Investor and stakeholder views on a miner’s sustainability reporting

What is shaping mining

Mining operations depend on a social licence from nearby communities as much as on permits. Safety culture, workforce welfare and transparent CSR shape how companies are seen locally and by regulators.

• Community trust can make or break an operation
• Safety culture is measured by behaviour, not policies
• CSR spending is increasingly evaluated for real impact

A listed mining company, working in Investors in the UK, Switzerland, Canada & Australia. Client identity is withheld to protect confidentiality.

Organisation

A listed mining company

Sector

Mining

Team engaged

Market Research

Services

Research consultancy, Qualitative research, Reporting & insights

The company published an annual sustainability report, but investor questions on climate, water and community issues kept increasing. Leadership wanted to know whether its reporting answered the questions that mattered most to investors and other stakeholders. Analysts had begun scoring the company below peers, partly because they could not find the data they needed.

• Deliver on the brief: investor and stakeholder views on a miner’s sustainability reporting.
• Uncover the motivations and barriers people do not state in a survey.
• Give the client evidence it can act on within 7 weeks.

Scope: 28 stakeholder interviews.

Audiences we typically reach in mining

Host communitiesMine workers and contractorsLocal leaders and officialsRegulatorsCSR beneficiaries

Coverage: Investors in the UK, Switzerland, Canada & Australia. Markets: United Kingdom, Switzerland, Canada and Australia.

• United Kingdom
• Switzerland
• Canada
• Australia

A qualitative design, built to uncover motivations, decision processes and the language people actually use.

1. 1Brief
2. 2Interviews with investors, analysts and NGOs
3. 3Insight

We interviewed portfolio managers, sustainability analysts, lenders and NGOs about how they assessed mining companies, what information they relied on and where the company’s reporting fell short. Interviews were confidential, and findings were grouped by stakeholder type. We also reviewed peer reports to show which disclosures stakeholders considered best practice.

Research consultancyQualitative researchReporting & insights

• Qualitative participants were recruited purposively to cover the full range of experiences that mattered, rather than for statistical representation.

stakeholder interviews

28

• Interviews and discussions were led by experienced moderators using a guide agreed with the client.

• Recordings and transcripts for every session
• Re-screening of qualitative recruits
• Logic and range checks on the final data
• Work carried out under our ISO 20252 quality procedures

• Thematic coding of interviews and discussions
• Journey and decision mapping

• Stakeholders wanted site-level data on water and tailings safety and clearer targets with progress reporting, rather than case studies.

Stakeholders trusted data and targets more than stories.

• Build on the core insight: stakeholders trusted data and targets more than stories.
• Focus effort where the evidence was strongest: stakeholders wanted site-level data on water and tailings safety and clearer targets with progress reporting, rather than case studies.
• Re-measure after the changes to confirm the effect.

• The company restructured its report around material issues with site-level data and published a tailings safety summary.

What changed in the business as a result of the work. Impact is described qualitatively.

• Insight report and management presentation
• Interview summaries and key verbatims

• Repeat the measure after changes are in place to track progress.
• A natural follow-on question: what do workers need to stay safe and engaged?