwise,

by maximizing rents.

• Seek to identify and internalize environmental and

social costs.

• Maintain and enhance the conditions for viable enterprise.

Social Sphere

• Ensure a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of

development for all those alive today.

• Respect and reinforce the fundamental rights of human

beings, including civil and political liberties, cultural

autonomy, social and economic freedoms, and personal

security.

• Seek to sustain improvements over time; ensure that

depletion of natural resources will not deprive future

generations through replacement with other forms of capital.

Environmental Sphere

• Promote responsible stewardship of natural resources and

the environment, including reparations for past damages.

• Minimize waste and environmental damage along the whole

of the supply chain.

• Exercise prudence where impacts are unknown or uncertain.

• Operate within ecological limits and protect critical natural

capital.

Governance Sphere

• Support representative democracy, including participatory

decision-making.

• Encourage free enterprise within a system of clear and fair

rules and incentives.

• Avoid excessive concentration of power through appropriate

checks and balances.

• Ensure transparency through providing all stakeholders with

access to relevant and accurate information.

• Ensure accountability for decisions and actions, which are

based on comprehensive and reliable analysis.

• Encourage cooperation in order to build trust and shared

goals and values.

• Ensure that decisions are made at the appropriate level,

adhering to the principle of subsidiarity where possible.

Table 16–1. Sustainable Development Principles

Broad Conclusions

Breaking New Ground contains only a fraction of theanalysis generated by the MMSD process, much of which is provided on the accompanying CD.Given the heterogeneous nature of this sector, fewgeneralizations can or should be made.With thatdisclaimer in mind, here are some general conclusionsof the MMSD Project:

Need – Society’s need for mineral commodities isclear, as they provide the substrate for numerousproducts upon which modern society depends.Even in the case of non-recyclable mineralcommodities such as coal, it will take years to phaseout use, given current dependencies. It is not currentlypossible to meet the world’s legitimate basic needswithout more of at least some kinds of mineralcommodities in circulation.

Structure of the Sector – Though there is a greatdeal of interdependence among companies along thevalue chain, the lack of vertical integration in some ofthe minerals industry can be an obstacle to effectiveproduct stewardship. Improving this situation willrequire much more collaboration in the industry thanhas occurred in the past. If the industry is to movetowards providing mineral ‘services’ as opposed tomaterial supply, restructuring and alliances will need tobe established.

Stakeholders – The sector includes stakeholders fromthe local to the global – with a wide variety ofinterests.There is a difference between those with adirect and often involuntary interest and those who areconcerned indirectly because they choose to be.The term ‘stakeholder’ therefore requires furtherclarification.Talking of multistakeholder processeswithout some clarity around the different kinds of‘stakes’ is too simplistic.

Subsidiarity – Local issues should be solved locally, aslocal endowments and priorities differ from place toplace. Local actors will be directly involved when theirinterests are threatened.While international action andsolidarity remain crucial, decentralizing decision-making to the point as close to the impact as possibleshould be the norm. Local actors often resentinterventions from national or international quarters‘on their behalf ’, particularly if this involves theassumption of a mandate.

Best Practice – Similarly, the concept of ‘bestpractice’ requires local solutions.A frequent response toquestions about what constitutes ‘best practice’ is that‘it all depends’. Best practice should be defined bydecentralized and iterative processes, not by a fixed setof parameters that can be read out of a manual.

Incentives – Win-win solutions are not alwayspossible; voluntary approaches alone are insufficientwhere there is a compelling social priority but little orno business case to justify the additional expendituresneeded to meet it.There are then two options:collective action on a voluntary basis that is enforcedinternally by a group, or governmental intervention orregulation to achieve the same result. Unless the law isclear and enforced, some enterprises will resist change.In addition, if civil society groups put pressure only ona large few companies and fail to recognize progress,the rest will ride free. From the MMSD financedialogue, it is clear that market-base incentives onsustainable development criteria are difficult thoughprobably not impossible to design.At present, thediscussion is couched in terms of the management ofrisk, increasing shareholder value, and the occasionalmarketing advantage. Devising a system of customer-driven certification is also problematic due to theheterogeneity of the industry.

Capacities – There is a genuine and critical need tobuild the capacity of all the actors.Though MMSD hasnot surveyed in detail respective capacities, the overallconclusion must be that sustainable development forthe sector calls for a new and different mix of skills.The current mix, whether looking at companies,NGOs, or governments, will need to improve for thesector to contribute to sustainable development.

Managing Mineral Wealth – The full potentialcontribution of minerals to national economies ismostly far from realized. In all too many instances,incentives for foreign investment reduce the wealthavailable to the host nation.The ability of mineral-richcountries to add value to their wealth by way ofbeneficiation and processing is often denied by lack of capacity, tariff, and other trade barriers. In somecases, subsidies make the position worse for others.The mismanagement of wealth through inefficiencyand corruption does not help.Those who have mineralwealth now should be determined to use it to producediverse and stable economies for tomorrow – and theyneed help to do so.





Legacies – The negative social and environmentallegacy of the sector is a major obstacle to buildingtrust and moving forward.Abandoned sites andcommunities, persistent waste and pollution issues,aggrieved peoples: the list is long. Historically,consumers – mostly in the industrial world – have notpaid the full costs of using mineral commodities; thefailure to internalize many of these costs has only beenrecognized recently.The obstacles to progress indealing with legacies include establishing priorities onthe worst sites, identifying who will pay, and decidingon the source of the funding.

Collective Efforts – Corporate performance in theminerals sector, measured against any indicator, isvariable. Some good companies are improving , but thebad are inexcusable, and the past record is even worse.Action by companies, individually and collectively, isclearly required. In an open trading and competitiveworld, a ‘rush to the bottom’ caused by ‘free riders’ is areal danger. In many areas, small companies are crucialto the standards of large ones. If, for example, projectsnear closure are simply sold by multinationals toprivate, less visible entities, other routes are opened toavoid obligations. Collective action must includecompanies of all sizes in order to produce positiveresults.

Use of Existing Institutions – Existingorganizations should be encouraged to continuefacilitating collective action. Institutions such asnational and international chambers of mining andregional governmental organizations currently offer thebest opportunity for collective action to move forward.Mutual recognition of their respective roles andcollaboration is needed.All need to engage moreopenly with other constituencies.

Dilemmas remain on a range of issues, including how to:• raise the capacity of all to act to the best of

standards,• define the boundaries of responsibility among

different actors when governance is weak,• balance the role of regulation with that of voluntary

initiatives,• apply the precautionary principle so as to have a

proportional response,• remove subsidies and trade barriers that favour the

better-off,• achieve better balances between risks and

opportunities,

• act when there is a democratic and governancedeficit,

• stop the free riders yet maintain competition in anopen trading world, and

• ensure that the price of a product reflects its total costs.

A Vision of the Minerals Sector

The MMSD process sought to create a picture of what the minerals sector would look like if it were tomaximize its contribution to sustainable development.(See Table 16–2.) In this vision of the future, theminerals industry is integrated throughout the valuechain and providing mineral services rather thanprimary products.To raise the performance of all, aleading group of companies – both large and small –provides a model and supports the efforts of others.

Legal and regulatory frameworks will becomplemented by voluntary initiatives, such as mine-site or company-wide verification.These measures will be developed through transparent and inclusiveprocesses, defining concrete performance standards atthe global, national, and local levels. Governments willhave sufficient capability and willingness to imposesanctions on those who will not meet these standards.There will be fair and accepted mechanisms tofacilitate access to information, public participation indecision-making processes, and access to justice toresolve disputes.

All actors will have sufficient capacity to meet higher standards, to define and enforce constructiveinterventions, and to monitor performance and facilitatesustainable development objectives. Costs will be muchbetter internalized, and there will be a concerted effortto address the legacies of abandoned mines.

There will be clear incentives for all actors. Companiesthat perform well will retain their social licence tooperate – including lower operating costs, favourableborrowing terms, and lower insurance rates.Governments will benefit from harmonious social,economic, and political relations. Labour will enjoybetter working conditions and better health. NGOswill play a positive role in meeting society’s needs.Consumers will be assured that their use of mineralproducts is supporting sustainable livelihoods.Andcommunities overall will have better standards of livingand greater involvement in decision-making processes.

Supporting Sustainable Development in theMinerals Sector

One of the principal difficulties in adopting the agendaof sustainable development is the multiplicity of theindividual issues, problems, and proposed solutions.This Agenda for Change proposes a relatively smallnumber of overarching ideas that can be used toorganize those many individual concerns and prioritiesinto manageable tasks. In each chapter in Part III, risksand opportunities are outlined and current problemsidentified, with some specific steps suggested that maylead to progress in problem solving.

This chapter does not attempt to capture andsummarize all those proposals and suggestions; itsfunction is quite different.The goal here is torecommend some broader steps that can be taken tointegrate many of the suggestions in Part III.These canbe grouped into four major categories of actions tosupport sustainable development in the minerals sector:• Increase understanding of sustainable development.• Create organizational-level policies and management

systems for implementing the principles ofsustainable development.



