CAN MINING SUPPORT BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

1
CAN MINING SUPPORT BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION?

• David Richards
• Chief Adviser, Mine of the Future
• Rio Tinto

Presentation to ICE Seminar 13th February 2007
2
Presentation outline
3
Presentation outline
4
Are Mining and Biodiversity Conservation
incompatible?

• Even at its best, Mining has unavoidable impacts
• Access
• Land clearance
• Water use
• Non-renewable resources
• To meet growing demand for minerals, new mines
  will be needed
• Seeking access to land puts mining in the same
  market as other land uses, including
  conservation
• At its worst and in its past, mining has caused
  extensive biodiversity loss
• But
• There have always been examples of mining
  projects delivering good conservation outcomes

5
Balancing development need with conservation

• Consider 3 world maps
• Conservation value
• Mineral prospectivity
• Poverty/development need
• There would be considerable overlap
• It is too simplistic to portray the issue as a
  two-sided confrontation between mining and
  conservation
• Analysis of root causes of biodiversity loss
  identifies poverty, weak governance,
  urbanisation, perverse policies and market
  malfunction
• So ..
• Can Mining be a significant actor in addressing
  these?

6
Two models for the future

• PROTECTION BY EXCLUSION
• Advantages
• Clarity No-Go for everyone
• Precedence for conservation management objectives
• Disadvantages
• Constrains development options
• Does not solve poverty-driven threats
• Resource requirements
• Sustainability
• Good performers not rewarded

• RISK-BASED, CONDITIONAL ACCESS
• Advantages
• Still retain No-Go areas
• Higher risk ? higher costs for developers
• Better performers have more opportunities
• Socio-economic benefits possible
• Disadvantages
• Relies on good enforcement of controls
• Open to abuse of EIA system
• Quality of information available to assess risk
  may be inadequate

7
Biodiversity has a diversity of perspectives

• For biologists it means conserving the rare,
  threatened, endemic and fragile ecosystems,
  species and genes
• For local communities it often means livelihoods
  and survival food, shelter, spiritual
  significance, culture or recreation and
  wellbeing a better quality of life
• For governments it means responsibility for
  stewardship and meeting obligations under UN
  conventions CBD, Ramsar
• For economists it can represent a source of
  capital, an asset with value
• For investors it can appear as a potential
  source of risk and uncertainty
• For mining companies, it means there may be
  sensitivity and concern over areas of land that
  might be prospective for mineral deposits
• For the public there is an expectation that
  industry should do more to reduce its impacts

8
Presentation outline
9
The Global Mining Initiative

• In 1999 CEOs and chairmen of several leading met
  and resolved to change the way their industry was
  perceived, accepting that at least part of this
  poor perception was down to poor performance
• They formed the Global Mining Initiative, with 3
  tracks
• Independent analysis of minings role in the
  transition to Sustainable Development
• In-company activities to understand SD aspects
  and develop policy responses
• Development of a better model for representation
  of the industry
• Working with the WBCSD, they commissioned the
  Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development
  (MMSD) project, an independent multi-stakeholder
  review
• The MMSD report was launched in 2002, and the GMI
  conference was held in May 2002 to debate its
  findings

10
Global Mining Initiative the three tracks
1999
2000
2001
2002
11
The MMSD governance
12
What were the strengths and weaknesses of the
MMSD?

• Strengths
• Independent of control by the industry (or any
  constituency)
• Devolved activities S. America, N. America,
  Africa, Australasia
• Strong governance structure
• Quality of inputs and participants
• Multi-stakeholder workshops were very well
  organised and run
• Focussed on reporting at WSSD
• Weaknesses
• Timetable too compressed
• World Bank not fully engaged EIR followed MMSD
• Other key players opted out
• No time for original research

13
Presentation outline
14
The history and origins of the ICMMs work on
Biodiversity

• Biodiversity was identified as a significant
  issue in the MMSD report
• Environmental and biodiversity protection is the
  subject of one of ICMMs 10 SD principles
• ICMM formed a Biodiversity Task Force in May 2002
  to take forward the MMSDs recommendations for
  future work

