MIN ​ I NG CONTRA ​ C TS

CONTENTS
F O R EWO R D
Foreword

1 2 5 6 12 22 30 31 33

C O N​ TEXT
The Min​ ing In​ dust​ ry Laws and Contra​ cts The Negotiat​ ing Table

MINE O P​ ER A ​ TIO NS
In​ troduc​ tion to Mine Op ​ era​ tions Legal Re​ gimes

I

Re​ con​ nais​ sance and Ex​ p lora​ tion Feasibil​ ity Pro​ duc​ tion Closure

37 41 54 57 61 62 65 94 106 112 113 122 142 153 154 155 167 175 176 182 187 II

F ISC​ AL IS​ SUES
Money Matt​ ers Fisc​ al Re​ gimes Speci​ al Chal​ lenges How to Spend It

EN​ V IR O N​ M ENT​ A L A ND SO C I​ AL IS​ SUES
What Are the Is​ sues? Using the Contra​ ct to Man​ age the Is​ sues Fin​ d​ ing Guidan​ ce and An​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min​ ing Contra​ ct

EC O NO M IC LI​ NKA GES
In​ troduc​ tion Min​ ing and Local Con​ tent Min​ ing and In​ frastruc​ ture

LEGA L A ND NEGO TIA ​ TIO N C O N​ SID ER A ​ TIO NS
So You Think You Need Help After All? 170 Years at the Table: Con​ fess​ ions of a Negotiator Dis​ p ute Avoidan​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion

Plann​ ing for Troub​ le To Pub​ lish or Not to Pub​ lish?

197 202 207 208 214

AP​ PEND IX
Glos​ sa​ ry List of Com​ mon​ ly Re​ feren​ ced Contra​ cts

III

FOREWORD
FORE WORD

FOREWORD
We are happy to pre​ sent the first edi​ tion of “Min​ ing Contra​ cts - How to Read and Un​ derstand Them.” Like its sist​ er book on oil contra​ cts pub​ lished at the end of 2012, it has been pro​ duced in just five days as a col​ lec​ tive ef​ fort using the Book Sprint tech​ nique. The aut​ hors and col​ laborators began work by the shore of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland, USA, on Mon​ day, De​ cemb​ er 8 and fin​ is​ hed on Friday, De​ cemb​ er 13, 2013. A Book Sprint is a facilitated pro​ cess through which a small group of con​ tributors with a wide range of ex​ p ert​ ise and per​ spec​ tives come togeth​ er to write a book col​ laborative​ ly in five days. The aut​ hors star​ ted with a title only, spent a day de​ cid​ ing on an out​ line, and then wrote, il​ lustrated, edited, pro​ ofed and “pub​ lished” the book in the re​ main​ ing four days. Build​ ing the book in a sprint has re​ sul​ ted in a com​ p rehen​ sive re​ sour​ ce that be​ nefits from the dynamic in​ terac​ tion of a di​ v er​ se group of lead​ ing ex​ p erts work​ ing at the in​ ter​ sec​ tion of min​ ing and economic de​ v elop ​ ment. As with the oil book, the Book Sprint met​ hodology has two major im​ p lica​ tions for its con​ tent. First, it is a work of opt​ imiza​ tion, not per​ fec​ tion. We are con​ fident in the qual​ ity and the value of the con​ tent, but de​ spite the aut​ hors’ best ef​ forts dur​ ing the sprint, we are sure the oc​ casion​ al fac​ tu​ al error or typo will have re​ mained, and there will cer​ tain​ ly be gaps. These are un​ avoid​ able when writ​ ing a book of over 150 pages in under a week. We hope this book be​ comes a li​ v​ ing docu​ ment; that this edi​ tion is just a first pass at a work that will be up ​ dated and ex​ p an​ ded over time. We in​ v ite our col​ leagues to critic​ ize vigorous​ ly, and in this way help our or​ ganiza​ tions and our partn​ ers im​ p rove the text for the next edi​ tion.

2

Foreword

Second, not every con​ tributor - nor every or​ ganiza​ tion spon​ sor​ ing this ef​ fort - ag​ rees with every de​ tail or judg​ ment in the book. We do, howev ​ er, share the vis​ ion that a re​ sour​ ce of this kind is needed, to equip govern​ ments, citizens and other stakehold​ ers to bet​ t​ er un​ derstand the con​ tent and the im​ p act of min​ ing contra​ cts so that they can negotiate, an​ alyze and monitor contra​ cts more ef​ fective​ ly. We also all sup ​ p ort contra​ ct trans​ p aren​ cy, the idea that major extra​ ctive in​ dust​ ry ag​ ree​ ments should be pub​ lished to help build more trust and bet​ t​ er gover​ nance around these in​ dust​ ries. The an​ alysis and quota​ tions in this book, of contra​ cts from Australia, Ecuador, Guinea, Li​ beria, Mon​ golia, Niger, Peru, Sier​ ra Leone and el​ sewhere, are just a small sam​ p le of what is pos​ sible if more contra​ cts come into the pub​ lic space. Apart from that, the goal is for this book to stand as an in​ for​ mation​ al in​ troduc​ tion to this com​ p lex and often con​ trover​ si​ al sub​ ject. There were li​ v e​ ly de​ bates among the aut​ hors throug​ hout the week, and per​ son​ al op ​ in​ ions im​ p licit​ ly in​ form the way the aut​ hors have sequen​ ced and addres​ sed vari​ ous sub​ jects. This book is the pro​ duct of team​ work, not group think or a “con​ sen​ sus” docu​ ment. We trust that rea​ d​ ers will quick​ ly re​ cogn​ ize, as we have, the value of this uni​ q ue draft​ ing pro​ cess. The or​ ganiz​ ing in​ stitu​ tions are: the In​ ter​ nation​ al Sen​ ior Lawy ​ ers Pro​ ject (ISLP), Op ​ enOil, Re​ v enue Watch Institute-Natural Re​ sour​ ce Chart​ er (RWI-NRC), and the Vale Col​ um​ bia Cent​ er on Sus​ tain​ able In​ ter​ nation​ al In​ v est​ ment (VCC). Some fin​ an​ ci​ al sup ​ p ort was pro​ vided from with​ in our or​ ganiza​ tions, and more was generous​ ly pro​ v ided by Australian Aid, the World Bank In​ stitute, the World Bank Sus​ tain​ able En​ er​ gy, Oil, Gas and Min​ ing unit, and the Ger​ man Feder​ al Minist​ ry for Economic Co​ opera​ tion and De​ v elop ​ ment (GMZ) through GIZ. Speci​ al thanks go to Anna Shakarova at ISLP for mobiliz​ ing such a wealth of legal ex​ p ert​ ise for the pro​ ject. The con​ tributors to this book are: Joseph Bell, of co​ un​ sel, Hogan Lovells, RWI-NRC and sec​ reta​ ry of the Board, ISLP; Zorigt Dashdorj, Mon​ golia De​ v elop ​ ment Strategy In​ stitute Board mem​ b​ er; Matthew Genas​ ci, RWI-NRC; Jeffrey David​ son, Robert M. Buc​ han De​ p art​ ment of Min​ ing, Queen's Uni​ v ers​ ity, Kingston, On​ tario; Juan José Her​ rera Extra​ ctive In​ dust​ ries Pro​ gram Co​ or​ dinator, Grupo Faro, Ecuador; Mic​ hael Jar​ v is, World Bank; Lise Johnson, VCC; Susan Ma​ p les, legal ad​ v isor; Her​ bert McLeod, lead​ er of the Sier​ ra Leone govern​ ment negotiat​ ing team for

