Emphasizing Environmental Management and Monitoring - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 471

In 2002, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) provided guidance on voluntary report-
ing. This has now been followed by various other initiatives to offer sector specii c or alter-
native references to improve the quality of voluntary reporting on environmental, health
and safety, social, and economic performance (e.g. IPIACA/API 2005).
Reporting of non-i nancial indicators has become an increasingly important require-
ment fuelled by the public desire to understand how industrial activities affect the environ-
ment. It can also provide a means for strengthening stakeholder relationships, improving
internal values, and may become an important accountability mechanism which will even-
tually lead to enhanced business value (Stratos 2001).
The key to performance reporting is selecting the set of appropriate performance indi-
cators. Financial key performance indicators (KPI) are well-established, but this is not true
for non-i nancial performance indicators. Developing KPIs for a particular mine is not an
easy exercise (see Chapter Eight for a discussion of environmental indicators). It is even
more difi cult at the corporate level where it becomes necessary to report on the collective
performance of several mining operations, which may be operating in different jurisdic-
tions and environmental settings.

The key to performance
reporting is selecting the set
of appropriate performance
indicators.

10.4 COMMITMENT, FUNDS AND RESOURCES

Good design and planning are essential, but they are not a substitute for good implemen-
tation. Experience shows that more often than not, a massive gap exists between the EAP
recommendations and their implementation, particularly during mine construction. The rea-
sons for this apparent inconsistency include inadequate funding and lack of internal capacity.

Allocating Environmental Budgets

Implementation of mitigation measures requires money. Not accepting environmental
management costs as standard operational project costs is a warning sign of future envi-
ronmental problems. In contrast, adequate budgeting for environmental management
signals the ownership, commitment, and buy-in of senior management.
Environmental performance depends on the timely implementation of planned miti-
gation measures, and budgeting should be aligned to the environmental implementa-
tion schedule. Budgets must be time-bound. Often implementation is time-sensitive and
cannot be left until later in the mine life. Environmental management of construction
activities at the beginning of mine development unfortunately often serves as an example
of what can go wrong. Construction activities are the cause of a number of signii cant
adverse impacts, if not managed properly. In tropical areas, scheduling of earthworks to
avoid the wet season may be the single most effective decision in avoiding environmental
problems and their costly consequences. Yet only a minority of projects plan accordingly.
Budgeting for and monitoring of environmental mitigation measures (of a physical and
social nature) during construction, are essential to ensure that the mining project is not
tainted by negative community perceptions for the rest of its life.
Adequate funding for environmental mitigation measures is now a legal requirement
in most countries. Where external project funding is used, funding for environmental
management is normally included in the legal covenants and loan agreements. A standard
clause in loan agreements is to specify that the EAP shall be implemented in accordance
with an agreed schedule and budget.

Adequate budgeting for
environmental management
signals the ownership,
commitment, and buy-in of
senior management.