rmi report 2020 · in chinese, english, french, indonesian, portuguese, russian and spanish....
TRANSCRIPT
RMI Report 2020Summary
2 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Acknowledgements
The Responsible Mining Foundation would like to thank all those who provided comments and recommendations subsequent to the RMI Report 2018 including mining-affected community members, representatives of local community associations, people’s movements, national and international NGOs, government bodies, industry associations, mining companies, multi-stakeholder initiatives, multilateral organisations, investors, academics, expert consultants and others.
RMF Expert Review CommitteeSonia BalcazarFritz BruggerLi LiGlen MpufaneLisa SachsPrabindra ShakyaIngrid WatsonLuc Zandvliet
FundersThe RMF wishes to thank its funders:Swiss State Secretariat for Economic AffairsThe Netherlands Ministry of Foreign AffairsThe Triodos Foundation
External Review PanelBritt BanksFritz BruggerPeter ColleyLiz McGrathAfshin Mehrpouya
Research PartnersSynergy Global ConsultingAmos Advisory
Report designOmdat Ontwerp, The Netherlands
RMI Report 2020
The RMI Report 2020 is an evidence-based assessment of 38 large-scale mining companies’ policies and practices on economic, environmental, social and governance issues.
The Report is produced by the Responsible Mining Foundation (RMF), an independent research organisation that encourages continuous improvement in responsible mining across the industry by developing tools and frameworks, sharing public-interest data and enabling informed and constructive engagement between mining companies and other stakeholders.
This Summary provides some overall results and extracts from the RMI Report 2020. The full results and individual company and mine-site reports are available at www.responsibleminingindex.org, in Chinese, English, French, Indonesian, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish.
Responsible Mining Foundation
The Foundation supports the principle that minerals and metals mining should benefit the economies, improve the lives of peoples and respect the environments of producing countries, while also benefiting mining companies in a fair and viable way. The Foundation’s work and research reflect what society at large can reasonably expect from mining companies on economic, environmental, social and governance matters. As an independent foundation, RMF does not accept funding or other contributions from the mining industry. www.responsibleminingfoundation.org
3RMI Report 2020 | Summary
What RMI measures
The RMI assessment covers 43 topics, grouped into six broad thematic areas, as shown below. The assessment focuses largely on company-wide policies and practices on economic, environmental, social and governance (EESG) issues, using three types of indicators (or ‘measurement areas’):
Commitment indicators assess the extent to which companies have produced formalised commitments, endorsed by senior management, and assigned responsibilities and resources to implement these policies.
Action indicators assess the extent to which companies are systematically putting in place measures to improve and maximise the potential EESG benefits and avoid, minimise or mitigate the negative EESG impacts of their activities.
Effectiveness indicators assess the extent to which companies are tracking, reviewing and acting to improve their performance on managing EESG issues.
In addition, the RMI assessment also includes a smaller set of mine-site indicators to assess mine-site-level actions on the following topics: local employment, local procurement, post-closure viability of communities, community grievances, worker grievances, air quality, water quality, water quantity, tailings management, and emergency preparedness.
RMI analytical framework
Transversal Issues
Measurement Areas
Them
atic
Are
as
Environmental Responsibility
Working Conditions
Community Wellbeing
Lifecycle Management
Business Conduct
Economic Development
Action(58%)
Effectiveness(28%)
Commitment(14%)
Human Rights Open Data Mine-siteGender
4 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Home countries, where companies are headquartered
Producing countries, where companies have mining operations
Mine sites selected for mine-site-level assessment
Other operational mine sites
Closed or suspended mine sites (known)
Company and geographic scope
5RMI Report 2020 | Summary
For more maps, visit maps.responsibleminingindex.org
Companies assessed
Anglo AmericanAngloGold AshantiAntofagastaArcelorMittalBanpuBarrick Gold CorpBHPBuenaventuraBumi ResourcesChina ShenhuaCoal IndiaCODELCOERGEvrazExxaro ResourcesFirst Quantum MineralsFortescueFreeport-McMoRanGlencoreGold FieldsGrupo MéxicoIndustrias PeñolesMMGNavoi MMCNewcrest MiningNewmontNMDCNordgoldOranoPeabody EnergyPolymetalRio TintoRUSALSibanye-StillwaterTeckValeVedanta ResourcesZijin
6 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Risk of SDG-washing
It is good to see that companies are increasingly aligning their sustainability reporting with the SDGs. However this reporting is selective and risks the perception of SDG-washing as companies generally omit any mention of negative impacts potentially impeding the achievement of these internationally agreed objectives. It is essential that an honest picture emerges of the true challenges the mining sector faces in its support of the SDGs.
