Every week we talk to, learn from, and are inspired by amazing people doing innovative things in the world of social value and we are excited to share some of those conversations with you.
Today we're talking to Tracey Cooper about the value of genuine dialogue with communities and stakeholders, the risks when you get it wrong, and how the mining sector can ensure that the next boom is a real opportunity for change.
Don't miss out - sign up for more exclusive content here
Today we're talking to Tracey Cooper about the value of genuine dialogue with communities and stakeholders, the risks when you get it wrong, and how the mining sector can ensure that the next boom is a real opportunity for change.
Don't miss out - sign up for more exclusive content here
Five minutes with… Tracey Cooper, Executive Director at Mining Dialogues 360 Degrees: A South African based not-for-profit company facilitating dialogue and catalysing socio-economic development in the mining sector.
What do you do?
I am the founder of Mining Dialogues 360 Degrees, which is an independent, non-partisan organisation bringing together key stakeholders from the mining sector and local communities to facilitate evidence-based dialogue and robust discussion around the socio-economic development issues arising from mining activities. Our role is to help people find each other and come together to discuss difficult themes and then help them take the next step to translate that dialogue into collaborative and co-designed action.
Why did you set up Mining Dialogues 360 Degrees?
In 2012 I ran a three-day dialogue, which explored the nationalising of natural resources in South Africa. At the time, this was a very political debate and there was a need for a more objective, evidence-based conversation. Our team brought together all the major stakeholders in South Africa, alongside international experts from all over the world, to discuss the topic in a global context. The event was a real success and it led to a robust discussion and resulting report.
One month later the Marikana Massacre happened and many of the burning issues contributing that incident had been identified at our event. The massacre showed the urgency for more of this type of dialogue and it went from being a one-off national discussion to the need to establish a structure to host ongoing discussions.
Have you seen a change over the last decade because of this ongoing dialogue?
There has definitely been a change in recognition by the operators of their need to engage better; whether they do it better is a different matter. Ten years ago, the ‘social licence to operate’ was very low down on the list of operational risks - if it made the list at all – since then it’s been steadily climbing and in the last three years it’s been the number one risk across many indexes.
Unfortunately, the reality is that lots of companies have beautifully written sustainability reports and glossy annual reports, but there remains a vast chasm between what is written in those documents and the lived experience of communities on the ground.
What do you think are the main issues in the sector?
The fundamental problem is a huge trust deficit between mining companies and mine host communities. These two groups speak such different languages (both literally and figuratively) that it can often be difficult for them to find each other and communicate effectively. Mining companies always talk about their ‘beneficiaries’ and this is an immediate indicator of a power imbalance that needs to be adjusted. If we frame the relationship as a ‘partnership’ then it changes the dynamic from the community being dependents to becoming real partners. It encourages them to step up and participate more in the process and to take responsibility and ownership for what they want and are trying to achieve.
I also think that internally in companies the community development role is still not given enough weight at board level. Often it is still in slotted in under the umbrella of corporate affairs. This is a critical issue because you can’t expect someone who deals with shareholders and investors to have the same skillset that’s required to do development work with communities. You need to carve out a specialist role in your management structure for development practitioners. And if social risk is the number one issue, then your HR team should be scouring the earth to find the best development practitioners and giving them a really heavy weighted role in the decision-making process.
Can you see commercial benefits for companies who do this properly?
Now that ESG reporting is becoming mainstream there is a realisation that what were once considered ‘soft issues’ are actually ‘hard issues’, and in fact a major business imperative. It’s getting more difficult for mining and other major companies to raise funds without being able to show that they are compliant with ESG requirements and there is a new generation of investors coming through who want the assurance that the companies they are investing in are ‘walking the talk’, taking care of the earth, taking care of communities, and using best practice while delivering results.
I think there is still a big lag in mid to lower tier companies – those that are not publicly listed and so are not as scrutinised as multinationals or major players. There are still a lot of these companies that are not compliant or use token CSR initiatives, such as building schools and clinics to pacify local people, rather than investing in their upliftment and enabling them to create economic livelihoods that are diversified away from mining operations. A lot more work needs to be done in these spaces.
