DR. ANDREW PARSONS: “The recognition of the importance of biodiversity conservation is growing all the time”

THE WORLD OF MINING
“The recognition of the importance of biodiversity conservation is growing all the time”
Dr. Andrew Parsons
ICMM Director on environmental, safety and health programs

Raul F. Campusano Droguett
International Editor

Andrew Parsons is the current ICMM Director on environmental, safety and health programs. After completing a PhD in organic chemistry at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa (1992), Andrew Parsons held postdoctoral fellowships at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada (1992/93), and at the Rand Afrikaans University in Johannesburg (1993/94).

He joined the Chamber of Mines of South Africa in 1994, where he worked initially in the fields of environmental, safety and technology policy. He concentrated on environmental policy issues from 1997. He was seconded by the Chamber of Mines to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in Paris, France, from 1998 – 1999. On his return to the Chamber of Mines in 2000, he continued to work on environmental and sustainable development policy issues. In April 2002, he took on some responsibility for safety issues, especially research. He led the South African mining industry’s input to the World Summit on Sustainable Development, the preparation of the South African Guideline on Cyanide Management for Gold Mining, and the rehabilitation of 37 radioactively contaminated sites that had been the subject of controversy for ten years previously. He joined ICMM in June 2004 on secondment from the Chamber of Mines. He is responsible for environmental, safety and health programmes. Andrew Parsons was born in Harare, Zimbabwe. He is married, with 2 children.

The International Council on Mining and Metals, ICMM, is an international organization whose vision is “a viable mining, minerals and metals industry that is widely recognized as essential for modern living and a key contributor to sustainable development.” The ICMM’s mission goals are to offer strategic leadership to achieve improved sustainable development performance in the mining, minerals and metals industry; to represent the views and interests of its members and serve as a principal point of engagement with the industry's key constituencies in the international arena; to promote science-based regulations and material-choice decisions that encourage market access and the safe production, use, reuse, and recycling of metals and minerals; and to identify and advocate the use of good practices to address sustainable development issues within the industry.

One of ICMM’s key functions is driving improvements in our industry's sustainable development performance. We believe that improving performance requires an integrated package of activities covering principles, and supported by public reporting, verification systems and the dissemination of good practice examples.

In May 2003, the ICMM Council approved this set of principles and committed its corporate membership to measure their sustainable development performance against them. The principles are central to ICMM's Sustainable Development Framework and draw on the landmark MMSD report. In light of the MMSD recommendations, ICMM undertook a “gap analysis” comparing current standards with relevant conventions and guidelines. These included the Rio Declaration, the Global Reporting Initiative, the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, the World Bank Operational Guidelines, the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery, ILO Conventions 98, 169, 176, and the Voluntary Principles on Human Rights and Security. The ICMM Principles are as follows:

Implement and maintain ethical business practices and sound systems of corporate governance.
Integrate sustainable development considerations within the corporate decision-making process.
Uphold fundamental human rights and respect cultures, customs and values in dealings with employees and others who are affected by our activities.
Implement risk management strategies based on valid data and sound science.
Seek continual improvement of our health and safety performance.
Seek continual improvement of our environmental performance.
Contribute to conservation of biodiversity and integrated approaches to land use planning.
Facilitate and encourage responsible product design, use, re-use, recycling and disposal of our products.
Contribute to the social, economic and institutional development of the communities in which we operate.
Implement effective and transparent engagement, communication and independently verified reporting arrangements with our stakeholders.

On ICMM, the environment, mining and sustainable development, we talked to Dr. Parsons.

Mr. Parsons, could you tell AREAMINERA about ICMM and the work you perform there?
In the words of our mission statement: “ICMM members believe that the mining, minerals and metals industry acting collectively can best ensure its continued access to land, capital and markets as well as build trust and respect by demonstrating its ability to contribute successfully to sustainable development. ICMM offers strategic industry leadership towards achieving continuous improvements in sustainable development performance in the mining, minerals and metals industry. ICMM provides a common platform for the industry to share challenges and responsibilities as well as to engage with key constituencies on issues of common concern at the international level, based on science and principles of sustainable development.”

I am responsible for directing environmental, health and safety programmes related to mining. Most of my time is spent managing projects designed to provide tools to assist our members to improve their performance in these areas. I also represent ICMM at relevant international meetings.

According to you, which are the most relevant challenges for the mining sector regarding the environment at this time of history?
The challenges differ from country to country and ecosystem to ecosystem, but I think that the greatest common challenges are:
·1. biodiversity management
·2. closure, including financial assurance
·3. water issues, including acid drainage and groundwater
·4. riverine and submarine tailings deposition
·5. accounting for ecosystem services
·6. artisanal mining
·7. legacies

The recognition of the importance of biodiversity conservation is growing all the time and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has recently highlighted the frightening extent of ecosystem loss. It’s a critical land access issue and as development increasingly encroaches on previously untouched areas, will continue to grow in importance. ICMM has a large biodiversity programme, much of which is carried out under the auspices of our dialogue with the World Conservation Union (IUCN). We’ve published case studies and are promoting debate on offsets and we’re developing good practice guidance for our members. ICMM members also committed in 2003 not to explore or mine in World Heritage sites. Addressing rules around land use planning is another critical area in which we’re active. Evidence of ICMM’s success may be found in the assessment of extractive industry companies’ management of biodiversity by F&C Asset Management: “Overall, we believe that mining companies, particularly those that are members of the trade body International Council on Mining and Metal (sic) (ICMM), are leading the way.”