The Worst of the Past A Vision of the Future

Mineral revenues that are spent outside the public view for Mineral wealth spent transparently to support social and

the benefit of a few economic goals

Long-running disputes with landowners about compensation Disputes resolved efficiently and fairly

Tariff and non-tariff barriers that deter developing countries from A level playing field where free trade works more equitably

establishing downstream industries

Minerals development as a threat to protected areas and Mineral development in appropriate places and as a source of

biological diversity revenue to ensure the protection of areas critical to biodiversity

Companies that set their own rules in protected enclaves A shared system of laws and practices that applies to everyone

Government decisions taken privately and unaccountably, Decisions taken publicly, after consultation with affected parties,

based on poor information based on clear criteria

Mining and recycling industries seeing each other as competitors An integrated, complementary approach to management of

materials in use

Consumers who have no idea of the source of the minerals they use Consumers who know the source of the products they use and

increasingly act on that knowledge

Minerals development as a threat to indigenous peoples’ cultures A minerals industry that works in partnership with indigenous

and societies peoples and communities

Frequent disputes and armed conflicts Fair, equitable, and accepted ways of preventing and resolving

disputes

Minerals operations endangering worker and public health and A minerals industry that promotes improvements in public health

causing deaths

A legacy of ghost towns, poverty, and pollution Integrated planning for sustained post-closure environmental,

social, and economic benefits

Infrequent exchanges among a few stakeholders Ongoing and inclusive dialogue among all stakeholder groups

Table 16–2. Towards a Sustainable Future for the Mining and Minerals Sector



• Collaborate with others with common interests totake joint steps towards sustainable development.

• Increase the ability to work towards sustainabledevelopment at local, national, and global levels.

The proposals are directed principally to those with ahigh level of interest and involvement in the sector.Many of the proposals are more applicable to someactors than to others.

Step One – Understanding Sustainable DevelopmentRealizing the potential of sustainable developmentrequires a commitment to education and research,including a focus on the development of practical toolsfor making decisions and taking actions.

EducationThere is a need to increase the understanding ofsustainable development among employees of mineralscompanies, relevant government agencies, labour andcivil society organizations, and others with importantroles in the sector.

• Institutions such as mining schools that have a rolein educating future mining and mineralsprofessionals – who may work in the future incompanies, governments, or elsewhere in the sector– should incorporate sustainable development intheir curricula.

• Donors to these institutions should support,encourage, and insist on these broadened curricula.

• Industry associations, labour unions, and NGOsshould work with educational institutions on theircurricula.They could also assist in developing shortcourses or distance learning modules for currentprofessionals.

• Educational institutions with more general mandatesshould strive to incorporate broader understandingof the role of minerals in society, as well as thesector’s contribution to sustainable development.

Research on Priority IssuesWhile the MMSD Project has compiled a considerableamount of information, it has also highlighted areaswhere more research is needed. Research will faceincreasing demands to ensure relevance to theconcerns of stakeholders in the sector, and there is aneed to find mechanisms to ensure this broadening offocus occurs. In the minerals sector, research has also

been used in the past to gain political capital, or toensure that research reaches conclusions that are notdamaging to particular interests.This leads to dismissaland rejection on one or another side of even goodresearch results.

• Any organization funding significant research in thisarea should have clearly stated policies ensuring therigour of the research it is supporting, includingpublication of data, citation to publicly availablesources, and peer review.

• There is an important role for panels withrepresentatives selected by a variety of stakeholdersto establish research priorities for organizationssupporting research related to sustainabledevelopment in the minerals sector, especially inreflecting the needs of developing countries.

• Many research priorities are identified throughoutPart III. Specific areas needing attention include thedevelopment of a business case relating to the useand recycling of metals and minerals, and thepositive and negative impacts of mineralsdevelopment on community health.

• More funding could be committed to research thataims to integrate existing disparate sets of knowledgeor expertise within a sustainable developmentframework.

• International mechanisms exist to coordinate andfund research of public interest on topics such aspublic health and climate change.While there arealready some international alliances for research inthe minerals sector, it is hoped that either researchnetworks with specialist university departments,national research institutions, or a UN agency wouldconvene meetings of interested parties to discussresearch of public interest.

Development of Practical ToolsThere is great emphasis on the development of toolsfor taking concrete steps towards the goals andprinciples of sustainable development, especially in thebusiness world.This is necessary and should beencouraged; but there is also a danger that the marketmay be flooded with duplicative and poorly thoughtout tools that will ultimately discredit the idea.

• An industry body, such as the International Councilon Mining & Metals (ICMM) or the Prospectorsand Developers Association of Canada (PDAC),could commission respected institutions – perhapsinvolving a partnership of leading business schools –

to survey industry needs and develop criteria todistinguish appropriate types of decision-makingtools.These tasks should be undertaken with theappropriate participation of affected stakeholders.

• Many specifics tools should be developed or refined.These include, for example, indicators on humanrights, conflict, or social conditions.

• Donor governments, regional and internationalorganizations, or a group of like-mindedgovernments could support surveys on the kind ofdecision-making tools needed to enhance decision-making in governments.

Improving Professional Practice and KnowledgeThe knowledge and practice of the various professionsneeded by organizations may not encourage practicesconsistent with sustainable development, or may evenserve as obstacles to progress. In companies, forexample, current accounting standards may not provideclear answers for integrated planning for mine closure,purchasing standards may not be appropriate to theemerging concepts of supply chain assurance orcommunity development, and methods for evaluatingmineral prospects may not take into account the best current understanding of sustainable development.

Specialists of different disciplines and technical fields atall stages of the minerals cycle – from geology toaccounting – will need to evaluate how to apply theprinciples of sustainable development to their currentactivities.This task may be aided by collaboration withothers in the same fields, through, for example, thework of professional associations.

• At the international level, appropriate industrybodies from all stages of the minerals chain, such asICMM or PDAC, in partnership with internationalassociations of professionals and specialists, couldconvene meetings to examine priority issues facingdifferent disciplines working to apply the principlesof sustainable development.Associations ofexploration geologists, accountants, engineers,human resource directors, purchasing managers,marketing professionals, lawyers, and others wouldbe among the high priorities for such meetings.

• At the national level, national mining associations ororganizations of processing, fabricating or recyclingcompanies could convene similar events withnational associations of professionals.

• Labour unions, working with other actors, couldconvene events designed to understand workers’concerns about sustainable development, to



Actions Responsibilities

Education and Research• Incorporate sustainable development into curricula for • Educational institutions supported by donors, industry

mineral professionals associations, labour unions, and NGOs• Policies for transparency and rigour for research • Donors, research institutions • Establish research priorities • Multistakeholder panel• Undertake research • Research institutes and other organizations that

undertake research• Fund integrative research • Donors

Development of Practical Tools• Quality assurance for decision tools • Industry bodies such as ICMM or PDAC, business schools,

and research institutions• Development of specific tools • All actors• Survey of government decision-making tools • Donors, governments, regional, and international organizations

Improving Professional Practice and Knowledge• Meetings at the international 1evel • Industry bodies such as ICMM and PDAC, international

professional associations• Meetings at the national level • National industry associations, national professional associations• Meetings focused on the role and concerns of labour • Labour unions

Key Actions for Understanding Sustainable Development



strengthen their roles in dealing with a variety ofissues, and to identify areas in which the training ofworkers should be improved.These can build onexisting work in areas of health and safety,retrenchment, and broader community issues.

Step Two – Creating Organizational Policies andManagement SystemsMost organizations do not have sustainabledevelopment policies and should consider developingthem.This is important for all actors, including largeconsumers of mineral products, lenders, andinstitutional investors. Such a policy can be used tocreate internal change and to integrate sustainabledevelopment into mainstream thinking in ways thatadd value to the organization.

As a first step in developing such a policy, anorganization should review its overall objectives andfunctions from a sustainable development perspective.This could include understanding how theorganization can contribute to sustainabledevelopment; identifying the potential costs andbenefits of doing so; and maximizing the benefits forthe organization as a whole by integrating individualactivities into a coherent, organization-widemanagement system. Institutions, government agencies,businesses, and other groups that already havesustainable development policies should review the extent to which these have penetrated theorganization and its decision-making processes, andshould consider more effective ways of integratingthem into practices and deriving organizational valuefrom them.

Sustainable development policies are a starting pointfor action, but integrated management systems arerequired to ensure their effective implementation.These will involve the integrated use of specific toolsand may be based on models such as those that havedriven improvements in worker health and safety orenvironmental impacts.All actors need to reviewexisting organizational management systems to assesswhether the right mechanisms are in place and todetermine whether they have sufficient capacity toundertake necessary changes. In particular,organizations need to ensure that mechanisms are inplace to evaluate progress in implementation and toreport findings to management and key stakeholders ina credible manner.

The remainder of this section considers thedevelopment of policy and management systems by individual actors.Actions that involve cooperativeefforts with others are dealt with later in the chapter.

CompaniesA company-level sustainable development policy canincorporate other relevant company policies such asthose on environmental issues, worker health andsafety, employee integrity, community relations, humanrights, reporting, and so on.This should enable theintegration of these policies within a coherent, moreefficient and effective, and less costly managementsystem.The whole company should be engaged, as thispartial list of the departments that might be includedindicates:

• Human resources – recruiting and retaining good-quality staff, evaluation and compensation.