15
The ICMM-IUCN Dialogue

• The Chairman of ICMM and the Director-General of
  IUCN the World Conservation Union launched a
  Type 2 partnership at the WSSD in September 2002
• Terms of Reference and a work programme were
  agreed by early 2003
• The dialogue was debated by IUCN Council after
  the World Parks Congress in 2003
• A revised ToR were agreed in 2004
• Continuation of the Dialogue, with conditions,
  was endorsed at the World Conservation Congress
  in 2004

16
The ICMM Good Practice Guidance for Mining and
Biodiversity

• IUCN-ICMM multi-stakeholder workshop in 2003
  established guiding principles
• Joint IUCN-ICMM advisory group formed to develop
  and review GPG
• 4 NGO nominees 4 mining company staff
• IUCN and ICMM secretariat staff
• GPG approved by ICMM Council in 2006
• Launched at national and regional events in
  Madagascar, USA, Australia, Canada, Ghana
• Aimed at mining industry managers with
  responsibility for land management
• Interest shown by governments

17
Other products of the IUCN-ICMM Advisory Group

• 2 Biodiversity Offsets papers
• Briefing Paper for ICMM members
• Proposition paper to contribute to the debate
• Case Studies Publication
• Integrating Mining and Biodiversity Conservation
• TRUST

18
Outside the IUCN-ICMM Dialogue

• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
• Contributing to Business and Industry Synthesis
  Report
• Pilot application of Ecosystem Services Review
  methodology
• Convention on Biological Diversity
• Business Biodiversity meetings in 2005
• CoP 8 decision on private sector involvement
• Global Reporting Initiative
• Mining sector supplement
• Conservation Commons initiative
• Founder members and signatories
• UNESCO Landscape Level Planning Initiative
• Founder members
• UNEP working groups

19
Presentation outline
20
Rio Tinto Group

• 36,000 people, including 6,000 in Joint Ventures
• Multiple cultures

21
Location of Rio Tinto operations
Diamonds
Aluminium
Talc
Zinc, silver and gold
Coal
TiO2 / Iron
Iron Ore
Talc
Gold
Talc
Coal
Borates
Diamonds
Gold
Copper / Gold / Silver / Molybdenum
Iron ore
Gold
Diamonds
Gold
Uranium
Bauxite
Diamonds
Coal Alumina Aluminium
Iron ore
Salt
Uranium
Coal
Iron ore
TiO2
Talc
Copper
Coal
Copper/ gold
Aluminium
TiO2
Aluminium
Borates
22
Significance of Biodiversity to Rio Tinto

• 20,000 km2 of land
• only 7 needed for mining
• 2001 Biodiversity Survey
• 70 of all operations already dealing with
  biodiversity issues
• Good experiences from new projects
• QMM Madagascar
• Diavik
• Simandou Guinea
• Societys expectations
• GMI and MMSD
• 2010 Biodiversity target
• ICMM-IUCN dialogue
• Window on the SD debate
• Ethical arguments

23
Elements of a business case

• The Traditional Elements
• Cost Reduction
• Risk Reduction
• Revenue Growth
• New Opportunity

• The Emerging Approach
• Access to land, sea and related natural resources
  (directly, or through supply chains)
• Legal and social (functional) license to operate
• Access to capital and insurance
• Access to markets for products (old and new)
• Access to human capital
• A seat at Policy development tables

24
Expert Advice- Rio Tintos Biodiversity Partners

• GLOBAL
• BirdLife International
• Earthwatch Europe
• Fauna Flora International
• Royal Botanic Gardens Kew
• The Nature Conservancy (Developing)
• Conservation International
• LOCAL
• Earthwatch Australia
• The Australian Museum
• Birds Australia
• Australian Bush Heritage (Developing)

25
The Rio Tinto Biodiversity Strategy

• Internal Steering Group and External Advisory
  Panel formed in 2002
• Internal inputs from corporate, operations,
  exploration, social environment
• External NGO inputs CI, FFI, BirdLife
  International, WWF, IIED
• Elements of the strategy developed jointly in
  2003
• Internal review and information process in 2004,
  leading to ExCo approval
• Launch at World Conservation Congress, Bangkok,
  November 2004

26
Net Positive Impact the Position Statement and
PrinciplesRio Tinto aims to have a net
positive impact on biodiversity by minimising the
negative impacts of its activities and by making
appropriate contributions to conservation in the
regions in which it operates.

