Sustainability Reporting in Mining Continues to Grow

While PDAC departed from developing a voluntary sustainability reporting framework for its members, adoption of GRI continues to grow in the mining sector - albeit slowly. - Shortlink: http://wp.me/p27qSt-mP

It seems that my enthusiastic blog entry Are Canada’s PDAC and MAC embracing GRI? has not withstood the test of time. The Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) appears to have shelved its original intent which was being supported by Stratos. This is surprising. Consider this: the CSR Strategy for the Canadian International Extractive Sector specifically refers to the promotion of the GRI Framework to enhance transparency and encourage market-based rewards for good CSR performance. But this is perhaps a story for another day.

A review of the statistics available from GRI shows that sustainability reporting continues to grow in the mining sector. In 2011, 93 organizations reported using either the GRI G3 (85 entries) or GRI G3.1 (8 entries – see also separate blog entry here) reporting framework.

GRI’s database for 2011 includes nine additional reporting entries. Four of these were categorized as “GRI Referenced”. This indicates the use of the GRI framework but a lack of a GRI Content Index. The remaining five were classified as “Non GRI” (see also Dilemma of GRI Reporting Stats in the US – Needs Grain of Salt?).

The use and distribution of GRI Application Levels in sustainability reporing in the mining sector between 2009 and 2011 is shown in the bar chart inserted further above. GRI Application Levels were introduced by GRI to help communicate to what extent a report has followed GRI’s G3 (and, more recently, G3.1) Guidelines. The system was also designed to provide a pathway for incremental improvement of reporting.

However, as readers of this blog will know, Application Levels – regardless if Self-declared (by reporting organization), Third Party Checked (typically by an external consultant) or GRI Checked (by GRI of course) – are not designed to provide a verification or assurance of the content or quality of the report or the sustainability performance of the reporting organization.

For those mining companies which are still contemplating the adoption of sustainability reporting, I would suggest a quick peek at some of the following blog entries:

So, is your mining company considering sustainability reporting using the GRI framework? If not, what is holding you back?

 

About the author: Mehrdad Nazari (MBA, MSc, LEAD Fellow) is a Corporate Responsibility, GRI & ESIA Advisor, and Director of Prizma. His most recent GRI reporting assignment involved Supporting ScottsMiracle-Gro with CR Reporting. Previous GRI-reporting engagements included Lundin Mining Corp., Red Back Mining (now part of Kinross Gold) and Gold Reserve Inc. Access Prizma’s Winter 2012 newsletters here.

One Comment to Sustainability Reporting in Mining Continues to Grow

  1. Dr. Godfrey Mvuma says:

    Next time you wite such a report try to look at the Yale University Sustainability reporting system and the United Nations system

Leave a Reply