Data helps protect mining environment

As Dr Susanne Schmitt, Extractives and Infrastructure Manager at WWF-UK, the UK division of the international secretariat founded in 1961, told Mining Journal, the organisation was also working hard to raise awareness of biodiversity and land-use issues and improve environmental and social governance in the mining space. Schmitt’s background is in geography, economics and ecology, not mining, and she’s spent the past 16 years managing conservation projects on behalf of WWF-UK in far-flung biodiversity havens such as Papua New Guinea and the Congo Basin in the ‘Green Heart of Africa’. Although she’s only been in her current role focused on extractives and infrastructure for a little more than two and half years, as with her career to date, her work still has a distinctly international edge. One of the things that first struck her about the industry was the general lack of easily accessible data and thus WWF’s inability to constructively engage on the most pressing issues.“My brief was to focus on what could we do for the UK to add value to improving decision-making that impacts wildlife and habitats and because I work with colleagues who specialise in finance I really felt there was space to foster some engagement,” she said. “Coming from my background and interest in mapping and land-use planning I was quite amazed that we don’t know most of the time where developments are about to take place and I think we need to get smarter in that space.”“When I got this job I did a big scoping exercise and it was absolutely striking that we as an organisation – and probably many other conservation organisations – were always behind the times because we don’t have sufficient intelligence about the industry about where concessions are given out, who owns them, what stage they’re at and so on. Often you find out about operations that are about to start when millions of dollars have already been sunk into the project and there is very little opportunity to actually engage.”She is quick to dispel the myth that WWF is anti-mining and said transparent data was vital to encouraging the type of early, constructive engagement that will ultimately help more mining projects come up against less social and environmental stumbling blocks. “It’s not always about campaigning and always wanting to stop things, it’s about constructive engagement,” she said. “Obviously as a conservation organisation we’re not anti-development at all. We realise particularly in continents like Africa and Asia there are countries that do need to develop and there are obviously many ways of doing this in a much more environmentally and socially sensitive fashion. “That is really where I am hoping to get my own organisation in a much better place to do that and what I realised is that we do not have sufficient data or knowledge in that space.”"“The idea is that it will become something that people all over the WWF network could use because it’s very user-friendly and you don’t have to be a GIS expert to use it""Consequently, Schmitt, alongside colleagues from WWF Norway and the WWF Coastal East Africa Initiative, has spent much of her time over the past 10 months on developing a pilot geographic information system (GIS) mapping tool which combines proprietary concession with biodiversity and infrastructure data that identifies the exact location of mining concessions. Although the data would obviously throw up any examples of concessions overlapping with protected areas or areas of particular significance for biodiversity, Schmitt stressed that the main goal was to boost spatial transparency and improve opportunities for engagement with all stakeholders.“The key for me is just being able to engage, not just with companies but also governments, investors, and so on, and it’s also about thinking more collectively," she said.“As I said, for me it’s about transparency as this information should be available anyway and some countries are now putting this stuff online, but slower than you might wish and often the data is very out of date. This information should be transparent so that the citizens of these countries know how their land is being given out – it shouldn't be just for the mining industry.“For example, if people are thinking they’re short of water and they either rightly or wrongly have the impression that you've taken all the water, then this can create social conflicts. These are the sorts of issues where having dialogue and better intelligence and then debating and discussing those issues early on – a lot of damage and potential material risk for companies and their investors could be avoided.”She said the tool would, with the support of further internal and external funding, soon be rolled out to the wider WWF network. Although an internal GIS expert developed the tool, a major advantage is that it is easy to use, meaning anyone, regardless of their technical background or location, can learn how to use it. “The idea is that it will become something that people all over the WWF network – which works in around 100 countries and has over 80 offices – could use this tool because it’s very user-friendly and you don’t have to be a GIS expert to use it.