• Legal departments – permitting, contracts, managingliabilities, better due diligence, making clear that nocorruption will be tolerated, adequate provisions forenforcement.

• Purchasing – supply chain assurance, communitydevelopment.

• Accounting – treatment of risks, costs, and liabilities;accurate and informative reporting to seniormanagement, Boards of Directors, and externalaudiences.

• Boards of directors and senior management –identification of sources of risk and potentialbusiness opportunities.

• Exploration and property acquisition – better duediligence in identifying liabilities, more effectiveassessment of the pros and cons on acquisitions anddivestitures.

• Health, safety, and environment – further progress inintegrating programmes into employeeconsciousness; improved relations with regulators.

• Site management – long-term planning; improvedrelations with local communities.

• Marketing – moving beyond selling commodities tomore complex relationships with customers that areharder for competitors to match.

• Corporate strategy – better planning and assessmentof future business opportunities.

• Communications and external relations – improvingcommunications and delivery of information toexternal stakeholders, whether they be shareholders,surrounding communities, or NGOs.

Companies can develop management systems for keyissues to help implement sustainable developmentpolicies, or even where such policies have not beenestablished.An example is establishing a managementsystem to review end-of-life plans at existingoperations, to take necessary action to strengthenthem, and to continue to monitor them throughoutthe project life.

The company review should focus on whether existingplans fully address the end-of-life environmental,social, and economic conditions of affectedcommunities; care and opportunities for displacedworkers; and the implications for government at alllevels. Key questions are whether the different actorsshare an understanding of their respective roles andresponsibilities, and whether these are clearly spelledout.Appropriate measures should be in place to ensurethat benefits achieved during the project life can besustained to the maximum extent and that negativeimpacts at closure are eliminated or minimized.This process can be useful in surfacing potential futureliabilities and allowing them to be managed.

The company should extend this review to involve keystakeholders and should facilitate discussion among theprincipal actors in the community and localgovernment.The aim is to develop a shared vision ofthe environmental, economic, and social life of thecommunity post-closure; to elaborate specificobjectives; and to allocate the roles, responsibilities, andobligations for achieving those goals. Plans shouldbuild on and supplement any existing governmentplanning processes and requirements.

Labour OrganizationsLabour organizations can develop policies forsustainable development as a way of bringing memberstogether in a shared understanding of priorities andobjectives for themselves and for the organization as awhole.The policy can identify priority areas in whichthe organization seeks to collaborate with other actorsto promote sustainable development. In addition to itstraditional responsibilities towards workers, this couldinclude involvement in broader community concernssuch as health and local development.

Government Government policy on sustainable development in theminerals sector can be a useful tool to integrate,coordinate, and harmonize the missions of different

departments in pursuit of common objectives. It canprovide guidance to all departments in orienting theirpolicies and enable an increased level of cooperationand integration of efforts.The departments involved indeveloping and adopting the policy should at aminimum include those dealing with mineralsexploration and development, the environment, tradeand industry, labour, and economic development.

A country with significant mineral endowments shouldconsider undertaking a comprehensive review of theimpact of its legal and policy framework for theminerals sector.This should focus on looking at howthe mineral endowment is managed for sustainabledevelopment, identifying deficiencies, and finding waysto remedy them. It should consider different parts ofthe minerals sector, from exploration to themanufacture of mineral-related products, and shouldconsider all sizes of operations. Of equal importance isensuring that the government departments involvedhave adequate resources and the tools they need to dotheir work effectively.

Any review would be most beneficial if it takes theform of an open discussion involving key actors inindustry, labour, and civil society.The World BankGroup is already active in a number of countriespromoting national mining policy dialogues,development frameworks, and country strategies; itmay well be a source of advice or assistance for thosecountries that desire its support.At the same time, theBank can use the conclusions of its ongoing ExtractiveIndustries Review to examine how its activities in theminerals sector can best contribute to sustainabledevelopment and improve performance.

Non-Governmental Organizations NGOs could develop policies to clarify the linkbetween organizational purposes and broadersustainable development goals, to provide guidance toemployees, to serve as guidance in making decisions,and to make the organization’s position clear to otheractors.

NGOs can also enhance their effectiveness and reducerisks by developing clear and public policies ofinvestigation and assurance that they apply to data theyuse.Although accuracy of information is important toall actors, this is particularly so for campaigningNGOs, since their effectiveness is closely tied to theirreputation for accuracy and since they are increasingly





asked to campaign on issues arising in parts of theworld far from their home base. NGOs that haveadopted explicit policies and management systems to ensure thorough investigation of information, as is the case with some human rights organizations, haveclearly enhanced their effectiveness and credibility.

Step Three – Achieving Cooperation Among Those WithSimilar InterestsGroups of actors with common roles, responsibilities,and interests can benefit from collaboration in anumber of ways. For example, they can formassociations or networks to share understanding andlessons of good practice, to enable more effectivecommunication with other groups to pool resources,and to minimize transaction costs. Groups of actors,whether at the national or international level, focusmore effectively on the concerns of a broad associationof organizations than on the opinions of singleorganizations or communities. Collaboration mayoccur from the local to international level and maytake a number of different forms – everything frominformal information-sharing networks to formalassociations requiring membership and adherence tocertain norms.

Existing Associations• Review and Formulation of Sustainable Development

PoliciesAssociations and networks should review existingpolicies with a view to developing sustainable

development policies. In some cases these already exist.The Sustainable Development Charter of ICMM isone example; several national industry associations havealso either developed or are developing such policies.Networks such as the World Mines Ministries Forum,regional associations such as the Mines Ministries ofthe Americas (CAMMA) and ministries in Asia PacificEconomic Cooperation (APEC), and NGO initiativessuch as the Global Mining Campaign should alsoconsider adopting sustainable development policies.

• Sharing Information and Capacity Building AmongMembers

International bodies of ministers, including those ofmines, finance, and the environment, can beinstrumental in sharing experience and ideas forimproving the contribution of the minerals sector tosustainable development. National, regional, andinternational industry associations, such as Eurometauxand the International Zinc Association, have also donevaluable work in sharing ideas and approaches amongmember companies.They provide a platform forcompanies to share experiences and facilitate capacitybuilding among members.The same is true of nationalassociations of artisanal and small-scale miners (ASM).Labour unions have among the best developednetworks for these purposes. Other associations ornetworks such as the Global Mining Campaign orICMM are newer but have considerable potential ininformation sharing and capacity building.Associationsand networks should examine ways they canstrengthen and expand these roles.


Organizational-Level Policy• Policy review and development • Companies, labour organizations, government, NGOs,

international organizations• Coordination among government agencies to implement • Government ministries

sustainable development policies• NGO policies to deliver developmental services for companies • NGOs• World Bank Extractive Industries Review • Eminent Person and World Bank

Management Systems• End-of Life Planning • Companies, with stakeholder input• Identifying gaps in government capacity • Government, with assistance from international organizations• Systems for assuring quality of information • NGOs

Key Actions for Creating Organizational Policies and Management Systems

Forming Associations or NetworksWhere appropriate, stakeholder groups in the mineralssector should be encouraged to form associations toadvance their interests and improve their contribution.The impetus must come from within the groupsthemselves, but others can help create opportunities for engagement. More powerful groups of actorsshould provide financial and other support to groupsthat are shy of resources to organize themselves intoassociations.To be represented effectively, groups must select leaders in a way regarded as legitimate and ensure that the mandate of leadership isperiodically renewed.

• Stronger Networks for Artisanal and Small-Scale MinersAssociations of artisanal and small-scale miners exist insome countries but not others. Even where they doexist, their ability to participate in global policyprocesses is limited.A key goal is to develop the abilityof small-scale and artisanal miners to speak forthemselves, through their own organizations, in policy and other processes that affect their interests.The Communities and Small-Scale Mining initiative is critical in providing a forum to facilitatecommunication and coordination between miners,communities, donors, governments, industry, and otherstakeholders and in actively promoting the sharing ofknowledge, lessons learned, good practices, andpolicies. Continued and increased support of thisinitiative is needed in order for it to have a real impact.

• Stronger Networks for CommunitiesCommunities affected by mining could benefit fromthe development of stronger networks for sharingexperience and as a means of bringing their views toattention at the national and global level. Conferencesof local governments and other communityorganizations, supported by donors and organized onan inclusive basis, might be a first step towards buildingthese stronger networks.They could take place at thenational, regional, and global levels. One challenge inassuring the effectiveness and value of this approach isensuring a balance and representation of allcommunity views. In addition, local governments inareas with minerals development should be encouragedto network with each other to share experiences, sothat their concerns can be reflected internationally.

• International Indigenous Peoples OrganizationIn two workshops held by MMSD on indigenous

people and mining, it was suggested that aninternational indigenous peoples organization beestablished to share experience and strategically advise,direct, and monitor industry performance in the arenaof indigenous relations.With the help of governmentsand the international community, this organizationcould oversee development and implementation of aset of core principles on relationships with indigenouspeople. Leadership from existing indigenousorganizations will be necessary if this new group is tosucceed. Its value would in part depend oninclusiveness and the ability to attract a wide range of indigenous organizations with disparate views.It should also build on the networks establishedthrough the efforts of other groups.