Governments are increasingly reluctant to provide “exit tickets” to mining companies and companies are naturally reluctant to bear responsibility for a closed site in perpetuity. Thus the challenge is to agree criteria that satisfy government and community concerns while not placing undue burdens on companies. The post closure performance of sites is what ultimately defines the environmental impacts of individual operations. Similarly, an operation’s long-term contribution to social, economic and institutional development in communities is revealed after closure. Thus the industry’s reputation depends to a large extent on how closure is managed. An integrated approach to closure - which takes environmental and social considerations into account at an early stage of an activity and throughout its lifecycle – plays a fundamental role in post closure performance. However, “the full appreciation of mine closure and ways to manage the associated economic, environmental and social impacts is relatively new” and there are “few case studies […] on successful integrated mine closure” (MMSD, 2002). ICMM is embarking on a project to understand closure requirements around the world and identify where we can best add value.

An important aspect of closure planning and regulation is providing assurance that sufficient funds will be available to pay for the rehabilitation of a closed mine. Governments are tending to require increased amounts of such financial assurance and are imposing stricter terms. This area is very fluid and results in significant costs to companies. The funds that must be provided are often not put to productive use. ICMM has reviewed the arrangements for both mines and metals operations in different jurisdictions around the world, and is currently developing a position statement that will set out what we consider to be the most important principles of a financial assurance regime.

Mining by its very nature impacts on water resources, both on surface and underground. This is an issue both in arid and well-watered areas. The impacts are often long-term and thus represent significant long-term challenges for mines. Where contiguous mines impact the same aquifer or join previously unconnected aquifers, finding solutions can be very challenging. Many of these solutions are site-specific. We anticipate working in this field ourselves, but have not yet identified where best ICMM could add value to the many activities our members already undertake.

Tailings deposition is well understood and is generally well managed. However riverine and submarine tailings disposal is controversial with several NGOs strongly opposed to their use. The mines that use these technologies usually have no other choice because of the terrain, rainfall and/ or geology of the site. Thus opposition to these forms of tailings disposal usually equates to opposition to the mine’s existence and there are therefore few solutions to this issue. ICMM is opposed to out of hand rejection of particular technologies and considers that every case should be addressed on its own merits, with a rigorous risk assessment of the merits of a proposal.

As I said earlier, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has drawn attention to the fragility of ecosystems and we therefore see payment for ecosystem services increasingly being required. We’re seeing such requirements appearing around the world. This will help to ensure the internalisation of externalities, which is a good thing as long as it is applied consistently. However it will drive up the cost of doing business in countries that implement such requirements.

Many people do not distinguish between large- and small-scale mining. While large mines can make large impacts, artisanal mining often impacts the environment and society disproportionately because it is unregulated and carried out by people with very few resources. Owing to its scale and the fact that it is often carried out outside of the law, it is a huge challenge. ICMM participates in the World Bank’s Communities and Small-Scale Mining (CASM) project and several of our members are addressing artisanal mining at the site level.

The remains of former mines are a serious problem in many countries, particularly where mining has been present for many years. Society’s expectations have changed over the years and we tend to judge the past by today’s standards. Another issue is that well-meaning actions may not have resulted in the desired long-term effects because of an inadequate scientific understanding at the time. Where a company still exists and it can be shown to have broken the law, then it should be brought to book. However it is often the case that the problem becomes apparent after the company has closed down. If the company complied with the law at the time then it should not be penalised for having failed to anticipate future legal requirements. This is an issue for the entire society because it is society that benefited from the economic benefits of the mining operation at the time. Some jurisdictions have found innovative solutions to this difficult issue, but there are few easy answers.

4.How do you evaluate and project the MMSD process?
Initiating the MMSD was a bold step by the mining and metals industry. However it has led to significant changes being made, not least the formation of ICMM. Almost all of what ICMM does today is a result of the direction provided by the MMSD report. Not all of what the report recommended is being carried out though because some of the issues, such as abandoned mines, cannot be addressed by industry alone, and also because there are limits to what we can do within the scope of a finite budget. When others noted the courage being shown by the MMSD sponsors, some stakeholders were equally courageous to enter into partnerships or dialogues with us, such as the IUCN dialogue I mentioned earlier. Such initiatives are ongoing and have yielded tremendous dividends themselves. So though it was risky I think the MMSD has greatly benefited ICMM members.

It was hoped at the time that the regional MMSD processes would develop their own momentum and continue independently, but that hasn’t happened for reasons related to the individual processes. The ICMM Sustainable Development Framework, including the Principles, which were developed using the MMSD report, will be reviewed from time to time. I think that it’s likely that there’ll be a follow up to the 2002 GMI conference, but I don’t see another MMSD happening in the foreseeable future.