I am the founder of Mining Dialogues 360 Degrees, which is an independent, non-partisan organisation bringing together key stakeholders from the mining sector and local communities to facilitate evidence-based dialogue and robust discussion around the socio-economic development issues arising from mining activities. Our role is to help people find each other and come together to discuss difficult themes and then help them take the next step to translate that dialogue into collaborative and co-designed action.
Why did you set up Mining Dialogues 360 Degrees?
In 2012 I ran a three-day dialogue, which explored the nationalising of natural resources in South Africa. At the time, this was a very political debate and there was a need for a more objective, evidence-based conversation. Our team brought together all the major stakeholders in South Africa, alongside international experts from all over the world, to discuss the topic in a global context. The event was a real success and it led to a robust discussion and resulting report.
One month later the Marikana Massacre happened and many of the burning issues contributing that incident had been identified at our event. The massacre showed the urgency for more of this type of dialogue and it went from being a one-off national discussion to the need to establish a structure to host ongoing discussions.
Have you seen a change over the last decade because of this ongoing dialogue?
There has definitely been a change in recognition by the operators of their need to engage better; whether they do it better is a different matter. Ten years ago, the ‘social licence to operate’ was very low down on the list of operational risks - if it made the list at all – since then it’s been steadily climbing and in the last three years it’s been the number one risk across many indexes.
Unfortunately, the reality is that lots of companies have beautifully written sustainability reports and glossy annual reports, but there remains a vast chasm between what is written in those documents and the lived experience of communities on the ground.
What do you think are the main issues in the sector?
The fundamental problem is a huge trust deficit between mining companies and mine host communities. These two groups speak such different languages (both literally and figuratively) that it can often be difficult for them to find each other and communicate effectively. Mining companies always talk about their ‘beneficiaries’ and this is an immediate indicator of a power imbalance that needs to be adjusted. If we frame the relationship as a ‘partnership’ then it changes the dynamic from the community being dependents to becoming real partners. It encourages them to step up and participate more in the process and to take responsibility and ownership for what they want and are trying to achieve.
I also think that internally in companies the community development role is still not given enough weight at board level. Often it is still in slotted in under the umbrella of corporate affairs. This is a critical issue because you can’t expect someone who deals with shareholders and investors to have the same skillset that’s required to do development work with communities. You need to carve out a specialist role in your management structure for development practitioners. And if social risk is the number one issue, then your HR team should be scouring the earth to find the best development practitioners and giving them a really heavy weighted role in the decision-making process.
Can you see commercial benefits for companies who do this properly?
Now that ESG reporting is becoming mainstream there is a realisation that what were once considered ‘soft issues’ are actually ‘hard issues’, and in fact a major business imperative. It’s getting more difficult for mining and other major companies to raise funds without being able to show that they are compliant with ESG requirements and there is a new generation of investors coming through who want the assurance that the companies they are investing in are ‘walking the talk’, taking care of the earth, taking care of communities, and using best practice while delivering results.
I think there is still a big lag in mid to lower tier companies – those that are not publicly listed and so are not as scrutinised as multinationals or major players. There are still a lot of these companies that are not compliant or use token CSR initiatives, such as building schools and clinics to pacify local people, rather than investing in their upliftment and enabling them to create economic livelihoods that are diversified away from mining operations. A lot more work needs to be done in these spaces.
Are there any learnings that apply to other sectors?
In our experience there are two key issues that always come up:
In our experience there are two key issues that always come up:
- Access to information. Local communities often feel as though companies aren’t sharing information or are being selective about what they share in order to bolster their side of the argument. Data has become weaponised and this fuels this the distrust narrative. Removing barriers to information is key to moving conversations forward. This means having independently verified data and a common evidence base available on an open access platform that everyone can see and use. It also means taking into account education, literacy and language barriers when it comes to how you present information. Everything should be highly visual, engaging and accessible. Not just a library of PDFs.