3

Foreword

miner​ als; Sam G. Russ, De​ p uty Minist​ er for Op ​ era​ tions, Minist​ ry of Lands, Mines and En​ er​ gy, Li​ beria; Salli Anne Swartz, Partn​ er, Artus Wise Partn​ ers, Paris, ISLP Volun​ te​ er; Per​ rine Toledano, VCC; Johnny West, Open Oil; and Jeff Wood, Re​ tired Partn​ er, De​ bevo​ ise & Plimpton and Volun​ te​ er, ISLP. Adam Hyde, who in​ v en​ ted the Book Sprint tech​ nique, once again facilitated the book, as​ sis​ ted by Bar​ bara Rühling and Clara Roor​ da, Re​ search As​ sociate at VCC as tar​ get rea​ d​ er. The Book Sprint team also in​ cluded Hen​ rik van Leeuw​ en (grap ​ hic de​ sign), Raewyn White (re​ mote proof), and Eyal Holtzman & Myrthe Stel (HTML book de​ sign). We are also grate​ ful to De​ bevo​ ise & Plimpton for pro​ v id​ ing a pro​ of​ read​ er in the eleventh hour. The book is is​ sued under Creative Com​ mons li​ cen​ se (CC BY SA). This means an​ y one is free to ex​ cerpt, trans​ late, copy and re-use for any pur​ p ose with​ out seek​ ing per​ miss​ ion – as long as you use the attribu​ tion specifica​ tion below and your work is also is​ sued under Creative Com​ mons li​ cen​ se. Going for​ ward, we anti​ cipate trans​ la​ tions into multi​ p le lan​ guages, and that the book will pro​ v ide materi​ al to be in​ teg​ rated into train​ ing co​ ur​ ses run by our or​ ganiza​ tions and oth​ ers. One of the fal​ la​ cies some​ times raised by those who op ​ p ose contra​ ct trans​ p aren​ cy is that the broad​ er pub​ lic is not equip ​ p ed to read contra​ cts or an​ alyze them in any meaning​ ful way. We hope that this book will be​ come a valu​ able tool to broad​ en and en​ rich pub​ lic de​ bate of the min​ ing in​ dust​ ry, by and for the hundreds of mill​ ions of peo​ p le around the world for whom it is an issue of vital pub​ lic poli​ cy. Daniel Kauf​ mann, Pre​ sident, RWI-NRC Garth Meintjes, Ex​ ecutive Di​ rec​ tor, ISLP Lisa Sachs, Di​ rec​ tor, VCC Johnny West, Found​ er, Op ​ enOil

4

CON ​ T EXT
THE M IN​ ING IN​ DUS T​ RY L AWS AND CONTRA​ CTS THE NE G OTIAT​ ING TAB L E

THE MIN ​ I NG IN ​ D UST ​ RY
The sig​ nifican​ ce of miner​ als and the uses they have ser​ v ed ac​ ross human his​ to​ ry can hard​ ly be over​ stated. Miner​ als are so im​ p or​ tant that ages of his​ to​ ry have been named for them: the Co​ pp​ er Age and the Iron Age. Mines have been dis​ covered dat​ ing to 40,000 years ago. Greeks, Romans and Egyp ​ tians wrote treatises about min​ ing thousands of years ago. Na​ tions have come to great​ ness and fall​ en on the ris​ ing and ebb​ ing tides of miner​ al com​ mod​ ity prices. Silv ​ er and gold have taken co​ unt​ ries to faraway lands to find more. Every con​ tinent has had min​ ing of ores in some form or fash​ ion in its his​ to​ ry. Min​ ing is, in many re​ spects, an​ cient and uni​ v ers​ al. And it re​ mains vital​ ly im​ p or​ tant today. As min​ ing has be​ come more of an in​ dustri​ al pro​ cess in many parts of the world, min​ ing contra​ cts govern​ ing that pro​ cess have pro​ liferated as well. And, as re​ lative​ ly “easy ac​ cess” de​ p osits are be​ com​ ing fewer and farth​ er bet​ ween, min​ ing com​ p an​ ies are going to new loc​ a​ tions to hunt for new miner​ al de​ p osits. This chan​ ge has re​ sul​ ted in the ris​ ing sig​ nifican​ ce of the miner​ als sec​ tor in the glob​ al economy. One study re​ cent​ ly showed the numb​ er of econom​ ies which de​ p end on min​ ing rose from 46 to 61 in the per​ iod bet​ ween 1996 and 2011 - and the de​ gree of de​ p end​ ence also in​ creased, ac​ cord​ ing to Ox​ ford Poli​ cy Man​ age​ ment. Some of these co​ unt​ ries are among the world’s poorest. Oth​ ers are among the world’s wealthiest.

6

Con ​ text

Mine de​ v elop ​ ment holds much pro​ m​ ise for host co​ unt​ ries as the key pro​ mot​ er of growth through ex​ p ort earn​ ings, economic ex​ p ans​ ion, even​ tu​ al di​ v er​ sifica​ tion of the economy, and mas​ sive pover​ ty al​ levia​ tion. Fluc​ tuat​ ing but ris​ ing de​ mand for miner​ als ap ​ p ears to pro​ v ide a log​ ical and economic way to build new in​ frastruc​ ture in rapid​ ly de​ v elop ​ ing na​ tions and re​ p lace the old in ma​ ture econom​ ies. An as​ p ect of miner​ al re​ sour​ ces drives the dynamics that un​ der​ p in much of this book: miner​ als are de​ p let​ able, non-renewable re​ sour​ ces. When they are gone, they are gone forev ​ er. The fin​ ite na​ ture of miner​ als makes them uni​ q ue as com​ p ared to other in​ dust​ ries and re​ v enue sour​ ces for com​ p an​ ies, govern​ ments, and citizens in resource-rich co​ unt​ ries. But past ex​ p eri​ ence also sug​ gests that un​ less there is prudent man​ age​ ment of these re​ sour​ ces, these op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies could be lost. Or, worse, cat​ astrop ​ hic en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al con​ sequ​ ences can occur. "Be care​ ful to learn the na​ ture of the loc​ al​ ity, its roads, its salubr​ ity, its over​ lord, and the neighbours.” “The miner should not start min​ ing op ​ era​ tions in a dis​ trict which is op ​ p res​ sed by a tyrant." This is stun​ ning​ ly good ad​ v ice for an​ y one start​ ing out on a min​ ing pro​ ject. No, it does not come from one of the CEOs of the major min​ ing com​ p an​ ies, but in​ stead it comes from Geor​ gius Ag​ ricola, from his De Re Metal​ lica, Book 1 writt​ en in 1556. You read that right: 1556. And just as natur​ al re​ sour​ ce extra​ c​ tion has been around for a long time, so have the clust​ er of is​ sues that have come to be as​ sociated with it. Al​ though "Re​ sour​ ce Curse" was only co​ ined as a phrase at the end of the 20th cen​ tu​ ry, its fea​ tures were also around in Ag​ ricola's time. Economic his​ torians have de​ v eloped theo​ ries to de​ scribe how, after the "dis​ cove​ ry" of the Americas by Col​ um​ bus, his im​ p eri​ al mast​ er, Spain, fell prey in the six​ teenth and seven​ teenth cen​ tu​ ries to th​ ings like a drop in pro​ duc​ tiv ​ ity in tradition​ al li​ velihoods, cor​ rup ​ tion, polit​ ical and soci​ al stag​ na​ tion and con​ flict - be​ cause of huge amounts of gold ar​ riv ​ ing from the New World.