Protocols and Statements of PrincipleWithin associations of actors, standards can beimproved collectively through the development of andagreement on norms and principles.As described inChapter 14, these range from non-binding statementsto requirements for specified practices as a condition ofmembership, and sometimes include codes or protocolsthat verify performance through third-party audits.

• A Global Declaration and Establishment of a Protocol The mining industry should consider adopting aDeclaration on Sustainable Development andestablishing a Protocol to support its commitment.These tools are intended to complement, not replace,other priorities and initiatives identified at other pointsin this chapter.The proposal is designed to simplify thecurrent multiple codes of conduct and sources ofguidance by providing a way to bring these togetherover time into one management system. It would startby building on the recently adopted SustainableDevelopment Charter of ICMM.

The Declaration is a means to address two potentiallycompeting objectives. First, there is a strong interestamong many in industry, made evident in the MMSDprocess, for some kind of rigorous process to define abetter level of performance through means recognizedby and acceptable to key external stakeholders, and toverify that performance. Second, there is a strong desireto act promptly, to maintain momentum, and to showseriousness of purpose. Some variety of a certificationsystem, a Protocol, or a stewardship council mightmeet the first objective but will take time to create,and more immediate action is important.





Phase I – ICMM and other appropriate organizationscould develop the Declaration. (See Box 16–2 forsuggested basic elements.) While it would inform andconsult key stakeholders in the process, the Declarationwould be a unilateral action by industry. Companieswould be encouraged to adopt and sign on to it.The Declaration might be most effective if it:• pledges to review the ICMM charter in light of the

conclusions of the MMSD report;• includes a commitment to developing specific,

measurable criteria as a set of protocols, to bebrought together in a Protocol to the ICMMCharter, dealing with specific areas of concern suchas those identified in this report, along with a systemof verification of performance; and

• suggests how that system of protocols could beextended more broadly to others in all parts of theindustry.

Phase II – This phase would establish a fully articulatedProtocol, dealing with key areas of concern forsustainable development and industry performance.This would be done through a process encouraged andcatalysed by ICMM, but managed in a way acceptableto principal constituencies and including them in

appropriate roles to which they agree.The goal ofPhase II would be to create the basis for an acceptedProtocol for individual minerals facilities or projects.Elements for individual sets of issues could be adoptedas they were agreed; there is no reason to wait foragreement on every issue before adopting measuresthat are not in dispute.The Protocol should beaccompanied by a clear system of rigorous third-partyverification.There should be a comprehensiveinvestigation of whether this should lead to acertification system at the project level.

Representatives of key stakeholder groups should beinvolved in development of the Protocol and theverification process. Commercial lenders could supportthe Declaration and Protocol as a means to the bettermanagement of risk. Insurers would benefit from riskreduction.Where the risk is better managed, they canmake a broader range of insurance products available,or offer existing products to higher limits. Equityinvestors may want to evaluate the extent to whichcompany participation in the proposed Declarationand Protocol is likely to be relevant to investor risksand share value.As the Protocol becomes company-wide, it will be increasingly relevant to investors,particularly those who publish ‘sustainability listings’for share issues, and ethical or sustainable developmentfunds.The World Bank Group could also use theProtocol as a tool for considering its lendingconditions for mineral projects.

Phase III – This phase is envisioned to be an expandedProtocol for company-wide application. Participationby external stakeholders in management of the processwould be deepened at this stage. It may lead to asystem of company-wide certification or verification.Phase III could ultimately, if the parties deem itappropriate, approach the question of productcertification for certain mineral commodities.

While ICMM must have the key role in reviewing itsown Charter, and should take leadership in developingthe language of the Declaration and the subsequentadoption of the Protocol, it should be absolutely clearthat companies choosing not to join ICMM should be able to participate in this system. It should be opento all levels of the industry, and therefore should be a subject of early discussion with national associationsand such bodies as PDAC or Eurometaux.Any or all of these bodies could eventually decide thatadhering to the Protocol is a requirement of

Companies could agree to:

• Participate in review of their association charters and

policies in light of the conclusions of this report.

• Work with other companies, within a defined time, to

establish a Protocol dealing with key issues of sustainable

development and corporate performance, in a process

acceptable to key external stakeholders.

• Work with other companies to develop an accepted system of

verification to accompany the Protocol.

• Devise a set of immediate commitments embodied in the

Declaration; one approach would be adoption of the basic

principles outlined in a manageable number of existing

agreements and guidelines.

• Develop internal management procedures to familiarize

employees with the meaning of these commitments, their

importance as company policy, and their alignment with

business success.

• Develop reporting procedures that address the principles in

the Declaration.

• Conduct, over a defined period, an independent audit by a

reputable outside organization of the state of company

compliance with the requirements of the Declaration.

Box 16–2. Basic Elements of the Declaration on Mining,

Minerals, and Sustainable Development

membership. But the Protocol should not requiremembership in ICMM.

The Declaration could call for an immediate set ofcommitments that could be adopted by individualcompanies, together with a commitment to a longer-term process of multistakeholder engagement todevelop the more comprehensive and specificguidelines for responsible management in the mineralsindustry. It should also provide for a companycommitment to adopt and comply with national orregional industry codes of conduct where they exist.For example, companies operating in Australia shouldinitially comply with the Australian Minerals IndustryCode for Environmental Management, and those inCanada should adhere to the Mining Association ofCanada’s environmental policy and sustainabledevelopment principles as they are developed.

• National and Regional Industry Codes of ConductMany issues can be dealt with more effectively at thenational or regional level, such as within the regiondefined by the Southern African DevelopmentCommunity (SADC).A number of national industry

associations have adopted sustainable developmentpolicies.There may be benefits in developing thesefurther into codes of conduct, on the model of theenvironmental codes already in place in some associations.

• Regional Statements of Principle by Governments Regional government organizations such as SADC,APEC, or CAMMA may want to consider adoptingsustainable development policies for the minerals sectorthat can help governments seek greater convergenceand harmonization.

• Statements of Principles by Nongovernmental Organizations A collective statement of principles by NGOs thatfocuses on mineral-related issues might strengthentheir influence and increase the contribution they areable to make in the sector.

Developing the Capacity to Prevent and Respond toEmergencies Preventing accidents is a high priority.When theyoccur, their impacts are greatly magnified if thecapacity to deal with them promptly and effectively islacking. Moreover, uncertainty, lack of knowledge, and




Existing Associations and Networks• Policy review and development • All associations and networks including intergovernmental • Sharing information and capacity building among members bodies such as ICMM and PDAC, other regional and international

industry associations, international bodies of ministers, labourunions

Forming Associations and Networks• National and international networks for small-scale and • Artisanal and small-scale mining organizations, donors

artisanal miners• National and international networks of local governments and • Community representatives, local governments, donors

community organizations • International indigenous peoples organization • Indigenous organizations, governments, donors

Protocols and Statements of Principle• A global industry Declaration and Sustainable Development • ICMM and other international industry bodies

Protocol• National and regional industry codes • National industry associations• Regional governmental statements of principle • Governments, regional bodies such as SADC and CAMMA• NGO statements of principles • Global Mining Campaign or other associations of NGOs

Preventing and Responding to Emergencies• Emergency Response Facility • Industry associations, with governments, NGOs, experts,

insurance companies

Key Actions for Achieving Cooperation Among Stakeholders



inaccurate information may cause as much publicconcern as the accident itself.

An international Emergency Response Facility,supported principally by industry and with appropriateinvolvement of other stakeholders, could play animportant role. It could mobilize world-class experts tosupplement government capacity to assess, respond, andcontrol accidents and emergencies or to reduce thechance of them happening.This approach could assurethe public that the best possible advice is available to responsible officials.This function would not have ongoing staff beyond a coordinator but wouldrely on experts from consulting firms, universities,governments, companies, NGOs, or other institutionson an ‘as needed’ basis. Minimizing the impact of one incident could achieve considerable direct andindirect savings.

The insurance industry is keen to prevent accidentsand emergencies. Most insurance companies wouldlike to see more frequent and effective inspections ofkey facilities such as tailings dams.The transaction coststo insurers of conducting these inspections themselvesare high.The proposed emergency response capabilitycould be of significant interest to insurers.They couldparticipate in the design of the facility and in definingits tasks to ensure maximum business benefits.Theycould consider whether these benefits are sufficient tomerit financial support from the insurance industry,just as this industry has supported other collective risk-reduction organizations in the past.

Step Four – Building Capacity for Effective Actions at All LevelsCommunity LevelWhere a local community is affected by mineralsdevelopment, a shared vision of the development path for the community is required, includingagreement on how the costs and benefits of mineralsactivity are apportioned and how decisions taken.A key issue is who the ‘community’ is and how itmakes decisions.

• Community EngagementFor most mining operations, engagement with localcommunities must begin at the exploration stage.There is no universal formula appropriate to everycommunity or situation. Exploration companiesthrough their associations are in some cases, such asPDCA’s 3Es initiative, developing programmes orguidelines designed to promote fairer and more

equitable dealings with communities at this early stage.