2. The second thing is that the people who attend town hall meetings or participate in consultation processes are usually not representative of the broader community and this means you can end up excluding people from the conversation. To be effectively inclusive, you need to reach deeper and beyond those who have the means or agendas for participating in consultations by investing in actively supporting and building community self-organisation.
We’re currently working on a new socio-economic technology platform to address these issues in our sector. The idea is to provide qualitative insights and quantitative linked data with independent and evidence-based research that reaches deeper into communities to really understand their concerns, perceptions and dreams.
Do you see an appetite for change in the mining sector?
Yes. There is a real boom happening in the mining industry at the moment. Last time the commodity cycle peaked was in the early 2000s and the government, regulatory bodies, companies and social economic development agencies didn’t harness the full socio-economic potential of the massive profits that were generated. So as the cycle starts to spin up again there is definitely an appetite to make sure we don’t make the same mistakes.
This isn’t about criticising what happened in the past, but about looking at the future and the benefits and opportunities for long-term development. It’s about framing the conversation in a positive light. How do we bring the right people together? What can be done from a government regulation point of view to enable the private sector in development? How do companies set up and deploy their social licence to operate? What do communities really need and want? What are the alternative livelihood avenues for people in the region that would allow them to become less dependent on mining? How can we help people working in relevant organisations to have the confidence to drive that message and culture shift through their organisation?
All these things essentially mitigate risk because when people in local communities have food on the table and have purposeful work, they have the opportunity to develop their own longer term livelihoods and economic opportunities. I see great potential for us to harness that. And if we can get it right in South Africa, where we speak many different languages and contend with deep legacy issues, then it could be a best practice model that can be applied to other countries around the world. The mining sector has the opportunity right now to not just change the narrative through PR and spin but to actually lead the way through good practice to a more sustainable and resilient future.
This article first appeared as part of the Social Value Files, sign up here to keep up to date.
We’re currently working on a new socio-economic technology platform to address these issues in our sector. The idea is to provide qualitative insights and quantitative linked data with independent and evidence-based research that reaches deeper into communities to really understand their concerns, perceptions and dreams.
Do you see an appetite for change in the mining sector?
Yes. There is a real boom happening in the mining industry at the moment. Last time the commodity cycle peaked was in the early 2000s and the government, regulatory bodies, companies and social economic development agencies didn’t harness the full socio-economic potential of the massive profits that were generated. So as the cycle starts to spin up again there is definitely an appetite to make sure we don’t make the same mistakes.
This isn’t about criticising what happened in the past, but about looking at the future and the benefits and opportunities for long-term development. It’s about framing the conversation in a positive light. How do we bring the right people together? What can be done from a government regulation point of view to enable the private sector in development? How do companies set up and deploy their social licence to operate? What do communities really need and want? What are the alternative livelihood avenues for people in the region that would allow them to become less dependent on mining? How can we help people working in relevant organisations to have the confidence to drive that message and culture shift through their organisation?
All these things essentially mitigate risk because when people in local communities have food on the table and have purposeful work, they have the opportunity to develop their own longer term livelihoods and economic opportunities. I see great potential for us to harness that. And if we can get it right in South Africa, where we speak many different languages and contend with deep legacy issues, then it could be a best practice model that can be applied to other countries around the world. The mining sector has the opportunity right now to not just change the narrative through PR and spin but to actually lead the way through good practice to a more sustainable and resilient future.
This article first appeared as part of the Social Value Files, sign up here to keep up to date.
Tracey Cooper is a founding member and Executive Director of Mining Dialogues 360. She leads a collective of experts who produce empirical, evidence based research that provides the basis for frank and robust dialogue on socio-economic issues arising from the extractive industry.
Connect with her on Facebook, Twitter, or Linkedin.
All photos are provided with permission by Mining Dialogues 360.
Connect with her on Facebook, Twitter, or Linkedin.
All photos are provided with permission by Mining Dialogues 360.