7

The Min ​ ing In ​ dust​ ry

The min​ ing in​ dust​ ry has of co​ ur​ se be​ come far more in​ dustri​ al since the days of Ag​ ricola. This book is, lar​ ge​ ly, about a min​ ing in​ dust​ ry that he would bare​ ly re​ cogn​ ize. One with earth-movers larg​ er than a house. Pits that go over a kilomet​ er into the earth and mine sites so big they are visib​ le with the naked eye from space. An in​ dust​ ry dominated by mac​ hines: mech​ anized water treat​ ment facilit​ ies, huge sites with just a han​ d​ ful of en​ gine​ ers on site man​ ag​ ing the mac​ hines, not leagues of peo​ p le scratch​ ing out ore by hand. Giant mines that con​ sume as well as pro​ duce voracious​ ly. Sites that need an electric​ ity plant big en​ ough to power a city, en​ ough water to re​ duce a river, with their own roads and rail​ ways, their own settle​ ments and some​ times secur​ ity for​ ces. And with scale and mac​ hines have come capit​ al in​ v est​ ment on an un​ p receden​ ted scale and, ac​ cording​ ly, lengthy contra​ cts and de​ tailed laws. Un​ less Ag​ ricola were also a lawy ​ er, and his​ to​ ry some​ how for​ got this de​ tail, he would hard​ ly re​ cogn​ ize the sub​ ject of this book: min​ ing contra​ cts. The rest of this book will focus primari​ ly on min​ ing contra​ cts and the legal frameworks sur​ round​ ing them. But these contra​ cts re​ flect the mar​ ket for​ ces and rea​ lit​ ies of sup ​ p​ ly and de​ mand. The real world drives the legal framework. In order to un​ derstand the full im​ p lica​ tions of these ag​ ree​ ments and their ramifica​ tions for the de​ v elop ​ ment of host co​ unt​ ries, it is use​ ful to ex​ amine the op ​ era​ tions of the sec​ tor at the glob​ al level, how the mar​ kets func​ tion and are struc​ tured, and evaluate the links in the sup ​ p​ ly and value chains for the average miner​ al.

M OR E OF J US T AB OUT E VE R Y​ TH​ ING
The big pic​ ture for the way min​ ing has evol​ v ed in the last two de​ cades is quite simp ​ ly: “more”. Just more. More of every ​ th​ ing. More min​ ing com​ p an​ ies spend​ ing more money to pro​ duce more stuff which is more speculated on and then sold for more money to meet more de​ mand than ever be​ fore.

8

Con ​ text

Ac​ cord​ ing to The Econom​ ist, lead​ ing co​ unt​ ries con​ sumed 50% more tin in 2011 than at the turn of the cen​ tu​ ry, 60% more nic​ kel, 60% more lead, 60% more coal, 40% more zinc, 30% more co​ pp​ er and 20% more silv ​ er and gold. Iron ore pro​ duc​ tion has near​ ly tri​ p led in that time. A bi​ ll​ ion ton​ nes more are pro​ duced today than at the end of the 20th cen​ tu​ ry. Prices have also roc​ keted. Gold, silv ​ er, lead, zinc, nic​ kel and co​ pp​ er all tri​ p led in price in the first de​ cade of the cen​ tu​ ry, and al​ though some com​ modit​ ies have fall​ en back from 2010-11 highs, they are still all high in his​ tor​ ical terms and many an​ alysts ex​ p ect de​ mand to stay strong, with the oc​ casion​ al blip. Some econom​ ists talk of the world now being in a com​ modit​ ies “super​ cyc​ le” such as has only oc​ cur​ red three or four times since the In​ dustri​ al Re​ v olu​ tion. Part of this, it is true, can be ex​ p lained by the world's ris​ ing popula​ tion – there are an​ oth​ er bi​ ll​ ion peo​ p le alive on the planet since the year 2000. But an​ oth​ er, per​ haps larg​ er part of it is ris​ ing li​ v​ ing stan​ dards, as parts of what used to be cal​ led the de​ v elop ​ ing world rush towards pro​ sper​ ity as best they can. China's rise as glob​ al “swing con​ sum​ er” of a numb​ er of com​ modit​ ies has been stun​ ning​ ly fast. Twen​ ty years ago, it bought eight per​ cent of iron ore traded on world mar​ kets. Now it is 60%. Ac​ ross met​ als as a whole, its share has risen from 3% to 30% and that de​ mand shapes the glob​ al mar​ ket for in​ dividu​ al com​ modit​ ies in very par​ ticular ways. De​ mand for co​ pp​ er is li​ ke ​ ly to re​ main strong, for ex​ am​ p le, be​ cause China is plann​ ing to add 700 gigawatts to its domes​ tic grid by 2020 and co​ pp​ er fibre is an in​ tegr​ al part of grid net​ works. China’s de​ mand for im​ p or​ ted tin is also li​ ke ​ ly to rise sharp ​ ly as its bi​ ll​ ion con​ sum​ ers eat more pro​ ces​ sed food. There are also more min​ ing com​ p an​ ies on the scene now. Ris​ ing de​ mand has led “junior” less capitalized com​ p an​ ies into more re​ mote and harsh​ er loc​ a​ tions in more speculative ex​ p lora​ tion, where they may seek quick​ er re​ turns. Other com​ p an​ ies may be large but new to the in​ ter​ nation​ al scene, lured out of nation​ al strongholds by crazy de​ mand and prices. And just as pro​ duc​ tion, con​ sump ​ tion and price all shot up in the last de​ cade, so did speculative in​ v est​ ment in fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stru​ ments around com​ modit​ ies. These in​ stru​ -

9

The Min ​ ing In ​ dust​ ry

ments in​ itial​ ly al​ lowed trad​ ers who needed real quan​ tit​ ies of stuff to lock in their price at some fu​ ture date, or to “hedge” the price against other as​ sets, and they have been en​ thusias​ tical​ ly em​ braced by in​ v est​ ment banks and funds. The Uni​ ted Na​ tions es​ timates the numb​ er of com​ mod​ ity fu​ tures contra​ cts traded more than doub​ led every year from 2001 to 2011 as a slew of com​ mod​ ity trad​ ing in​ dexes sprang up. The role of this “fin​ an​ cializa​ tion” is hotly dis​ p uted. Some say it has driv ​ en the price rises, oth​ ers say it has pro​ vided li​ q uid​ ity at a time of un​ p receden​ ted growth in de​ mand. But it is un​ like​ ly to go away. Of co​ ur​ se, the clear trend toward “more” and “bi​ gg​ er” has one im​ p or​ tant caveat: Small​ er mines, and ar​ tisan​ al mines in par​ ticular, still play an im​ p or​ tant role in many co​ unt​ ries. And these can have dis​ p ropor​ tionate​ ly large im​ p acts - on em​ p loy ​ ment, on the en​ v iron​ ment, and on the soci​ al fab​ ric. Throug​ hout this book we deal al​ most ex​ clusive​ ly with in​ dustri​ al min​ ing, but it is im​ p or​ tant to re​ memb​ er that this is not the whole story. We live in a globalized world, and the peo​ p le and com​ munit​ ies af​ fected by min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are clear​ ly aware of these trends, even if they may not pore over the de​ tails. We are once again in a glob​ al ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions game which is hard to balan​ ce. The World Gold Co​ un​ cil an​ noun​ ced that the gold in​ dust​ ry created $78 bi​ ll​ ion of value in the glob​ al economy in 2012, but the Al Jazeera pre​ sent​ er asked their spokes​ man why only an eighth of that went to the work​ ers. Com​ p an​ ies stress the pre​ ssure on their bot​ tom line as costs have skyroc​ keted. Meanwhile the strik​ ing min​ ers of Marikana were de​ mand​ ing their wages be tri​ p led when they were shot dead in a con​ fron​ ta​ tion with the South Af​ rican police. Other mine riots have brok​ en out re​ cent​ ly in Guatemala, Zam​ bia, and Ar​ gentina to name a few. A Chat​ ham House re​ p ort states that there were 126 ac​ tive local dis​ p utes over min​ ing in Peru alone. These pre​ ssures with​ in the min​ ing sec​ tor, co​ up​ led with broad​ er trends toward in​ creased cor​ p orate ac​ coun​ tabil​ ity and in​ creased at​ ten​ tion on the broad​ er im​ p acts of min​ ing on society, have spur​ red a numb​ er of in​ novative in​ itiatives such as the Extra​ ctive In​ dust​ ry Trans​ p aren​ cy In​ itiative (EITI). Sever​ al Af​ rican govern​ ments have an​ noun​ ced they are re​ v iew​ ing their min​ ing contra​ cts be​ cause of widespread per​ cep ​ tions they have not cap ​ tured en​ ough of the last de​ cade's “super​ p rofits”; other govern​ ments around the world, in​ clud​ ing in Mexico, Australia, and