Companies should develop plans for continuousengagement during the operational life – fromexploration through to closure.This plan should bediscussed with the community to ensure that themechanisms it proposes are considered appropriate.Companies must ensure that those in charge have theright skills and proper authority and that there iscontinuity of involvement.They must also be willingto invest time in the community.

• Integrated Impact Assessment Currently, the almost universal tool used at the earlystage of any large mining or minerals processingproject and many smaller ones is environmental impactassessment.This is supplemented on an ad hoc basis bysocial impact assessments and a variety of other kindsof appraisals, often in a poorly integrated framework.Environmental and social assessment tools should becombined to enable a transition to integrated impactassessment.

An integrated impact assessment should include allsignificant social, economic, and environmental issues.It should be universal for new projects and include anearly phase of consultation with the community toidentify local concerns, and to design the assessment toensure those concerns are addressed. It should includea community-level resource inventory and examinethe whole spectrum of sustainable development issuesin the project’s area of influence, in addition to thoserequired by legislation. Such an assessment shouldbecome an inclusive, dynamic, ongoing process ofintegrating knowledge on potential impacts intodecision-making and management practices. It shouldbe endorsed by the local community and government,and entail independent monitoring of impacts. It couldbecome the basis for developing effective communicationwith a community that will lead to development of aCommunity Sustainable Development Plan (CSDP).

• Community Sustainable Development PlansEstablishing a Community Sustainable DevelopmentPlan is a step that needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In some areas, the existing governmentframework and local or regional planning processeswill suffice. Elsewhere, leadership from companies,labour organizations, or community organizations willbe needed.The objective is not to replace but tosupplement government while attempting to build orimprove local capacity in the process.

The CSDP should be based on the community’sconcept of how the mine can best contribute toachieving its social, environmental, and economicgoals. It should be grounded in the willingness andability of the company and appropriate levels ofgovernment to contribute to and support those goals.It should be designed through a process of consultationthat begins during the permitting phase (for newprojects) and that is supported by the studies preparedin the integrated impact assessment process.

The plan should provide the fundamental frameworkfor relationships among the company, the community,and the government (and any other parties) throughthe project life and into post-closure. It should identifythe specific actions needed and the respective roles andresponsibilities to achieve the agreed-upon vision. Itcould also create some obligations, on all sides, fortaking those steps. Independent mechanisms formonitoring and evaluation, including clear and agreedindicators of performance, need to be included.The plan will need to evolve and be amended over the life of the project to reflect changing priorities and capacities.

While a company may facilitate and promote theprocess, the leadership role belongs to localgovernment to the extent it has the capacity andwillingness. Otherwise an NGO or developmentorganization could step into this role.The processcould also become, for example, part of the forum fordiscussion between local and national government overrevenue sharing and responsibility for services.

Some companies are moving in this direction; it wouldbe helpful if these arrangements were formalized.Asystem for learning by all from the growing experiencein this or other sectors would also be valuable.

The World Bank could evaluate the usefulness ofrequiring or encouraging contractual CommunitySustainable Development Plans, where they will beuseful, in projects funded by the International FinanceCorporation (IFC) or insured by the MultilateralInvestment Guarantee Agency (MIGA).These couldclarify the roles and responsibilities of the community,the company, and the host government for sustainabledevelopment, extending through closure into the post-closure phase. Commercial banks could reviewwhether adopting a parallel requirement would be a

way to reduce their exposure to the results ofproceeding without such plans.

• Integrated Planning for Closure Since many mineral projects depend on specificdeposits that have a finite life span, there is a need tofocus on where the community wants to be when theproject closes.This requires defining desired end-of-lifeenvironmental, social, and economic conditions;identifying the resources required to achieve them; andclearly allocating the roles and responsibilities of eachof the actors.There needs to be a focus on sustainingbenefits in areas such as housing, community health,and education. Plans could be developed throughconsultation with the community as part of the CSDP.Improving performance in closure planning will behelped by actions at the national and even globallevels, as discussed later in this agenda.

• Labour and Management CooperationEmployees have important bridging roles between thesmelter, factory, or mine and the community in oraround it. Employees could be central in thecommunity-level processes: reviewing end-of-life plansand assisting in the design of CSDPs.This could be in the context of a labour-management agreement.If there is no leadership from the company in initiating the processes, labour could consider takingon that role. International labour organizations can also play a role in informing their national and localaffiliates about the opportunities these processes could present, and how they might most effectivelyparticipate in them.

• Dispute Resolution MechanismsWhen problems, disputes, and controversies arise,government should usually be turned to first. Butwhere there is restricted access to justice, especially atthe community level, or when existing mechanisms areinadequate or not trusted, it may be necessary todesign dispute resolution mechanisms at thecommunity level.The question of how to resolvedisputes should be discussed and agreed at the earlieststage of negotiations; they should be part of theconsultation process or the CSDP. It may be impossibleto design effective mechanisms that are self-containedat the community level.There may not be a ‘neutral’organization in the community acceptable to everyonein a dispute resolution role.





• Large Companies and Artisanal and Small-Scale MiningLarge companies could engage directly with small-scale miners and their communities, helping them towork in a more sustainable fashion and wherenecessary to find alternative economic activities.

National LevelNational governments have many roles to play in theminerals sector.They are the facilitators of investment,regulators, and also the providers of public goods andservices. Effective policy, coordination, and action atthe national level will help to maximize the benefits ofminerals activities and minimize the negative impacts.Different government agencies that deal with theminerals sector need to coordinate their activities toensure coherence and consistency, from exploration tofabrication. In addition, as suggested earlier in thechapter, governments with mineral activities mayconsider comprehensive reviews of their legal andpolicy frameworks for the minerals sector to ensurethat they are consistent with the vision of sustainabledevelopment.

• Access to InformationNational legislation is needed to give interested partiesthe legal right to access information. Effective publicparticipation cannot take place without it, nor can thebuilding of trust and cooperation among actors.Alllevels of governments should have legal provisions andregulatory provisions for citizens to access informationin government possession for which there is not a validand publicly stated reason for non-disclosure.Mechanisms to support this may include contact pointsfor regular exchange of information with civil society.

Governments and civil society organizations shouldalso establish clear and agreed procedures forrequesting, receiving, and disseminating information,including the opportunity for the public to identifythe information they need for effective and responsibleparticipation in the decision-making process.

• Public ParticipationIn its most developed form, public participationinvolves civil society in decision-making aroundstrategy, policy, and practice and in setting the agendafor discussion of these.There is a growing trend at thenational level in some countries towards contractualand quasi-contractual arrangements to satisfy publicparticipation and public benefit interests. Nationalgovernments should continue the process of regulatoryreform to facilitate public participation and access toinformation.They should introduce the systemsneeded to ensure consistency with emerginginternational norms in this field.Access to informationand public participation cannot be established andmaintained unless there is a right to access to the legalmeans to enforce them.

• Clarifying Land RegimesIn some places, land rights issues, includingcompensation and dealing fairly with informaloccupation and use, cannot now be resolved withoutsubstantial conflict with communities. Resolvingconflict over land must start at the national level withclear rules for access to and use of land.These must beaccepted as fair by those most likely to be affected bydevelopment proposals involving land negotiations.The best long-run solution is for governments to


• Community engagement • Companies, communities, local institutions• Integrated impact assessment (IIA) • Companies, communities, local government, consultants • Community Sustainable Development Plans (CSDP) • Companies, labour unions, local government, communities,

civil society organizations• Integrated planning for closure • Companies, labour unions, local government, communities,

civil society organizations• Labour-management agreement for sustainable development • Labour organizations, companies• Disputes and conflict resolution mechanisms • Companies, communities, labour unions, local government,

civil society organizations• Cooperation between large companies and artisanal and • Companies, artisanal and small-scale miners

small-scale miners

Key Actions at the Community Level

establish laws and policies in these areas that offer betteropportunities for avoiding and resolving conflicts.

No system of laws can accommodate all situations thatare likely to arise in land negotiations. In some places,these issues require extensive private negotiationsamong companies and local occupants of land or thoserequiring compensation. Governments could considerrevising existing laws to include elements such asextensive consultation with local communities; clearlydefined rights for those with established occupancyand use of land or communal land holdings, evenwhere they hold no legal title; compensation for loss ofrights; and effective access to systems of justice.Governments should also ensure that when bilateralnegotiations do take place around land issues, the rulesare understood and followed by all actors.

• Traditional Indigenous TerritoriesIndigenous land claims deserve special consideration inthis process. Failure to resolve land claims createssignificant tensions and often causes affectedcommunities to be suspicious of any activity thatrequires use of or access to indigenous territories.Governments and companies could make considerableprogress by maintaining respect for the principle ofprior informed consent freely given. For companies,this would mean behaving as if consent is required to gain access to indigenous lands even when this isnot the case in law; this is a prelude to free and fairnegotiation on land access issues. For governments,it does not mean that they would subordinate allsovereign national interests to local concerns, butrather that indigenous communities should berecognized as having clear rights within the territoriesthey occupy.The extent of indigenous territories needsto be clearly defined for the security of traditionalpeoples, and open dialogue needs to be maintained onthis issues. Other actors such as the NGO communitycan assist with these processes.