Key findings
Significant gaps remain with society expectationsThe performances of even the best-scoring companies fall considerably short of society expectations in all six thematic areas. Stronger efforts are required by all companies to ensure their practices are managed effectively, in light of society expectations and the SDGs.
Some signs of progress, but mostly commitmentsSince the RMI Report 2018, more companies have made and disclosed formal commitments on some economic, environmental, social and governance (EESG) issues. A few companies have developed new or stronger management standards. Yet many companies show little sign of movement and much needs to be done to translate corporate commitments and standards into successful business practices.
Effectiveness requires persistenceMost companies are still not able to demonstrate that they track and publicly report on how effectively they are managing EESG issues. Even fewer companies show evidence of reviewing their performance and taking responsive actions where necessary. Once commitments are in place it takes persistence to Plan-Do-Check-Act.
1
3
2
4
7RMI Report 2020 | Summary
It can be done
Although individual company results are generally very low, collectively the companies prove that society expectations are achievable. If one company were to attain all the highest scores seen for every indicator, it would reach over 70% of the maximum achievable score. Similarly for a mine site in the mine-site assessment, achieving all the best scores recorded would enable it to reach over 80%. Each company and mining operation is encouraged to adopt the responsible practices already being demonstrated across the sector.
External requirements drive performanceStronger-performing and more transparent companies tend to be subject to specific requirements set by investors or producing country or home country governments. For example, the investor-led request for disclosure of information on tailings storage facilities has generated much more publicly available data of critical interest to shareholders, debt issuers, insurers and governments.
Mine-site data still missing
Many mine sites do not disclose site-level data on issues of strong public interest for communities, workers, governments and investors. And very rarely do mine sites evidence engagement with local stakeholders on EESG issues. To build trust with all stakeholders and reduce risks, companies will benefit from adopting responsible mine-site behaviour across all their operations and transparently sharing information.
Severe adverse impacts must be addressed urgentlyEvents such as the Vale tailings disaster in Brumadinho are harsh reminders of the unacceptable risks faced by many communities, workers and environments in mining areas. Such tragedies and other severe adverse impacts, including worker fatalities and attacks on human rights defenders, reflect very poorly on the industry as a whole and put into stark perspective any claims of responsible mining. The mining industry needs to prove that it prioritises ESG risk management over short-term considerations.
5
7
6
8
8 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Economic Development
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nVa
le
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiNew
mon
tAnt
ofag
asta
BHP
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
MM
G
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Arcel
orM
ittal
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Glenc
ore
Rio T
into
RUSA
LEv
raz
Newcr
est M
inin
gCoa
l Indi
aER
GCO
DELCO
NMDC
Orano
Teck
Free
port-M
cMoR
an
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Forte
scue
Gold
Field
s
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
China
Shen
hua
Grupo
Méx
ico Zijin
Buen
aven
tura
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Polym
etal
Peab
ody E
nerg
yBa
npu
Navoi
MM
CNor
dgol
d
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nVa
le
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiNew
mon
tAnt
ofag
asta
BHP
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
MM
G
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Arcel
orM
ittal
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Glenc
ore
Rio T
into
RUSA
LEv
raz
Newcr
est M
inin
gCoa
l Indi
aER
GCO
DELCO
NMDC
Orano
Teck
Free
port-M
cMoR
an
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Forte
scue
Gold
Field
s
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
China
Shen
hua
Grupo
Méx
ico Zijin
Buen
aven
tura
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Polym
etal
Peab
ody E
nerg
yBa
npu
Navoi
MM
CNor
dgol
d
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
AVERAGE SCORE
society expectations
Commitment( 1 indicator)