10

Con ​ text

Quebec, have an​ noun​ ced chan​ ges to their tax re​ gimes aim​ ing to cap ​ ture more of the re​ sour​ ce rent; and In​ donesia's par​ lia​ ment is in​ troduc​ ing an ex​ p ort tax on some miner​ als in an ef​ fort to en​ courage be​ neficia​ tion. One re​ spon​ se by a left-wing move​ ment cen​ tered in Latin America seeks to de​ fine “postextractivism”. Since gett​ ing miner​ als out of the ground tri​ gg​ ers so much tur​ bul​ ence, they argue, the only way out is to sharp ​ ly re​ duce its pro​ min​ ence in economic de​ v elop ​ ment, and re​ s​ ist glob​ al for​ ces that seek to extra​ ct it. There is fer​ ment every ​ where, even in Swiss vil​ lages where re​ sidents elec​ ted to re​ p at​ riate some of what they re​ gar​ ded as ex​ cess pro​ fits ear​ ned by com​ mod​ ity trad​ ing com​ pan​ ies based in Swit​ zerland, such as Glen​ core, to sour​ ce co​ unt​ ries in Af​ rica. Con​ cern is on the rise for min​ ing com​ p an​ ies as well. De​ spite what could be viewed as an in​ exor​ able rise in com​ mod​ ity prices and a min​ ing boom that could hard​ ly see an​ y th​ ing more than a "blip" in miner​ als prices, PwC is re​ p ort​ ing that in​ v es​ tor con​ fid​ ence in min​ ing com​ p an​ ies is de​ clin​ ing re​ lative to the broad​ er equ​ ity mar​ kets. And al​ though pro​ fits rea​ ched re​ cord highs in 2011, they came against re​ cord costs, which meant that pro​ fit mar​ gins, and the value of such com​ p an​ ies, stayed flat or even di​ p ped. Since then, prices have come off their his​ toric highs, but costs have re​ mained high and the com​ p an​ ies are in troub​ le. Min​ ing stocks fell near​ ly 20% in the first four months of 2013. De​ loit​ te has chimed in as well: the list of pro​ blems min​ ing com​ p an​ ies faced in 2013 in​ cludes ris​ ing costs, fall​ ing prices, supply-demand im​ balan​ ces, and de​ creased pro​ duc​ tiv ​ ity. Urg​ ing com​ p an​ ies not simp ​ ly to "wait out the swing", their an​ nu​ al re​ v iew en​ couraged com​ p an​ ies to em​ brace in​ nova​ tion, in​ clud​ ing sys​ tematic use of soci​ al media to in​ crease their en​ gage​ ment with com​ munit​ ies. Hence the need for this book which seeks to de​ scribe neut​ ral​ ly, from an in​ for​ mation​ al point of view, the legal and contra​ ctu​ al frameworks that sur​ round min​ ing op ​ era​ tions around the world.

11

LAWS AND CONTRA ​ C TS
Every co​ unt​ ry has its own uni​ q ue his​ to​ ry, peo​ p les, cul​ ture, food, music. Is it in​ fluen​ ced by other cuisines, lan​ guages, and cul​ tures? Yes. But it is al​ ways, in some way, uni​ q ue. The min​ ing laws and contra​ cts in any co​ unt​ ry are similar​ ly uni​ q ue. It is im​ p or​ tant to stress at the out​ set that this book can​ not and will not cover every contra​ ct type, every ​ th​ ing in a miner​ als law, or every law re​ lat​ ing to min​ ing for any given co​ unt​ ry. A contra​ ct or li​ cen​ se often re​ q uires a re​ fer​ ence to a law, which may re​ fer​ ence an​ oth​ er law, that then re​ fer​ ences sever​ al sets of re​ gula​ tions. Look​ ing for an an​ sw​ er to a par​ ticular ques​ tion re​ gard​ ing a specific pro​ ject can send a per​ son on a long jour​ ney ac​ ross numer​ ous ar​ ticles, clauses, phrases, and sub-clauses. Given that com​ p lex​ ity, this book pro​ v ides a road map help ​ ing to loc​ ate what you can find; a guide on how to get to cer​ tain places in the legal framework; an approach to an​ swer​ ing ques​ tions. Some re​ lative​ ly com​ mon prin​ ci​ p les help that task. No matt​ er what the legal sys​ tem is, a min​ ing com​ p any will al​ ways seek a re​ cog​ nized legal right to en​ gage in min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies from the state. Dif​ ferent li​ cen​ ses will cover dif​ ferent phases of the min​ ing pro​ ject, in​ clud​ ing ex​ p lora​ tion, pro​ duc​ tion, and re​ clama​ tion. While most co​ unt​ ries in the world have min​ ing codes (or min​ ing laws) govern​ ing how they grant these rights and re​ gulate these pro​ ces​ ses, even if there is a co​ unt​ ry that does not have a min​ ing code, the state can issue de​ crees, ex​ ecutive ord​ ers or per​ haps enter into contra​ cts in the ab​ s​ ence of a min​ ing law. The ac​ q uisi​ tion of a li​ cen​ se or contra​ ct doesn’t neces​ sari​ ly mean that the ow​ nership of the sub-soil re​ sour​ ces is also trans​ fer​ red. In fact, in most cases, the state re​ tains ow​ -

12

Con ​ text

nership over the sub-soil re​ sour​ ces. The state's ow​ nership of the sub-soil in most cases is the rationale for the govern​ ment to im​ p ose a "royal​ ty" (see the "Fisc​ al Is​ sues" sec​ tion). Only in a han​ d​ ful of cases, in​ clud​ ing the Uni​ ted States and some Canadian pro​ v in​ ces, is ow​ nership held by the owner of the land sur​ face. The whole point of a li​ cen​ se or contra​ ct is to secure an ex​ clusive right to un​ der​ take a par​ ticular ac​ tiv ​ ity on a par​ ticular piece of land. This is a fund​ ament​ al part of the miner​ als law in any co​ unt​ ry, and is addres​ sed this sec​ tion through an​ sw​ ers to some frequent​ ly asked ques​ tions on min​ ing laws and contra​ cts.

W H A T I S "T H E C O N T R A ​ C T "?
There are many types of contra​ cts in the miner​ als sec​ tor. This book con​ cerns it​ self with the contra​ ct that governs the re​ lationship bet​ ween the nation​ al govern​ ment and li​ cen​ se hold​ er for an ex​ p lora​ tion and/or min​ ing pro​ ject. In any legal framework, there is a contra​ ct that is "The Contra​ ct". This contra​ ct (or li​ cen​ se) pro​ v ides an ex​ clusive right to a com​ p any to ex​ p lore over a cer​ tain area of land and/or mine the dis​ covered re​ sour​ ces in ex​ chan​ ge for royalt​ ies, taxes, and other ob​ liga​ tions. These “contra​ cts” can have any numb​ er of names: Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment, Ex​ plora​ tion and Ex​ p loita​ tion Ag​ ree​ ment, Min​ ing In​ v est​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment, Min​ ing Contra​ ct, Min​ ing Con​ cess​ ion. The im​ p or​ tant point here is: do not get in​ v es​ ted in the name and what is on the out​ side cover of the docu​ ment. No matt​ er the name, these contra​ cts are all de​ al​ ing with the same kinds of is​ sues, though per​ haps at vary ​ ing levels of de​ tail. The dif​ fer​ ences in the name of the contra​ ct is not an im​ p or​ tant fac​ tor. It is most​ ly a matt​ er of his​ tor​ ical ac​ cident.