• Frameworks to Maximize and Sustain the Benefits ofMinerals Development

Governments should consider developing long-termstrategic plans for the creation and management ofmineral wealth that include appropriate methods ofcapturing the rent from minerals and distributing therevenues; the creation of human, physical, and otherforms of capital; and planning for the effects of mineclosure at both the local and the national/macro level.In addition, governments could develop measures, such

as commodity loans and fiscal restraint, to preventundue stress on public financing resulting fromminerals price volatility.

A proportion of the benefits, such as revenue receivedin royalties or taxes, needs to be distributed throughlocal administrative structures to enable them to takeadvantage of some important developmentopportunities for communities. It is clearlyinappropriate, however, to have a universal formula forthe distribution of wealth within countries, as thechoice should be determined by governmentsaccording to domestic priorities and political systems.What is clear is that the problem must be resolved inacceptable and fair fashions, or it may lead to conflictinimical to all interests that undermines any potentialfor sustainable development.

International organizations such as the World Bank, theUN Development Programme, and the UNConference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)should continue to promote study and discussion ofwealth distribution issues in their dialogues withgovernments, with a view to improving the spread ofresources at lower levels of government and incommunities, or to build essential human and physicalcapital for economic development.

• Frameworks for Artisanal and Small-Scale MiningGovernments need to develop an appropriate,consistent, and transparent policy and regulatoryframework that focuses on both the facilitation andmanagement of artisanal and small-scale mining.For the framework to be effective, governments should ensure that sufficient financial and regulatoryincentives exist for small-scale miners to formalizetheir activities, as described earlier. It is also importantthat any framework recognizes the linkages betweenlarge-scale mining and ASM and that there iscoherence in policy, regulation, and legislation for thewhole spectrum of mining activities.ASM activitiesalso should be incorporated in relevant regional andlocal development programmes.These policies shouldalso provide the means for dealing with priorityproblems, such as hazardous working conditions or the use of mercury.

• Frameworks for Community DevelopmentBuilding on existing elements, governments shouldconsider establishing a coordinated legal andinstitutional framework to incorporate integrated





impact assessments, Community SustainableDevelopment Plans, and integrated closure planningand to assign responsibilities among agencies – inconsultation with relevant stakeholder groups.

Legal requirements for developing closure plans formines tend to be heavily oriented towardsenvironmental concerns. Governments should ensurethat mine-closure planning also includes considerationof economic activities in affected communities,opportunities for displaced workers, socialinfrastructure, and other appropriate issues. In addition,governments could legally require that mine closureplanning clarify the roles, responsibilities, andobligations of the different actors.

There is a need to establish and clarify qualitystandards for impact assessments for mining projects.Government agencies charged with managing impactassessment processes should develop standards forbaseline data and analysis, and for special issues such asacid drainage assessment, closure planning, and waterquality. National-level industry associations need tomake such standards explicit to their membership andpursue mechanisms to inculcate them thoroughly intoproject development practices.

• Legislating for Mining-Induced Displacement andResettlement

Experiences with resettlement have often beenunfavourable.At present, the mining industry,financiers, and governments often externalizedisplacement costs onto the weakest party – thedisplaced. It may also be the case that compensationcannot adequately restore and improve the income andlivelihood standards of people subjected to involuntaryresettlement. Governments must put in placeregulations that ensure free and willing negotiation on any resettlement proposal, including freedom fromharassment or coercion at the local level and fullparticipation in the decision-making process. Mechanismsfor monitoring and fair arbitration procedures are anatural accompaniment to such regulation.

It is too early to expect harmonization and theemergence of a detailed industry-wide approach onthis issue. One option in the future might be toinstitute involuntary displacement and resettlementinsurance to protect the involuntarily displaced – butthis too is politically premature at present. In theinterim, a displacement and resettlement contingency

clause could be proposed as an on-the-groundsolution, which is an agreement that all likely risks ofthese outcomes be assessed, goals set, costs estimated,organizational arrangements proposed, and financingsecured before a mining project goes forward.

• Anti-Corruption InitiativesCorruption siphons off the potential benefits ofmineral activities, posing a serious threat to sustainabledevelopment. Concerted effort is needed to combatcorruption – governments should adopt nationallegislation to put the anti-corruption convention ofthe Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment into effect.There are also many examplesof national coalitions among companies, nationalchambers of commerce, and civil society organizationsagainst corruption. Companies could work withorganizations such as Transparency International at thenational level to establish industry-wide guidance.

Governments and companies should adopt more widelythe practice of open publication of basic informationabout how much wealth is generated from projects, theamounts of revenue received by governmentdepartments, and how that money has been spent.Industry organizations should consider taking theinitiative, possibly in partnership with an internationalorganization such as the World Bank, to establish aninternational and public register of all payments bymining companies to governments at all levels.

• Audits, Guidelines, and Standards for EnvironmentManagement

Governments and funding agencies should requireregular independent audits of all tailings storagefacilities and find ways to act on the results. Equally,governments should set up clear guidelines forevaluating different disposal methods for mining wasteon a case-by-case basis, with a clear value in the shortterm of the need to avoid riverine disposal.

Government agencies charged with managing impactassessment processes should develop standards forbaseline data and analysis and for special issues such asacid drainage assessment, closure planning, and waterquality.A high priority in many countries should becommunicating the results of an assessment of thepotential for acid drainage more effectively tointerested parties, and integrating this concern intodecision-making from the permitting stage throughclosure.

• Capacity BuildingAlthough the World Bank and the United Nationshave been supporting capacity building in this sector, itwould be helpful to develop a clearer picture of thekind of capacities needed and those that are already inplace at the national level.These internationalorganizations could work with member governmentsand others to develop an understanding of the levels of capacities required and specific guidelines orbenchmarks.

• Labour-Company AgreementsWorkers and organized labour could be majoradvocates for many aspects of sustainable developmentsuch as community development and health, and theyhave a special responsibility to implement goodpractices in safety and training. Governments couldpromote agreements between labour and industry atthe national level to promote sustainable developmentfor the minerals sector.

• National Multistakeholder ProcessesGovernments, in consultation with stakeholders, couldbe effective convenors of multistakeholder processes at the national level for policy discussions and change.

Global LevelMany mineral companies, markets for mineral

products, and capital markets that finance projectsoperate at the global level. Moreover, in a broad sense,the challenges faced by the sector are global concerns,including the need for economic development, povertyalleviation, and an end to human rights abuses.Thisand other factors mean that some action is needed atthe regional and global level.

The rationales for global initiatives include.

• Growing international pressure to observe higher standards– The spread of economic globalization has createdmore connections between economies than everbefore.Where commodities are traded in globalmarkets, consumers and investors are increasinglyconcerned about environmental and socialperformance at the source.

• Free trade and fairer markets – The world tradingsystem is seen to be failing to deal with aspects ofmarket access.Tariff and non-tariff barriers impedeminerals beneficiation, which may inhibit economicdevelopment of mineral-dependent economies.Thiscan only be addressed in ongoing trade negotiations.

• Skills and technology transfer – One important way toaddress the disparities in wealth, capacity, andresources is to facilitate access to new technologies,innovation, and skills training between nations.

• Need for a level playing field – Better internalization of




Review and Development of Legal and Policy Frameworks• Access to information • Governments and relevant stakeholders• Public participation• Land rights regimes and compensation systems• Traditional indigenous territories• Maximizing the benefits of mineral development• Artisanal and small-scale mining• Community development• Mining-induced displacement and resettlement

Other Actions• An international register of payments to combat corruption • Companies, industry associations, NGOs, governments,

international organizations• Audits, guidelines, and standards for environmental management • Government , affected communities, companies• Capacity building • Governments, international organizations such as the World Bank,

the UN, NGOs, donors• Labour-company agreements • National unions, companies• National multistakeholder processes • All relevant actors

Key Actions at the National Level



environmental and social costs will provide morerent for national governments and other resourceowners, more income for local communities, betterenvironmental performance, greater incentives formaterials efficiency, and greater margins forproducers. If these measures are required in someplaces but not in others, production may simply shiftto regions where costs are not internalized.This mayplace a cap on what can be achieved in countriesthat want better performance.

• Legacy issues – The failure to internalize costs in thepast means that consumers in wealthier countrieshave been subsidized, paying lower prices for theminerals they have used.Assistance to the poorestcountries to address legacy issues may be a step inthe right direction to redress this.

To move towards collective action, initiatives fromeveryone in the sector are required. Currentprogrammes and priorities show limited coherence and agreement. Stronger international action bygovernment is an important goal and greaterunderstanding among other actors is the first step toachieving it. In the meantime, there can be otherserious initiatives; but they will largely be voluntaryand non-binding.

Any proposal for global action for sustainabledevelopment faces serious hurdles. First, internationalorganizations tend to be dominated by those with themost resources, capacity, and access to institutions ofpower, and therefore tend to reflect the values of thosein industrial economies. Efforts must be made toredress power imbalances to ensure that the values ofpeople and institutions in developing economies aregiven equal weight. Second, very few global orinternational institutions have authority to establishbinding rules and requirements or to impose sanctionsfor non-compliance.And few of the limited numberwith such powers (such as the World TradeOrganization) have the mandate for or interest inaddressing the challenges of sustainable development inthe minerals sector.Third, while government initiativescan create effective international organizations withmandatory powers, governments are not pressured tomove in this direction.And finally, there is resistance tocreating any new international institutions unlessfunding sources can be identified.

