Sustainability reporting among mining corporations : a constructive critique of the GRI approach.

Abstract

The environmental crisis is giving rise to growing public demand for socially responsible and ecologically viable mining practices. Large mining corporations are responding by advancing the idea of a sustainable mining industry. These responses are accompanied by concerted efforts to advertise a company’s relative progress in this direction through the publication of sustainability reports based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Framework. Many scholars contest the effectiveness of that framework, arguing that GRIbased reports can mislead decision-makers who are concerned with sustainability, or even camouflage unsustainable practices, particularly at the site level. Few scholars, however, have scratched below the surface of criticism in order to consider how to improve the effectiveness of that framework. This article takes a closer look at this problem by answering the following question: What needs to be changed in mining corporations’ GRI-based frameworks for the purpose of promoting more meaningful and reliable sustainability performance information? This article followed a qualitative methodological approach based on literature reviews and 41 semi-structured interviews. The analysis was guided by an evaluation of the extent to which the predominant GRI-based approach to sustainability reporting meets a number of principles of sustainability assessment and reporting, known as the BellagioSTAMP principles. This paper outlines a number of specific changes that should be promoted in mining corporations’ frameworks if their reports are to provide meaningful and accurate information about sustainability progress. Such changes include a more systematic consideration of site-level performance, scenario building, and legacy effects. Overall, this article corroborates the view that meaningful and reliable standardized disclosures of contributions to sustainability are unlikely to emerge any time soon. The geographical dispersion of mining facilities imposes substantial difficulties to the contextualization of sustainability evaluations.