IS A M IN​ ING CONTRA​ CT T H E E X​ CE P​ TION OR THE RULE?
Contra​ cts are not re​ q uired or used by all co​ unt​ ries. The co​ unt​ ries that do not govern min​ ing by contra​ cts in​ stead de​ fine all rights and ob​ liga​ tions by the specific li​ cen​ se and general​ ly applic​ able laws. Com​ p rehen​ sive contra​ cts are more often em​ p loyed at the

13

Laws and Contra​ cts

early stages of miner​ al sec​ tor de​ v elop ​ ment when the legal framework is still evolv ​ ing. In con​ texts in which the legal framework and govern​ ment in​ stitu​ tions are fair​ ly strong, it is more li​ ke ​ ly that the part​ ies rely on general​ ly applic​ able law to govern their re​ spec​ tive rights and ob​ liga​ tions. In this kind of en​ v iron​ ment com​ p an​ ies can rely not only on the com​ p rehen​ sive na​ ture of the legal framework, but also on the re​ lative stabil​ ity of the legal en​ v iron​ ment and trans​ p arent gover​ nance mech​ an​ isms that guaran​ tee the safety of their in​ v est​ ment. For in​ stan​ ce, pro​ v in​ ces in Canada such as British Col​ um​ bia and On​ tario do not have for​ mal​ ly writt​ en contra​ cts bet​ ween the govern​ ment and the com​ p any, though there are vari​ ous other contra​ cts in​ v ol​ v ed, in​ clud​ ing contra​ cts with the in​ digen​ ous com​ mun​ ity. Similar​ ly, contra​ cts are not used at all in South Af​ rica, also a co​ unt​ ry with a long his​ to​ ry of min​ ing.

DOE S THE L AW TAK E PRE ​ CE D​ E NCE OVE R THE CONTRA​ CT?
Now this ques​ tion has an in​ terest​ ing an​ sw​ er. Theoretical​ ly, the an​ sw​ er is very clear: there is a hierarchy of laws, with the Con​ stitu​ tion at the top, then laws, re​ gula​ tions, and contra​ cts sitt​ ing way down at the bot​ tom. Laws take pre​ ced​ ence.

14

Con ​ text

But theo​ ry does not al​ ways match rea​ l​ ity. When you get into the real world, the an​ sw​ er may be quite dif​ ferent. There are cases where contra​ cts are specifical​ ly de​ sig​ ned to take pre​ ced​ ence over domes​ tic laws (though some​ times the laws will not allow this). Further​ more, there are legal stabil​ ity clauses and ag​ ree​ ments that may af​ fect the hierarchy of laws. This topic will be treated in more de​ tail in vari​ ous other sec​ tions of the book. Howev ​ er, as it was men​ tioned ear​ li​ er, the more com​ p rehen​ sive the domes​ tic legal framework, the strong​ er the ten​ den​ cy is for domes​ tic laws to take pre​ ced​ ence.

15

Laws and Contra​ cts

WHAT AB OUT COM ​ MUN​ ITY DE ​ VE L OP​ M E NT AG ​ REE​ M E NTS , L OCAL AG ​ REE​ M E NTS , AND OTHE R CONTRA​ CTS ? WHE RE DO THE Y FIT INTO THE PIC​ TURE?
There are a numb​ er of contra​ cts that may also be sig​ ned in ad​ di​ tion to "The Contra​ ct" bet​ ween a com​ p any and the nation​ al level govern​ ment. These will serve a dif​ ferent func​ tion from grant​ ing the ex​ clusive right to mine. There may be contra​ cts sig​ ned by local aut​ horit​ ies and li​ cen​ se hold​ ers that re​ gulate local rights and ob​ liga​ tions. There are some​ times vari​ ous contra​ cts for usage of water and in​ frastruc​ ture con​ cluded bet​ ween govern​ ment aut​ horit​ ies and the li​ cen​ se hold​ er. Contra​ cts could be con​ cluded bet​ ween vari​ ous stakehold​ ers, in​ clud​ ing for in​ stan​ ce non-governmental or​ ganiza​ tions, par​ ticipat​ ing in the min​ ing pro​ ject. In short, there could be hundreds of contra​ cts as​ sociated with any given mine, but one is the most im​ p or​ tant of all, and that is the min​ ing contra​ ct bet​ ween the nation​ al govern​ ment and the com​ p any grant​ ing that ex​ clusive right to con​ duct min​ ing op ​ era​ tions.

WHAT DOE S THE CONTRA​ CT COVE R?

16

Con ​ text

A contra​ ct could cover a wide range of is​ sues such as op ​ eration​ al ob​ liga​ tions, fisc​ al and economic de​ v elop ​ ment is​ sues, en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al is​ sues, dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion, local em​ p loy ​ ment and pro​ cure​ ment, chan​ ge of ow​ nership or man​ age​ ment con​ trol, among oth​ ers. In a re​ lative​ ly com​ p rehen​ sive legal en​ v iron​ ment, a contra​ ct could be ex​ treme​ ly short. A contra​ ct in one co​ unt​ ry may be 250 pages and only 15 pages in an​ oth​ er.

17

Laws and Contra​ cts

Ex​ am​ p le of li​ mited scope ag​ ree​ ment

18

Con ​ text

Ex​ am​ p le of a Com​ p rehen​ sive Ag​ ree​ ment In the past 20 to 30 years, pro​ bab​ ly the bi​ ggest de​ v elop ​ ments in min​ ing laws and contra​ cts are in the soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al areas - so much so that there is an en​ tire

19

Laws and Contra​ cts

sec​ tion of this book de​ v oted to those topics. Areas like soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity, human rights, anti-bribery pro​ v is​ ions, and local con​ sul​ ta​ tions are em​ erg​ ing as new is​ sues in the contra​ cts. New deal struc​ tures are also ap ​ p ear​ ing that have in​ frastruc​ ture, pub​ lic hous​ ing and other non-monetary forms of be​ nefits for govern​ ments. This is often as​ sociated with the re​ cent en​ trants to the mar​ ket such as Chinese com​ p an​ ies. This book co​ v​ ers a wide range of is​ sues typ ​ ical of a com​ p rehen​ sive contra​ ct in​ clud​ ing fisc​ al is​ sues, core op ​ eration​ al ob​ liga​ tions, en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al is​ sues, economic de​ velop ​ ment, dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion, equ​ ity ow​ nership, and force majeure, among oth​ ers. Howev ​ er, it needs to be stated again that if the domes​ tic legal en​ v iron​ ment addres​ ses them suf​ ficient​ ly, all is​ sues co​ v ered in the book would not neces​ sari​ ly end up in the contra​ ct.

HOW L ONG DO THE CONTRA​ CTS L AS T?
There are two main prac​ tices when it comes to the dura​ tion of contra​ cts. One way is to set a hard time limit: 10 years, 15 years, 25 years. For a com​ p any to want to in​ v est, the contra​ ct per​ iod will need to be of suf​ ficient dura​ tion to allow the com​ p any to re​ coup its in​ v est​ ment and make a pro​ fit. There will typical​ ly be the op ​ p or​ tun​ ity for ex​ tens​ ions as well. The other prac​ tice is to have the contra​ ct last as long as there is an economic de​ p osit there to mine. Under eith​ er prac​ tice, there are closure and re​ clama​ tion ob​ liga​ tions, which are co​ v ered furth​ er in the sec​ tion, "Min​ ing Op ​ era​ tions".