Action( 5 indicators)
Effectiveness( 1 indicator)
Score
Summary of company results
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
9RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Business ConductSummary of company results
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nRi
o Tin
toBH
PArc
elor
Mitt
alTe
ckNew
mon
t
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Glenc
ore
Antof
agas
ta
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiGol
d Fie
lds
Evra
zVa
leCO
DELCO
Orano
RUSA
L
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
al
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Free
port-M
cMoR
anBa
npu
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
MM
G
Bum
i Res
ourc
esER
GNM
DCCoa
l Indi
a
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Buen
aven
tura
Forte
scue
Peab
ody E
nerg
yZi
jinNor
dgol
d
Grupo
Méx
ico
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nRi
o Tin
toBH
PArc
elor
Mitt
alTe
ckNew
mon
t
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Glenc
ore
Antof
agas
ta
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiGol
d Fie
lds
Evra
zVa
leCO
DELCO
Orano
RUSA
L
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
al
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Free
port-M
cMoR
anBa
npu
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
MM
G
Bum
i Res
ourc
esER
GNM
DCCoa
l Indi
a
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Buen
aven
tura
Forte
scue
Peab
ody E
nerg
yZi
jinNor
dgol
d
Grupo
Méx
ico
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
Commitment( 1 indicator)
Action( 7 indicators)
Effectiveness( 3 indicators)
Score
AVERAGE SCORE
society expectations
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
10 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Lifecycle Management
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nTe
ck
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
ti
Newcr
est M
inin
gNew
mon
tVa
leCO
DELCO
Antof
agas
taRi
o Tin
to
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
MM
GBH
P
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGle
ncor
eBa
npu
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Gold
Field
s
Peab
ody E
nerg
yCoa
l Indi
aFo
rtesc
uePo
lymet
al
Grupo
Méx
icoOra
no
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Nordg
old
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Zijin
NMDC
Buen
aven
tura
Arcel
orM
ittal
China
Shen
hua
Evra
zRU
SAL
ERG
Navoi
MM
C
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nTe
ck
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
ti
Newcr
est M
inin
gNew
mon
tVa
leCO
DELCO
Antof
agas
taRi
o Tin
to
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
MM
GBH
P
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGle
ncor
eBa
npu
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Gold
Field
s
Peab
ody E
nerg
yCoa
l Indi
aFo
rtesc
uePo
lymet
al
Grupo
Méx
icoOra
no
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Nordg
old
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Zijin
NMDC
Buen
aven
tura
Arcel
orM
ittal
China
Shen
hua
Evra
zRU
SAL
ERG
Navoi
MM
C
AVERAGE SCORE
Commitment( 1 indicator)
Action( 5 indicators)
Effectiveness( 1 indicator)
Score
Summary of company results
Society expectationssociety expectations
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
11RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Community Wellbeing
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
n
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiNew
mon
t
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
BHP
Teck
Glenc
ore
Gold
Field
s
Free
port-M
cMoR
anRi
o Tin
toM
MG
Banp
uVa
le
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
alCO
DELCO
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Forte
scue
Arcel
orM
ittal
ERG
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Coal In
dia
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Peab
ody E
nerg
yNM
DC
Grupo
Méx
ico
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Antof
agas
taOra
noRU
SAL
Buen
aven
tura
Evra
zNor
dgol
dZi
jin
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
n
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiNew
mon
t
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
BHP
Teck
Glenc
ore
Gold
Field
s
Free
port-M
cMoR
anRi
o Tin
toM
MG
Banp
uVa
le
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
alCO
DELCO
Bum
i Res
ourc
es
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Forte
scue
Arcel
orM
ittal
ERG
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Coal In
dia
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Peab
ody E
nerg
yNM
DC
Grupo
Méx
ico
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Antof
agas
taOra
noRU
SAL
Buen
aven
tura
Evra
zNor