• Delivering on this aim will require both impacts
  and positive actions to be measured
• The use of biodiversity offsets will be important
  in achieving this aim
• A means of aggregating data across the Rio Tinto
  operations needs to be developed

27
Net Positive Impact the Position Statement and
Principles

• Aim to have a net positive effect on
  biodiversity.
• Committed to the conservation of threatened and
  endemic species and high priority conservation
  areas.
• Seek equity and the reconciliation of differing
  perspectives and ideals in biodiversity decisions
  and actions.
• Enhance outcomes through consultation,
  constructive relationships and partnerships.
• Integrate biodiversity issues into operational
  planning and decision making processes.
• Apply appropriate expertise and resources to
  biodiversity issues and build internal and
  external capacity.
• Promote the collection, analysis and
  dissemination of biodiversity information and
  knowledge.

28
Rio Tinto Biodiversity Strategy Framework
Achieving NPI
Strategic Issues Socio- Economic Cultural
Strategic Issues Water GHG Ecosystem Services
BPM Program
Offsets Program
Biodiversity Diagnostic (Health Check)
IBAP Program
BAP Program
29
Key Continuing Programmes 1 Performance Measures

• Joint Rio Tinto - NGO Partner Working Group
  formed 2005
• The aim is to develop indicators for measuring
  progress towards Net Positive Impact on
  biodiversity
• Based on Pressure-State-Response model
• Intrinsic and Service values for species,
  habitats, ecosystem features, ecosystem services,
  cultural values
• Review of existing performance measures completed

30
Key Continuing Programmes 2 Biodiversity Offsets

• Joint Rio Tinto NGO Partner working group
  formed in 2005
• Increasing part of regulatory conditions for
  development approval
• USA wetland banking Section 404 Clean Water Act
• Brazil
• Australia state legislation in WA, NSW
• EU Habitats and Birds Directives
• Principles, Guidance, being developed
• Participation in BBOP with pilot project in Guinea

31
Presentation outline
32
Factors affecting delivery of conservation
outcomes by Mining

• In the Mining industry
• Initiative overload in businesses
• Business value not delivered no competitive
  advantage
• Implementation support demand exhausts available
  expertise
• In Government
• Corruption, lack of transparency
• Low capacity for enforcement
• Lack of equity in benefit sharing leads to
  migration
• In the conservation community
• Lack of agreed metrics., currency
• Unrealistic expectations and ecological
  timeframes lead to loss of trust
• Limited capacity and knowledge of industry

33
In Rio Tinto

• Finite capacity and complex issues
• In 2007, plan for pilot implementation of
• 3 offset sites
• 3 performance measures sites
• 3 NPI projects
• 3 biodiversity diagnostic sites
• 4 IBAP projects
• 4 OBAP sites
• Retro-fitting to established operations where
  is the business case?
• Ambiguity of business benefit

34
CONCLUSIONS

• MINING PROJECTS CAN HELP TO DELIVER BIODIVERSITY
  CONSERVATION BENEFITS
• INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS AND LACK OF TRUST ARE
  SERIOUS OBSTACLES
• THE CAPACITY OF THE CONSERVATION SECTOR TO BE A
  FULLY-ENGAGED PARTNER IN THIS PROCESS IS LIMITED
• THERE IS GOODWILL ON BOTH SIDES, BUT DELIVERY
  MECHANISMS STRETCH THIS
• IF OTHER STAKEHOLDERS WANT MINING TO CHANGE, THEY
  MUST SEEK TO REWARD THOSE WHO ARE CHANGING

35
THANK YOU