20

Con ​ text

B ACK TO THE B E ​ G INN​ ING : G E TT​ ING THE CONTRA​ CT
We seemed to have jum​ p ed to the end of the contra​ ct with​ out talk​ ing about how you get one in the first place. Let’s end with the be​ ginn​ ing. The vast major​ ity of co​ unt​ ries around the world use a first come, first ser​ v ed sys​ tem of is​ su​ ing li​ cen​ ses and contra​ cts for the right to con​ duct min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies on a piece of land. This sys​ tem makes sense, as it theoretical​ ly should not favor any par​ ticular party and should in​ cen​ tiv ​ ize peo​ p le to come and get li​ cen​ ses to start min​ ing. This is, howev ​ er, chang​ ing, and more and more co​ unt​ ries are hold​ ing com​ p etitive bids for the right to mine or ex​ p lore. Com​ p etitive bids can have sever​ al ad​ v antages: they can en​ tice policy-makers to anti​ cipate, plan and priorit​ ize the be​ nefits from miner​ al pro​ jects that they would like to rea​ l​ ize, since those be​ nefits can be the ob​ ject of the bid; prequalification criteria, fees to par​ ticipate in bids, and upfront bonus pay ​ ments can deter specula​ tion and li​ cen​ se idl​ ing; and trans​ p arent bi​ dd​ ing rounds can de​ crease risks of cor​ rup ​ tion com​ p ared to first come, first ser​ v ed sys​ tems or di​ rect negotia​ tions. Howev ​ er, with​ out strong trans​ p aren​ cy pro​ v is​ ions and over​ sight, com​ p etitive bids can pre​ sent the same chal​ lenges of cor​ rup ​ tion and mis​ al​ loca​ tion of li​ cen​ ses and re​ sour​ ces as the other sys​ tems. And, in​ deed, is​ sues like li​ cen​ se idl​ ing and cor​ rup ​ tion can also be tackled in other al​ loca​ tion sys​ tems. Further​ more, when a govern​ ment lacks geolog​ ical in​ for​ ma​ tion, it can be hard​ er to or​ gan​ ize a suc​ cess​ ful and com​ p etitive bid round; in those in​ stan​ ces, the govern​ ment could eith​ er start with a first come, first ser​ v ed sys​ tem or in​ v est in re​ v eal​ ing geolog​ ical in​ for​ ma​ tion (for in​ stan​ ce, with sup ​ p ort from the US and British Geolog​ ical Sur​ v eys).

21

THE NEGOTIAT ​ I NG TAB LE
The mys​ teri​ ous "negotiat​ ing table". Who sits at it? What do they do? What are some of the "tri​ cks of the trade" - what do good negotiators do? Do peo​ p le rea​ l​ ly pound their fist on the table and threat​ en to walk away? Who is rea​ l​ ly in char​ ge? And per​ haps most im​ por​ tant​ ly, who is driv ​ ing the pro​ cess be​ hind the scenes? This chapt​ er an​ sw​ ers many of these ques​ tions. The chapt​ er, "So You Think You Need Help After All," also pro​ v ides guidan​ ce on how to choose legal co​ un​ sel. And, we have "170 Years at the Table: Con​ fess​ ions of a Negotiator" to pull back the cur​ tain even more on the negotiat​ ing table.

WHO S ITS AT THE TAB L E ?
The choice of who should sit at the negotiat​ ing table and who will be re​ p resent​ ing the vari​ ous part​ ies can be (and often is) one of the most im​ p or​ tant de​ cis​ ions that will in​ flu​ ence the out​ come of the negotia​ tions. The main ac​ tors in​ clude the govern​ ment, com​ p an​ ies, lend​ ers, and civil society.

Govern​ ment: At the Table
There is no one struc​ ture for govern​ ment negotiat​ ing teams. Prac​ tice is di​ v er​ se ac​ ross the globe, but can be grouped in three main cat​ ego​ ries, based on who takes the lead: Minist​ ry of Mines, poten​ tial​ ly with in​ v ol​ v e​ ment of other minist​ ries

22

Con ​ text

Inter-ministerial com​ mit​ tee, which could be led by the Minist​ ry of Mines, Nation​ al Min​ ing Com​ p any, the Ex​ ecutive's Of​ fice, Nation​ al In​ v est​ ment Com​ miss​ ion or other ministry-level re​ p resen​ tatives Nation​ al Min​ ing Com​ p any, poten​ tial​ ly with in​ v ol​ v e​ ment of other minist​ ries Rea​ son​ able minds can dis​ ag​ ree on which struc​ ture works best. In all li​ kelihood, any struc​ ture can work if there is the polit​ ical will for it to do so. Which struc​ ture a co​ unt​ ry uses will de​ p end lar​ ge​ ly on the co​ untry's gover​ nance struc​ ture and his​ to​ ry of prac​ tice in this area. It should be noted that bi​ gg​ er is not neces​ sari​ ly bet​ t​ er when it comes to seats at the table. A single negotiator or 3-4 negotiators may be much more ef​ ficient than a group of 15. Con​ fus​ ion, dis​ trac​ tion, and divide-and-conquer tech​ niques can be em​ p loyed for large negotiat​ ing teams. One negotia​ tion was held up by the fact that the seven negotiators in the room on the govern​ ment side typical​ ly needed to ac​ hieve un​ anim​ ity on all is​ sues. This isn't to say that a large team should​ n't sup ​ p ort the negotiators and have their views taken into ac​ count; only that more is not al​ ways mer​ ri​ er when it comes to face to face negotia​ tions. If there is a Nation​ al Min​ ing Com​ p any (NMC) or some other speci​ al pur​ p ose vehic​ le created by the govern​ ment to over​ see min​ ing per​ mitt​ ing and op ​ era​ tions, its re​ p resen​ tative(s) will sit at the table, usual​ ly with a team of legal, fin​ an​ ce (fisc​ al), economic and min​ ing ad​ v is​ ers and ex​ p erts. Such ad​ v is​ ers and ex​ p erts can be govern​ ment em​ p loyees or out​ side con​ sul​ tants de​ p end​ ing upon the ex​ p ert​ ise and re​ sour​ ces of the govern​ ment. If there is no NMC, the govern​ ment will often be re​ p resen​ ted by em​ p loyees of the Min​ ing Minist​ ry, with vary ​ ing de​ grees of of​ fici​ al or un​ of​ fici​ al in​ v ol​ v e​ ment from other minist​ ries. Which other minist​ ries might show up at the negotiat​ ing table? Here too, there is no con​ sis​ tent prac​ tice ac​ ross all co​ unt​ ries all of the time. One could rea​ sonab​ ly ex​ p ect re​ p resen​ tatives from the Minist​ ries of Just​ ice, En​ v iron​ ment, Labor and Em​ p loy ​ ment, In​ digen​ ous Popula​ tions (if ex​ ist​ ing), Cul​ ture, Fin​ an​ ce (and Bud​ get), Strategic Plann​ ing (if ex​ ist​ ing), Land De​ v elop ​ ment/Plann​ ing, Nation​ al In​ v est​ ment Com​ -