dgol
dZi
jin
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
AVERAGE SCORE
Commitment( 3 indicators)
Action( 12 indicators)
Effectiveness( 8 indicators)
Score
Summary of company results
Society expectationssociety expectations
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
12 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Working Conditions
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nPo
lymet
alCO
DELCO
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Antof
agas
taBH
P
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiGle
ncor
eNew
mon
tOra
noRi
o Tin
toTe
ck
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGol
d Fie
lds
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
MM
GEv
raz
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
RUSA
LBa
npu
Bum
i Res
ourc
esVa
le
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Forte
scue
Arcel
orM
ittal
Newcr
est M
inin
gER
GCoa
l Indi
a
Grupo
Méx
ico
Buen
aven
tura
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
NMDC
Nordg
old
Peab
ody E
nerg
y
China
Shen
hua
Zijin
Navoi
MM
C
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nPo
lymet
alCO
DELCO
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
Antof
agas
taBH
P
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
tiGle
ncor
eNew
mon
tOra
noRi
o Tin
toTe
ck
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGol
d Fie
lds
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
MM
GEv
raz
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
RUSA
LBa
npu
Bum
i Res
ourc
esVa
le
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Forte
scue
Arcel
orM
ittal
Newcr
est M
inin
gER
GCoa
l Indi
a
Grupo
Méx
ico
Buen
aven
tura
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
NMDC
Nordg
old
Peab
ody E
nerg
y
China
Shen
hua
Zijin
Navoi
MM
C
AVERAGE SCORE
Commitment( 1 indicator)
Action( 5 indicators)
Effectiveness( 2 indicators)
Score
Summary of company results
society expectations
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
13RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Environmental Responsibility
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nNew
mon
tTe
ckBH
P
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
ti
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Gold
Field
s
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGle
ncor
eRi
o Tin
toCO
DELCO
Banp
uAnt
ofag
asta
Vale
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
al
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
MM
GOra
noFo
rtesc
ue
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Arcel
orM
ittal
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Evra
z
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Coal In
dia
Peab
ody E
nerg
yRU
SAL
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Bum
i Res
ourc
esER
G
Grupo
Méx
icoNM
DCZi
jin
Buen
aven
tura
Nordg
old
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anglo
Am
erica
nNew
mon
tTe
ckBH
P
Anglo
Gold
Ashan
ti
Barri
ck G
old
Corp
Gold
Field
s
Free
port-M
cMoR
anGle
ncor
eRi
o Tin
toCO
DELCO
Banp
uAnt
ofag
asta
Vale
Newcr
est M
inin
gPo
lymet
al
Veda
nta R
esou
rces
MM
GOra
noFo
rtesc
ue
Siban
ye-S
tillw
ater
Arcel
orM
ittal
First
Qua
ntum
Min
erals
Evra
z
Exxa
ro R
esou
rces
Coal In
dia
Peab
ody E
nerg
yRU
SAL
Indu
stria
s Peñ
oles
Bum
i Res
ourc
esER
G
Grupo
Méx
icoNM
DCZi
jin
Buen
aven
tura
Nordg
old
China
Shen
hua
Navoi
MM
C
AVERAGE SCORE
Commitment( 2 indicators)
Action( 8 indicators)
Effectiveness( 5 indicators)
Score
Summary of company results
society expectations
The 0.00-6.00 scale is the scoring scale used in the assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
14 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Mine-site summary results
While most of the indicators in the RMI Report 2020 apply to company-wide policies or practices, ten very basic indicators have been applied at a mine-site level. Although not included in the company overall scores, these mine-site indicators help to assess the extent to which companies are consistently sharing disaggregated information and applying some basic corporate policies and systems throughout their operations.
For each company, approximately five sites were selected for assessment, and a total of 180 mine sites were covered by these mine-site indicators across a wide geographic distribution of 45 producing countries. Results for mine sites operated in Joint Venture between several companies are attributed equally to all co-venturers.
Disclosing site level information is an opportunity for companies to build trust, limit risk and show respect. The very low results show the stark reality that disaggregated mine-site-level information and action on these public-interest issues are mostly lacking.