The remainder of this section suggests initiatives thatcan be taken at the global level by different groups of

actors working together on general and specificchallenges. Some are already under way in some formand need to be supported. Others have yet to beinitiated. It should be noted that calling for action atthe international level does not preclude theseinitiatives being undertaken at other levels.The Forumand disputes resolution mechanism, for example, couldalso be developed (or may already be in place) at thenational or regional level.

• A Complaints and Dispute Resolution MechanismAll parties in the sector should have a serious interestin establishing fair, reasonable ways to resolvegrievances and disputes.A dispute resolutionmechanism should bring parties together, in a neutralforum, to work out a mutually acceptable facilitatedsettlement.The elements of the mechanism areenvisioned as similar to the methods and procedures ofan ombudsman, such as the IFC’sAdvisor/Ombudsman (CAO)or the MiningOmbudsman Project operated by Community AidAbroad in Australia. Clearly, where possible, complaintswould be better handled by an independentorganization operating at a regional or national level.

• The process would be available only in cases offoreign direct investment; it would not apply wherethe parties were all domestic.

• Where the IFC or MIGA are involved in projects, theprocess would not supersede the work of the CAO.

• The overall rules for the complaints and disputeresolution mechanism would be set at the globallevel and managed in a transparent fashion.The mechanism would be guided by principlesdesigned to avoid conflicts of interest.

• A prerequisite to invoking the mechanism would bean effort to solve the problem at the local level.

• The dispute resolution professionals who operate the system would not act as judge or jury to decidewho was right, but would mediate to try to achievea solution acceptable to all.

• The focus would be on problem solving andaddressing complaints in a way satisfactory to allparties.

• Anyone with a grievance that fell within theestablished subject matter could request assistancefrom the service.

The overall programme could be overseen by abalanced multistakeholder Board.The Board wouldperiodically issue public reports of its activities and the

overall process. It would establish rules for the conductof the process, and amend them as necessary based onstakeholder feedback and experience.• Complainants would have the option of having their

complaints handled privately and in confidence.There would be clear rules of evidence andprocedure.

• Parties would agree to cooperate with the process ofdispute resolution, provide appropriate informationas reasonably requested, and show a commitment tomaking the process work.

Commercial lenders could support this proposal byrequiring a demonstration that an effective disputeresolution mechanism is available as a condition ofloans.

• A Product Stewardship InitiativeIndustry needs to collaborate with regulatoryauthorities, downstream users, and other groups todevelop sound, science-based means of ensuring safe use, re-use, and eventual disposal of its products.A Product Stewardship Initiative could promotegreater exchange of information and integration of views with the industry’s principal customers andintermediary processors, recyclers, and others.Thisinitiative could build on the work already undertakenby the Non-Ferrous Metals Consultative Forum onSustainable Development, which has indicated thatfurther development of the stewardship concept needsto be done by selecting some real issues in real settingsand working with companies and stakeholders on apilot basis.

As part of this process, national governments need tocontinue to identify incentives and disincentives forrecycling and innovative design in metals use and todevelop policies on them.They need to developnational strategies for recycling and extending productlife, with measurable targets, to include collectionnetworks, infrastructure, and investment in recyclingtechnologies.

A Product Stewardship Initiative would lead toimproved understanding of:• energy, water, land use, recycling, and re-use issues;• life-cycle analysis as a management tool for

sustainable development;• appropriate recycling technology transfers to

developing countries; and• possible product certification schemes.

• A Sustainable Development Support FacilityThere is wide agreement that the complex anddemanding tasks of proper management of theminerals sector may tax available expertise and thecapacity of government and other essential actors,particularly where they do not have a great deal of prior experience with the sector’s operations.A Sustainable Development Support Facility could be developed to serve as a central clearinghouse forinformation on who is doing what in the sector andsuggest ways to coordinate and target efforts of donorsand others. It could serve:• as an independent source of capacity building or

advice to government on issues such as emergencyplanning or implementation of local emergencypreparedness plans;

• as a supplement to government departments chargedwith technical tasks such as safety inspection oftailings dams;

• to help develop the technical standards necessary foreffective impact assessment in the minerals sector;

• to assess potential for acid rock drainage andstrategies for dealing with it; and

• to assist local governments, companies, or others inthe development of Community SustainableDevelopment Plans and to strengthen the capacityneeded for effective planning for closure.

The Facility could be supported by one or moredonor agencies, with a pledge to support it longenough to give it a chance to prove its worth, andcould be administered by the World Bank Group as atrust fund.An important and useful role in itsmanagement could also be played by the WorldConservation Union–IUCN.

Applications for assistance could be made by anygovernment, NGO, UN body, trade union, or otherappropriate organization that was committed tocooperative approaches to sustainable developmentconcerns in the minerals sector. General policies wouldbe established and applications reviewed by a balancedpanel with representation of various stakeholderinterests at the global level, or by several such panelsoperating at the regional level.

• Reporting GuidelinesA harmonized system of reporting guidelines is neededto ensure that key aspects of company practice arepublicly reported to a standard that informs internaland external stakeholders about the sustainable





• Establish a multistakeholder forum that aims toachieve consensus on ‘no-go’ zones for mining, on acase-by-case basis, with a priority for World HeritageSites.

• Develop a package of published ‘better-practice’guidance on mining and protected areas, developedthrough collaborative research and capacity buildingpartnerships, to be showcased at the next WorldParks Congress in 2003 and the next conference ofthe Parties to the Convention on BiologicalDiversity in 2004.

• Establish clear criteria that can be used to decide ifmining is possible near protected areas, which shouldthen be applied to its control and to the assessmentof inherited mines in protected areas (especiallythose existing before the area was protected).

• Work towards improving the transparency ofdecision-making around the assignment of protectedareas categories, developing more detailed technicalguidance regarding the application of the categoriessystem.

• Undertake ‘high resolution’ mapping through keyinstitutions that will identify the scale and extent ofthreats to and opportunities for protected areasposed by mining and other sectoral activities.

• Mineral Legacies InitiativeDuring the MMSD process, an overwhelming majorityof participants agreed on the importance ofremediating abandoned mine sites where there is aclear threat to public health and safety or ongoingimpact on important water resources. Improvingconditions at abandoned sites can yield immense socialand environmental benefits for a relatively smallinvestment.

The focus at least initially should be on true ‘orphan’sites, where no former owner or operator can beidentified and all would agree that the problem is apublic responsibility. Priority should be given to siteswhere remedial action will offer a clear payoff inimproved public health and safety, more usable watersupplies, or other demonstrable benefits, such asprotection of biodiversity.Another priority is projectsin low-income countries with significant abandonedmine legacy problems and those with particularlypressing social legacies of mining communities.

Governments with many abandoned mines but fewresources could be given grants to determine prioritiesfor the cases most urgently needing attention and to

development performance of corporations and majorprojects.This requires reporting and performanceindicators that allow for innovation and for differencesat the level of specifics.The system will only beeffective if there is trust, transparency, andaccountability in terms of those doing the reporting –in the systems devised, the mechanisms used togenerate the information, and the process for reportingthe data in a usable form to the target audience.

A multilateral organization such as the World Bankcould convene an experts group to draft a broad set ofprinciples and operational guidelines for reporting.Organizations such as the World Bank and the UNEnvironment Programme (UNEP) as well as mineralsassociations and minerals corporations should participatein developing the guidelines.Appropriate and meaningfulNGO and community involvement is also key.

In defining guidelines, the sector should work withorganizations such as the Global Reporting Initiativeand the International Standards Organization toachieve comparability between sectors and to ensurethe transfer of existing knowledge.

Research into the identification and development ofkey indicators for public reporting needs to continue.Organizations such as the Minerals and EnergyResearch Network (MERN) that have taken a lead inthis field should continue to develop indicators and toexplore how they relate to each other and how they fitinto management systems.The eventual aim is toconstruct a set of ‘must have’ generic yet sector-specificindicators at the project and corporate level, supportedby a secondary set of indicators that could beapplicable at particular sites.

The UN, the World Bank, and governments have arole to play in creating a feedback loop. Equally,industry organizations such as ICMM and others havea role to play in ensuring that their membersunderstand and adopt the standards specified in theprinciples, guidelines, and public reporting criteria.

• Protected Areas and Mining InitiativeIncreased collaboration is required at the internationallevel among key actors including IUCN and otherconservation organizations, governments, and NGOs toresolve issues related to protected areas management.The MMSD process highlighted the following possibleactions, among others:

develop project proposals that could then be funded.High priority should be given to sites where therehabilitation of the environmental legacy will generateneeded employment and skill-building and be a sourceof livelihoods.

Most observers agree to the need to such action, butnot on its financing or administration.Yet there aregood if not perfect models for the administration – theGlobal Environment Facility is one; a trust fundestablished by donors and administered by the WorldBank or regional development banks would beanother.The World Bank has financed work atabandoned mines or other mineral facilities in the past.At a minimum it could coordinate its future supportfor such activities with a trust or other entitymanaging this work.The Bank might well find otherways to support the effort.