23

The Negotiat​ ing Table

miss​ ion, etc. Re​ p resen​ tatives of the Centr​ al Bank may be in​ v ol​ v ed, and some co​ unt​ ries pro​ v ide for ad hoc ex​ p erts to be of​ ficial​ ly part of the team. The fol​ low​ ing ex​ am​ p le is from Li​ beria's Mines and Miner​ als Law 2000. Later laws have since modified this par​ ticular struc​ ture - as they are apt to do! Howev ​ er, it re​ mains a good ex​ am​ p le of the legal lan​ guage that can be used to es​ tablish a negotiat​ ing team: "Sec​ tion 3.4. Es​ tablish​ ment of Miner​ als Tech​ n​ ical Com​ mit​ tee. There is hereby es​ tablis​ hed a Miner​ als Tech​ n​ ical Com​ mit​ tee com​ posed of the fol​ low​ ing: The Minist​ er of Lands, Mines & En​ er​ gy (Chair​ man); The Minist​ ry of Just​ ice; The Minist​ ry of Fin​ an​ ce; The Minist​ ry of Plann​ ing & Economic Af​ fairs; The Nation​ al In​ vest​ ment Com​ miss​ ion; The Minist​ ry of Labour; The Co​ un​ cil of Economic Ad​ visors to the Pre​ sident of Li​ beria; The Centr​ al Bank of Li​ beria. Sec​ tion 3.5. Power of the Com​ mit​ tee. The Miner​ als Tech​ n​ ical Com​ mit​ tee is hereby em​ powered under the chair​ manship of the Minist​ er to negotiate and con​ clude ag​ ree​ ments [...]" The most suc​ cess​ ful govern​ ment negotiators are those who have for​ med a co​ herent and co​ or​ dinated govern​ ment team with a lead li​ aison who re​ p orts di​ rect​ ly to the prime minist​ er or pre​ sident. It is help ​ ful if the per​ son who heads the team is ap ​ p oin​ ted di​ rect​ ly by the pre​ sident or prime minist​ er and can ob​ tain guidan​ ce when re​ q uired.

The In​ ter​ nation​ al Min​ ing Com​ pany (IMC): At the Table
The IMC may be act​ ing alone, with a Joint Ven​ ture (JV) partn​ er, or as the man​ ag​ ing partn​ er of a Con​ sor​ tium of busi​ ness en​ tit​ ies. Who the IMC or JV sends to the table can de​ p end on a lot of fac​ tors: the size of the com​ p any, how im​ p or​ tant it con​ sid​ ers a par​ ticular negotia​ tion or govern​ ment re​ lationship, or its gener​ al approach to negotia​ tions worldwide. The IMC side of the table may have a re​ gion​ al di​ rec​ tor, in-house co​ un​ sel, and other in-house ex​ p erts. Small com​ p an​ ies may have a CEO or other very high level re​ presen​ tative at the table.

24

Con ​ text

The IMC or JV will be typical​ ly as​ sis​ ted by its own in-house legal, fin​ an​ ci​ al (fisc​ al), economic, geolog​ ical, mar​ ket​ ing and tech​ n​ ical (en​ gineer​ ing and/or in​ frastruc​ ture) ad​ vis​ ers. The IMC or JV may also call on in​ tern​ al or third party ad​ v is​ ers to help address any numb​ er of is​ sues, par​ ticular​ ly is​ sues that may be very local to that negotia​ tion, for ex​ am​ ple, in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les, com​ mun​ ity, cul​ tur​ al heritage or other soci​ al is​ sues that may be raised dur​ ing the negotia​ tions. In some cases, the IMC may even in​ s​ ist that cer​ tain com​ mun​ ity is​ sues be co​ v ered in the ag​ ree​ ment. While com​ mun​ ity groups or civil society or​ ganiza​ tions do not usual​ ly have a seat at the negotiat​ ing table, this does not mean that their voices can​ not be heard; the IMC (as well as govern​ ment) may be open to dis​ cuss​ ions and con​ sul​ ta​ tions in ad​ v ance of or dur​ ing negotia​ tions. It may be worth not​ ing here that in all but a very few in​ stan​ ces, the IMC and the govern​ ment will often not be negotiat​ ing from the same in​ for​ ma​ tion. While the IMC may sub​ mit a numb​ er of stud​ ies on the geologic poten​ ti​ al of the area, en​ gineer​ ing plans, costs of pro​ duc​ tion, and other in​ for​ ma​ tion that is crit​ ical to de​ ter​ min​ ing negotiat​ ing posi​ tions, the IMC will li​ ke ​ ly have more tools at its dis​ p os​ al to un​ derstand, an​ alyze, and frame that in​ for​ ma​ tion in a way that is be​ nefici​ al to the com​ p any. And this makes sense: min​ ing com​ p an​ ies are in the busi​ ness of min​ ing! This is their prima​ ry pur​ p ose. The chal​ lenge for govern​ ments is to meet that level of ex​ p ert​ ise as best they can. A numb​ er of strateg​ ies for doing so are in​ cluded in this book. Last​ ly, the chal​ lenge of negotiat​ ing with IMCs can be com​ p oun​ ded if there is a JV or Con​ sor​ tium ar​ range​ ment. More in​ terests at the table usual​ ly means more is​ sues to work through. JVs and con​ sor​ tia are often neces​ sa​ ry for large-scale, in​ dustri​ al min​ ing pro​ jects. Such ar​ range​ ments di​ v ers​ ify the risks for the main pro​ ject com​ p any, can give ac​ cess to more equ​ ity fin​ an​ ce, special​ ist skills or tech​ nolog​ ies (e.g., in in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment), and even as​ s​ ist in secur​ ing part of the miner​ al sup ​ p​ ly. Even with multi​ p le com​ p an​ ies at the table, ready to put their own cash into the pro​ ject, that may not be en​ ough. Enter: the lend​ ers, the peo​ p le with the money.

25

The Negotiat​ ing Table

Lend​ ers: Not at the Table (but hover​ ing close​ ly in the background)
Min​ ing pro​ jects are ex​ p en​ sive. Very ex​ p en​ sive. In​ stead of co​ ugh​ ing up all of their own cash, as​ sum​ ing the com​ p any even has en​ ough, the IMC or the JV will pro​ bab​ ly turn to com​ mer​ ci​ al lend​ ers to pro​ v ide debt. For some min​ ing pro​ jects, debt could be used to fund as much as 70% of the total costs of build​ ing the min​ ing pro​ ject, with the third party lend​ er hav ​ ing more cash tied up in the pro​ ject at cer​ tain mo​ ments in the mine life cycle than the IMC or JV. For this rea​ son, the lend​ er will often want to be quite well-informed about the negotia​ tions over what will be, in ef​ fect, its money for a sig​ nificant per​ iod of time. They may want to be in​ for​ med of pro​ gress or pro​ blems en​ coun​ tered at the negotiat​ ing table, and will cer​ tain​ ly have made their own con​ di​ tions and ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions clear to the IMC as part of the fin​ anc​ ing or equ​ ity ag​ ree​ ments drawn up with the IMC, such as de​ fault/breach and other pro​ v is​ ions that will need to be har​ monized with the terms of the min​ ing contra​ ct or vice-versa. Who are these lend​ ers be​ hind the scenes? They could be private com​ mer​ ci​ al banks like HSBC, Barclays, RBS, De​ utsche Bank, Credit Suis​ se, as well as pub​ lic multi​ later​ al lend​ ing in​ stitu​ tions such as the In​ ter​ nation​ al Fin​ an​ ce Cor​ p ora​ tion or "IFC" (a mem​ b​ er of the World Bank Group). These ac​ tors, while not of​ ficial​ ly at the table, have been im​ p or​ tant in the over​ all con​ tent of min​ ing contra​ cts. For ex​ am​ p le, today most of the com​ mer​ ci​ al and larg​ er private lend​ ing in​ stitu​ tions sub​ scribe to the Equator Prin​ ci​ p les, and IFC in​ v ol​ v e​ ment in a pro​ ject means com​ p lian​ ce with its Soci​ al and En​ v iron​ ment​ al Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards (more about this in the "En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues" sec​ tion of the book). These stan​ dards have been al​ most uni​ v er​ sal​ ly em​ braced as com​ mon prac​ tice in these areas, and contra​ cts may make these stan​ dards legal​ ly bi​ nd​ ing. Just be​ cause a play ​ er is not at the table does not mean they can​ not be high​ ly in​ fluen​ ti​ al.