“To run it continuously we will have to look at resources and capacity in regions to use the data and maintain it. You can have a fantastic map or tool but if you don’t know how to use it or don’t know how to do the policy or advocacy around it, it’s not of much use.”Level playing fieldSchmitt is the sole member of the WWF-UK team focused on extractives, but works closely with her colleague Jon Hobbs, extractives adviser at WWF International, who is based in Kenya, and regularly liaises with Toby Gray, a market sustainability specialist at WWF Australia in Sydney. She also pointed to her colleague Dr Stuart Orr, who heads up WWF’s International Water Stewardship division in Geneva, and recently worked alongside the International Council on Mining and Metals to develop their Water Stewardship Framework, which was launched in 2014.Although by virtue of the international nature of the mining industry much of Schmitt’s focus is on overseas issues, a big part of her role involves improving WWF-UK’s capacity to properly engage with issues in the extractives industry. Regulation is one area that she feels particularly passionate about. “Regulation is a bit of a double-edged sword – most of the time the mining industry hates it as it adds costs and burden and so on, but at the same time they’re also calling for it as once you have clear regulations you actually know what to do and it gives a clear steer,” she said. “There are thousands of smaller companies that list on AIM that are just not so much in the public eye, which don’t have to comply with so many standards, so I think it’s about improving that basic practice and we've been looking at what could be done about strengthening the London Stock Exchange listing rules.”Though Schmitt admitted the LSE’s decision to join the Sustainable Stock Exchange last year was a positive move, she said there was still much more that the bourse could do to improve its listing requirements, particularly for non-UK companies. “Through the listing rules you can get that level of standard applied even if the local and national legislation in the countries they operate is much weaker,” she said. “That I think is the challenge as often everybody is clear that they have to comply with national regulations and often companies are [doing] what is way above what is locally required. But if the laws locally are extremely weak then what’s the lever at the international level that could bring up standards?” Who should London look to then as a role model? Schmitt pointed particularly to the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, but also the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and São Paulo’s BM&F BOVESPA, all of which she said have made concerted efforts to strengthen their listing requirements and procedures. “The frontrunners are the likes of Jo’burg, Hong Kong and São Paulo, so it’s interesting that it’s more of the emerging markets which want to be seen as serious destinations for investment.”"“There are thousands of smaller companies that list on AIM that are just not so much in the public eye, which don’t have to comply with so many standards""Listing requirements was one topic raised by Schmitt last year when she was invited to be a witness for the UK’s Business, Innovation and Skills Committee’s inquiry into the Extractive Industries.“I think partly why that inquiry came about was because there was a lot of concern about the reputation of the UK and London as a listing place because of the major scandals that have been in the press, such as the ENRC scandal, at FTSE 100 listed company at the time, which got a lot of publicity. And there were concerns that this could put UK plcs in a bit of a bad light.”Although she said the discussion was a positive step, government action on the committee’s findings left a lot to be desired. “It was very positive that it was being discussed. The report from the Select Committee was ok and quite a lot of the issues [that we’d raised] were quoted, but the response from the government was utterly disappointing. It was good it was all aired and raised but there was no particular action taken.”Schmitt said the onus should also be on companies to level the playing field around environmental and social governance and aim for the highest standards. “What is being advocated is that companies should have a commitment to achieve no net loss in biodiversity or even aim for a net positive gain, which is obviously a huge challenge.”Some companies are making concerted efforts in this area though, she said, citing in particular the example of Madagascar, where the likes of Rio Tinto’s 80%-owned QMM mineral sands mine and Sherritt International’s Ambatovy nickel joint venture are aiming for no net loss or even net positive biodiversity. However, companies must be prepared to put in the necessary legwork and long-term commitment, she said. “It is a big aim and companies such as Rio Tinto have the commitment to Net Positive Impact (NPI) a few years ago. They've spent a lot of time and money in terms of demonstrating how that can be done. And at Ambatovy [Sherritt] has done a huge amount of work to avoid and offset environmental impact. The proof, however, will be whether these commitments can be maintained over the long-term and through booms and busts, and be sustainable beyond the mines’ life-time.”For Schmitt, it is vital that examples like these become the rule not the exception. “You have to operate to those standards because the state we’re in in terms of what we’re doing to our planet – both in terms of carbon emissions and of trashing habits left, right and centre – obviously not just from mining but from oil palm, soy and so on, it’s absolutely essential we do our best to reduce impact and try, where possible, to avoid, mitigate and restore habitats and biodiversity. I think the mining industry can do huge amounts to improve on that.”

ABOUT

SOLUTIONS

LEGAL

SOCIAL

EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST STORIES

Data helps protect mining environment

Already have an account? Sign in here

MORE ON THIS TOPIC

FROM OUR PARTNERS

RESOURCE STOCKS

Forsys Metals' pipeline of catalysts to excite the market

RESOURCE STOCKS

The largest mineable measured uranium deposit in the USA

MOST POPULAR

MINERS

Anglo American shares tumble on planned production cuts

MINER'S RIGHT

Iron ore's unexpected boom rumbles on, defying experts

ESG

WATCH: What do American college students think about mining?

LATIN AMERICA

Lumina's Cangrejos a big beast

RESEARCH

Premium subscribers only

View more

Mining Journal Intelligence World Risk Report 2023 (feat. MineHutte ratings)

Mining Journal Intelligence Mining Equities Report 2023

Mining Journal Intelligence Global Leadership Report 2023: Social licence

Mining Journal Intelligence Project Pipeline Handbook 2023

THE ASPERMONT BRAND PORTFOLIO

Login

Not a Subscriber?

Subscribe Now