Last month, the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), an international organisation dedicated to a safe, fair and sustainable mining and metals industry, published a series of equivalency benchmarks that compare the requirements of ICMM’s Mining Principles with several mining and metals industry bodies.

These include gold industry market development organisation the World Gold Council’s (WGC’s) Responsible Gold Mining Principles, national organisation for the Canadian mining industry the Mining Association of Canada’s (MAC’s) Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) programme, global nonprofit standards setting and certification organisation the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative (ASI), the Responsible Mineral Initiative’s Risk Readiness Assessment and the Copper Mark.

Recognising stakeholder concerns around responsible production, as well as the recent proliferation of sustainability standards, ICMM has undertaken this exercise with three key aims – with the first being simplification.

This aims to support investors, customers and other stakeholders in their understanding of how these standards address a range of sustainability concerns, and the extent to which there are similarities and differences between them.

The second aim is efficiency, which aims to make self-assessment and/or third-party validation processes more efficient, including in situations where validation is conducted for two or more standards at the same time.

Thirdly is transparency; to promote transparency around mining and metals sector standards and validation processes.

The benchmarks enable all stakeholders to understand the coverage of different schemes in terms of the issues of concern to them, and any important points of difference or divergence. While each of these standards share the objectives of improving environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices at the operational level, there are points of difference which must be carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Differences occur for several reasons including that ICMM and other standard owners are distinct organisations with different memberships, mandates and governance structures.

As such, to measure the degree to which these standards may vary, ICMM has worked with each standard owner to robustly evaluate whether each individual requirement exceeds, meets, partially meets, or does not meet those of another standard.

The recent proliferation of sustainability standards reflects the justifiable demand from investors, consumers and other stakeholders for evidence that critically important metals and minerals are being produced responsibly, says ICMM COO Aidan Davy. He adds that this was a key consideration when the council developed its enhanced membership requirements, its Mining Principles, and from the outset the ICMM committed to understanding the degree of alignment with other responsible sourcing standards.

“This equivalency benchmarking exercise is a critical step in helping to avoid the duplication of work for those companies implementing one or more of these standards at once, and in parallel promotes transparency and good practice in the sector. This has been a collaborative process, so I want to thank the other standard owners for their support and input at each stage of the exercise,” says Davy.

The Responsible Gold Mining Principles have been designed to set out a clear framework as to what constitutes responsible practices for gold mining, says WGC CFO Terry Heymann, whose colleague John Reade will be speaking at the 2021 Investing in African Mining Indaba which will be hosted virtually on February 2 and 3.

“We recognise that there are a number of standards that support the broader mining industry and are pleased to have worked with the ICMM to develop this equivalency table, which shows a high degree of alignment. This should support efficient implementation and assurance for companies implementing both approaches.”

Further, Heymann highlights that it should also benefit investors, consumers and other stakeholders who are, quite rightly, increasingly seeking to understand how miners perform in regard to recognised responsible mining standards.

“Now more than ever before, consumers and businesses are rightly focusing on ensuring the materials they are purchasing have been sourced responsibly and the need for standards, specifically those highlighting measurable performance data and commitment to ESG, have never been more important,” says MAC president and CEO Pierre Gratton.

He notes that, given the variety of standards specific to the mining industry, including the MAC’s TSM initiative, it is clear that the mining sector is taking note of this expectation and is being proactive in providing assurance of sustainable practices while also working to minimise the burden on miners.

“We are confident that, when combined with MAC’s new TSM Responsible Sourcing Alignment Supplement – [which] brings the requirements of multiple standards, including ICMM’s, together into a single reporting and assurance process – this equivalency benchmark will provide important and transparent information on how the mining industry encourages and measures responsible mining practices.”

The ASI also welcomes ICMM’s recognition of the ASI Performance Standard. Harmonisation with relevant external standards and schemes is an important part of ASI’s collaboration activities to reduce unnecessary duplication and inform its learning and continual improvement, says ASI impacts and partnerships director Marieke van der Mijn.

“We look forward to continuing working with ICMM on equivalency as our standards evolve over time,” she adds.

Meanwhile, the Copper Mark welcomes ICMM’s work, adding that it already recognises ICMM’s Performance Expectations in its Assurance Process and is encouraged to see this recognition being extended to the Risk Readiness Assessment.

“The publication of the equivalency benchmarking results provide helpful information to identify efficiencies in our respective assurance processes but also to further the understanding of responsible mining standards across different stakeholder groups,” says Copper Mark executive director Michèle Brülhart.

Similarly, the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) VP Leah Butler underscores that the organisation is pleased to be part of these efforts.

“We support initiatives that increase awareness of expectations across standards and encourage alignment over time. “This drives efficiencies in the industry’s ability to achieve goals shared by the RMI and ICMM.”

This has been a collaborative process between the council and each of the standard owners who have been engaged at each stage of the process.

The benchmarks published have been agreed and/or accepted by each standard owner. The list of standards being benchmarked against ICMM’s Mining Principles is not finite, with other relevant standards being assessed in time.