CDP’s Water Disclosure Project: Who was Conspicuously Absent?
Busy with a GRI reporting benchmarking study, the recent Water Disclosure 2010 Global Report made me think: is this relevant to mining and reporting and who was conspicuously absent?
While completing a GRI reporting benchmarking study for a mid-tier mining company, I took a quick look at
Walk in the extractives: 16 responses were from the metals and mining sector (59% response rate of sector members surveyed) and 15 oil & gas companies (29% response rate, amongts the lowest response rates). I must admit that neither of this grabbed much of my attention. But soon I realized that, in addition to 150 responders who were part of CDP’s target group, 25 other companies responded on a voluntary basis. Now this caught my attention as it suggests - perhaps - a sense of accountability and leadership.
Voluntary responses in the mining sector were provided by
Why did some 40% of surveyed companies in the mining sector decide NOT to respond? Some (most?) of them are sustainability reporters and – I suspect – will have looked at water related issues as it is critical to environmental performance areas. Is this simply a sign of questionnaire fatigue? And why did groups like HudBay from Canada decide to provide voluntary disclosure?