Mining companies could raise the profile of this issueby ensuring that it is discussed and debated at theGlobal Mining Industry meeting in Toronto in May 2002. One possibility would be for a group ofcompanies to take the initiative by pledging an initialcontribution to the trust fund on the condition that itbe matched by government and other donors in somespecified percentage.

At the World Summit on Sustainable Development inAugust–September 2002, world leaders could use theopportunity of meeting in one of the world’s mostimportant mining centres – and one that shares withothers a legacy of problems from that activity – to callfor a full-scale feasibility study for a Mineral LegaciesInitiative. Establishing this fund would require anumber of nations to commit together to aprogramme to make it viable for at least several years.Protection of public goods such as water supply andpublic health and safety would have to be the primarygoals, but the programme could also be useful inbuilding skills and generating employment.

• Financial SuretyGovernments recognize that some industries (such aspower plants, chemical facilities, and mines) have thepotential to leave behind large social costs.To makesure they do not inherit these costs, some insist thatcompanies provide a bond or financial guarantee to ensure that they will comply with closure plans.The company guarantees in this way that the specificobligations for mine closure will be carried out; it also

ensures internalization of costs and promotes economicefficiency.Without such surety, the legacy ofabandoned sites and their attendant problems arecertain to grow.

Developing countries have often not adopted financialsurety for a number of reasons. Many have just finishedrevising their laws and regulations to create incentivesfor investment; guarantees and new requirements maybe seen as a disincentive. Small and medium-sizedcompanies with limited capacity to comply withbonding or financial surety obligations may collectivelybe a significant source of jobs. Finally, developing aneffective plan requires flexibility, which impliesdiscretionary authority. Discretionary authority impliesdelays and may lead to corruption. Despite theseobstacles, some way must be found to capture thebenefits of financial surety. Progress on this issue isimportant.The World Bank recognizes this as apriority concern.

The best way forward seems to be for the World Bankand the world’s mines ministers together to convene adialogue, starting with a high-level conference, to findways of reconciling the clear benefits to be achieved byappropriate guarantee systems, national policies forminerals investment, and the growing desire of manycommercial and non-commercial lenders to ensurethat the projects they finance do not wind up addingto the world’s inventory of sites abandoned withoutproper precaution.

• A Global Labour-Management AgreementThere could be a global-level agreement betweenlabour federations representing workers in the mineralssector, such as the International Federation ofChemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers’ Unions(ICEM), and international organizations representingcompanies for broad cooperation in support ofsustainable development. Organized labour could takethe lead to suggest elements of the agreement.Thesemay include traditional areas of interest such as thetraining, health, and safety of workers, but could alsoinclude broader community concerns.The agreementcould be linked to counterpart agreements at thenational and local levels.

• Forum on Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development To drive the sustainable development debate forward, itis important to establish effective and ongoingdialogues. Much of the dialogue to date has been





results that could not be created in any other way.Whatever anyone’s view of the cyanide code, forinstance, it is clearly a better and stronger product for having come through such a process.

With these models in mind, a Forum on Mining,Minerals, and Sustainable Development could beestablished.This would not have to be a permanentbureaucracy. It could, for example, resemble theToronto Conference in May 2002, but in a moreadvanced version at some determined intervals in thefuture.The Forum could perhaps achieve these goals:

• Establishing priorities, not just for industry or forgovernment, but for a wide range of actors in thesector, so that each could focus on a manageablenumber of tasks in the near term.

• Setting guidelines for processes directed at individualissues, to give all concerned a greater confidence intheir legitimacy and reduce the transaction costs insetting them up.

• Endorsing processes if they met those guidelines,adding to their legitimacy and increasing peoples’confidence in participating in them.

• Endorsing the results of those processes, giving thembroader acceptance and ensuring that their principlesare more quickly incorporated into company policy,industry Protocols, best practice guidelines, lendingpolicies of banks, and laws and regulations.

Setting up such an endeavour requires a significant

partial. Many actors in the sector have felt the need tomove towards an ongoing results-oriented dialoguethat adds value. During the course of MMSD, manyserious issues were raised.While few people deny thevalidity of these issues, they may phrase themdifferently, or see different solutions ahead, or distrustothers’ intentions in raising them. It is impossible todeal with all the issues facing the sector at once.Effective leadership could focus the agenda on amanageable number of issues and attempt to achieveconvergence on a ranking of priorities withoutagreeing on solutions. Discussion of this kind requiresa neutral space or spaces where ideas can be airedopenly without excessive concern.The MMSDregional processes that have begun this task wouldhope to continue in differing forms, at either thenational or the regional levels.

This argues for a process or processes that can stay ineffective communication with all principal stakeholdersand that is not controlled by any of them individuallybut ‘belongs’ to all of them as a group. In the forestproducts industry, a similar need led to the creation of a Forest Stewardship Council. In the dam buildingsector, it led to the World Commission on Dams.The Responsible Care initiative in the chemicalsindustry has a multistakeholder stewardship council.In the minerals sector, this model has been pursued,with variations, for things such as the recent cyanidecode, the White Horse Mining Initiative, and theMMSD Project itself. Processes of this type can create


• Complaints and dispute resolution mechanism • Companies, representatives of affected stakeholder groups, commercial lenders

• Product Stewardship Initiative • Non-Ferrous Metals Consultative Forum on SustainableDevelopment, industry associations, NGOs, governments, labour

• Sustainable Development Support Facility • Governments, international organizations, NGOs such as IUCN,stakeholders

• Reporting guidelines • ICMM–industry associations, NGOs and stakeholders, GlobalReporting Initiative, companies, international organizations

• Protected areas and mining • Conservation NGOs such as IUCN, governments, companies,associations such as ICMM, communities

• Dialogue on mineral legacies • Mining industry, world leaders• Dialogue on financial surety • World Bank, mine ministers• Global labour-management agreement • International labour unions such as ICEM and international

industry associations such as ICMM• Forum on Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development • All actors

Key Actions at the Global Level

amount of time, energy, and money.The WorldCommission on Dams, for example, spent an entireyear establishing the rules under which theCommission would operate and selecting its membersbefore it began its work programme. But if it can beachieved once, it should not be allowed to die, whichwould involve repeating the investment the next timehigh-level dialogue were needed. Investment is madenot only by the management of the process and itssponsors but by everyone – all stakeholders have toinvest in examining the process, setting the rules underwhich it will go forward, and developing confidencethat it will not work to their disadvantage.

The MMSD Project has identified a number of issuesripe for progress in a Forum – management of tailingsand other large-volume wastes, action againstcorruption, integrated planning for closure, communityhealth and mining, and biodiversity and protectedareas, to name just a few. But progress on any of themwill require engagement of a variety of stakeholders.Effective engagement that produces results will requireattention to process, which requires investment.There is no effective alternative.A way to proceed, andone that could yield better long-term results, would beto make the investment once, instead of every time anissue came up.

Whatever the reaction to this suggestion, it is clear thatit is easier to seek solutions with some kind of astructure. If the mineral sector returns to dialoguesamong some but not all key actors, happening more orless by accident, and fading as fast as they began, thesector will be going backwards.The goal for sustainabledevelopment in the mining and minerals sector shouldinstead be increasingly inclusive and intentionaldialogues that are deliberately planned and that engageever-broader circles, leading to ongoing engagementfor the long term.

There is an informal proposal for such a forum fromthe UN family. Others suggest that the Forum coulddevelop out of existing mechanisms such as theInternational Study Group’s Non-Ferrous MetalsConsultative Forum on Sustainable Development.

Whatever the future of the Forum proposal, at aminimum there should be a recognition thatestablishing communication and discussion amonginterested parties on a national, regional, or global basisrequires a committed effort and a significant

investment of time and money. Processes are expensiveat least in part because of the investment needed toestablish these links. Finding a home in an institutioncapable of maintaining the databases that projects –including MMSD – have established and of circulatingperiodic bulletins, perhaps containing a registry ofcurrent research activities, is an important investmentin the future of dialogue. MERN, theUNCTAD/UNEP Mineral Resources Forum, or anew Union for Minerals and Sustainable Developmentare all possible homes for such a body.

A Final Thought…

The MMSD Project did not try to resolve the manyeconomic, environmental, social, and governance issuesfacing the mining and minerals sector – no singleeffort could. But the project did try to turn a spotlighton the range of challenges raised by society’s need forand production of minerals. Judging by the input andreactions during the two years of the Project, that goalwas achieved.The many people who madecontributions to the process – through papers,workshop participation, comments on successive drafts,emails with news from all corners of the world –confirmed that the minerals sector involves much morethan digging ore out of the ground.

Although Breaking New Ground is the final report ofthe MMSD Project, it is not, of course, the final wordon this complex subject. But we hope that for theminerals sector it is a helpful step along a road towardssustainable development that includes all thoseaffected: policymakers, business leaders, public interestcampaigners, people working in mines, local communities,and – very important – consumers.All these peoplemust join the discussion and take action if the world isto find a better way to meet society’s needs.



Documents

CHAPTER 16 AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE - pubs.iied.orgpubs.iied.org/pdfs/G00908.pdf · CHAPTER 16 AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE ... AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE CHAPTER 16 ... no business case to justify