Company Average Mine-Site Score (%) Company Average Mine-Site
Score (%)
Teck 28.0 Buenaventura 11.3
BHP 24.5 Peabody Energy 9.3
Polymetal 23.8 Coal India 9.0
AngloGold Ashanti 20.4 Orano 6.8
Glencore 20.4 Fortescue 6.1
Newcrest Mining 19.7 First Quantum Minerals 5.1
Rio Tinto 18.8 Exxaro Resources 5.0
Vale 18.7 Zijin 4.4
Newmont 18.6 Sibanye-Stillwater 3.3
MMG 18.3 ArcelorMittal 3.1
Vedanta Resources 17.4 Industrias Peñoles 1.7
CODELCO 17.2 Grupo México 1.0
Barrick Gold Corp 15.3 Evraz 0.7
Freeport-McMoRan 15.3 ERG 0.3
Gold Fields 15.0 RUSAL 0.3
Antofagasta 14.9 Nordgold 0.3
Bumi Resources 14.5 Banpu 0.0
Anglo American 13.8 Navoi MMC 0.0
NMDC 11.3 China Shenhua 0.0
15RMI Report 2020 | Summary
The 0.0-3.0 scale is the scoring scale used in the mine-site-level assessment, which measures company performances against society expectations. All company results are based on public domain data sourced by analysts or provided by companies. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information made publicly available by the company.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Worker Grievances
130 MINE SITES SCORE 00.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Air Quality
141 MINE SITES SCORE 0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0Local Employment
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Local Procurement
129 MINE SITES SCORE 0140 MINE SITES SCORE 0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Post-Closure Plans
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Community Grievances
121 MINE SITES SCORE 0125 MINE SITES SCORE 0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Water Quality
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Water Quantity
99 MINE SITES SCORE 0149 MINE SITES SCORE 0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Tailings Management
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
180 mine sites
Sco
re
Emergency Preparedness
149 MINE SITES SCORE 0
70 MINE SITES SCORE 0
24 EXCEPTIONS
For full results, visit www.responsibleminingindex.org
16 RMI Report 2020 | Summary
Disclaimer
The findings, conclusions and interpretations within this Responsible Mining Index (RMI) Report 2020 do not necessarily represent the views of funders, trustees, and employees of the Responsible Mining Foundation (RMF), and others who participated in consultations and as advisors to the report.
This report is intended to be for information purposes only and is not intended as promotional material in any respect. The report is not intended to provide accounting, legal, tax or investment advice or recommendations, neither is it intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument. In order to fully understand the methodology of the RMI Report 2020, the respective sections on the website should be consulted.
The RMI seeks evidence of companies’ policies and practices on economic, environmental, social and governance (EESG) issues, but does not seek to measure the actual outcomes achieved on EESG issues. Results are based only on evidence sourced from the public domain or provided by companies as open data. Whilst this information is believed to be reliable, no guarantee can be given that it is accurate or complete, nor does it preclude the possibility that policies and practices may exist, but which the RMI has not been able to consider for purposes of assessment. In this respect, the results of the low-scoring companies do not necessarily reflect a lack
of relevant policies and practices; as they may be due to a lack of public reporting by the companies, limitations in accessing information, and/or any difficulties in accessing the RMI company portal.
It should be noted that, prior to publication, all companies in the RMI were invited to check the factual accuracy of the contextual data and evidence upon which the RMI is based and to review company information in the RMI document library.
Country borders or names on maps do not reflect an official position of the RMF or anyone involved in its governance, employees or in service providers. Maps used are for illustrative purposes and do not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of the RMF, concerning the legal status of any country or territory or concerning the delimitation of frontiers or boundaries. Where needed, approaches used by the UN to present borders were followed.
Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of translations, the English language version should be taken as the definitive version. The RMI reserves the right to publish corrigenda on its web page, and readers of the RMI Report 2020 should consult the web page for corrections or clarifications. www.responsibleminingindex.org
Copyright notice
All data and written content are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Users are free to share and adapt the material but must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license and indicate if changes were made. The licensed material may not be used for commercial purposes, or in a discriminating, degrading or distorting way. When cited, attribute to: “Responsible Mining Foundation (RMF), RMI Report 2020.” Images, photographs, and video content depicted on RMF websites are excluded from this license, except where noted.
www.responsibleminingindex.org