26

Con ​ text

Who is Usual​ ly Ab​ sent from the Negotiat​ ing Table? (An​ sw​ er: Al​ most Every​ one)
Frank​ ly speak​ ing, just about every ​ one else is usual​ ly not at the table. But there are a few ex​ cep ​ tion​ al cir​ cumstan​ ces in which other groups may be in​ v ited to take part. Re​ p resen​ tatives of com​ mun​ ity groups may be in​ v ited to par​ ticipate in those parts of a negotia​ tion that bear on en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion, com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment, be​ nefit shar​ ing or soci​ al im​ p act man​ age​ ment. Some​ times, the govern​ ment will in​ clude in its team re​ p resen​ tatives from minist​ ries that are re​ spon​ sible for cul​ tur​ al and other is​ sues af​ fect​ ing local popula​ tions or sub-national govern​ ment in​ terests. This pre​ sup ​ p oses that there is a govern​ ment en​ t​ ity of some na​ ture re​ spon​ sible for over​ sight or co​ or​ dina​ tion of in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les, sub-national govern​ ment or local com​ mun​ ity in​ terests in gener​ al. The more li​ ke ​ ly way that civil society will par​ ticipate is through a con​ sul​ ta​ tion pro​ cess of some sort, though that of co​ ur​ se is not the same thing as being at the table. Com​ mun​ ity De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ments and other com​ mun​ ity pro​ ces​ ses are dis​ cus​ sed more in later sec​ tions.

GETT​ ING TO THE TAB L E
Now that the team of negotiators are at the table and every ​ one knows - or thinks they know - who is re​ p resent​ ing what in​ terest groups and en​ tit​ ies, and who has aut​ hor​ ity to bind who, the negotia​ tions can fin​ al​ ly begin. The mo​ ment of truth has ar​ rived: part​ ies will come togeth​ er and go into the in​ tel​ lectu​ al equivalent of hand-to-hand com​ bat. Angry words will be ex​ chan​ ged. Strateg​ ies and stratagems will be em​ p loyed; bluffs, maybe even out​ right lies. Who will crack first? Who will cave on the cruci​ al points? Who will come out on top? Which negotiator will win in this test of wit and will? We have some dis​ ap ​ p oint​ ing news. For those that pic​ tured men in suits de​ bat​ ing each other to the death in a wood-paneled con​ fer​ ence room in New York or Hong Kong, that is not quite how it hap ​ p ens 99% of the time.

27

The Negotiat​ ing Table

Negotia​ tions are often mark​ ing up a word docu​ ment with track chan​ ges and then sen​ d​ ing that to the other side by email. More often, it is a per​ son be​ hind a com​ p ut​ er - maybe with a bi​ nd​ er with laws and contra​ cts, and pro​ bab​ ly sever​ al cups of co​ ffee - rea​ d​ ing and writ​ ing for hours at a time. The ratio of hours spent at the table, face to face with the other part​ ies, to pass​ ing drafts of a word docu​ ment is hard to ac​ curate​ ly es​ timate; but be as​ sured that in al​ most all negotia​ tions, far more hours are spent away from the table than at it. An IMC may start the negotia​ tions with its model ag​ reement(s), or the govern​ ment may start with its model or a chos​ en ag​ ree​ ment al​ ready in force that it views as its cur​ rent posi​ tion and prac​ tice. A model contra​ ct is one in which the gener​ al struc​ ture of an ag​ ree​ ment is laid out, but with a numb​ er of areas left open for negotia​ tion, such as the fin​ an​ ci​ al terms, ex​ p lora​ tion work pro​ grams, and com​ mun​ ity be​ nefits, for ex​ am​ p le. Other is​ sues may be open for negotia​ tion as well. What's the use of that, you might ask? First, it saves an en​ orm​ ous amount of time. Draft​ ing from a blank sheet of paper would be ex​ treme​ ly in​ e f​ ficient. Second, ex​ chang​ ing pre​ fer​ red models or re​ dac​ ted ex​ am​ p les often will re​ v e​ al the part​ ies' ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions: a party will rare​ ly share a model or contra​ ct that does not in​ clude its favorite pro​ v is​ ions. (And if a side does send a model that goes against its in​ terests, this would pro​ bab​ ly be a pre​ tty clear ex​ am​ p le of poor negotiat​ ing strategy, if there ever was one).

28

Con ​ text

By ex​ chang​ ing models or pre​ fer​ red re​ dac​ ted contra​ cts, the part​ ies will be able to as​ sess the first negotiat​ ing posi​ tions that each party may put on the table. These per​ ceived ex​ pec​ ta​ tions should not be ig​ nored be​ cause they will sur​ face at some point in the negotia​ tions eith​ er as ex​ p ress re​ q uests or im​ p lied is​ sues. This does not re​ sol​ v e which model or re​ dac​ ted contra​ ct will form the basis for the negotia​ tions but it will be a win​ dow into the part​ ies' wish lists. Once the part​ ies de​ ter​ mine which ag​ ree​ ment or ag​ ree​ ments they will negotiate from, the fun be​ gins. It is time to dive into the heart of this book, the text of min​ ing contra​ cts.

29

MINE OP ​ E RA ​ T IONS
IN​ TRODUC​ TION TO M INE OP​ E RA​ TIONS L E G AL RE ​ G IM E S RE​ CON​ NAIS ​ S AN CE AN D E X​ PL ORA​ TION FE AS IB IL ​ ITY PRO​ DUC​ TION CL OS URE

IN ​ T RODUC ​ T ION TO MINE OP ​ E RA ​ T IONS
Some of the great mines of his​ to​ ry have run for hundreds of years. Sweden's "Stora Kop ​ parberg" (or the "Great Co​ pp​ er Moun​ tain") is a mine that las​ ted from the 10th cen​ tu​ ry to the early 1990s. While that is an ex​ treme ex​ am​ p le, fin​ d​ ing a re​ sour​ ce, build​ ing a mine, and clos​ ing it down re​ spon​ sib​ ly is general​ ly a long pro​ cess. Re​ con​ nais​ sance and ex​ p lora​ tion may in​ v ol​ v e de​ cades of in​ creasing​ ly focused ac​ tiv ​ ity, by both govern​ ments and private com​ p an​ ies, in an ef​ fort to find re​ sour​ ces and ident​ ify those that may be worth de​ v elop ​ ing. After that thres​ hold is cros​ sed, it may take many more years of feasibil​ ity stud​ ies and pro​ ject apprais​ al, along with ex​ ten​ sive con​ sul​ ta​ tions with govern​ ment agen​ cies, local com​ munit​ ies, fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stitu​ tions and other key part​ ies, be​ fore a com​ pany is able to move on to mine de​ v elop ​ ment and ul​ timate​ ly pro​ duc​ tion. And then, pro​ duc​ tion may last from an​ y w​ here from a few to a few hundred years. But that's if you're lucky. Most ex​ p lora​ tion ac​ tiv ​ ity will fail to re​ sult in a pro​ mis​ ing dis​ cove​ ry, and many pro​ mis​ ing dis​ cove​ ries will never make it to the min​ ing phase. This chapt​ er takes a clos​ er look at each step in the min​ ing life cycle, from high-level re​ con​ nais​ sance through closure, de​ tail​ ing some of the key con​ sidera​ tions dur​ ing each stage. Some of the topics co​ v ered re​ late to tech​ n​ ical or en​ gineer​ ing is​ sues, pro​ v id​ ing an over​ v iew of the “footprint” and ac​ tivit​ ies of a min​ ing op ​ era​ tion at a given phase. Other con​ sidera​ tions re​ late to the legal framework, in​ clud​ ing broad prin​ ci​ p les that run

31

Mine Op​ era​ tions

through the min​ ing life cycle as well as key re​ gulato​ ry pro​ ces​ ses and decision-points that govern and fea​ ture in par​ ticular stages. And this will come as no sur​ p r​ ise to an​ y one, but money is im​ p or​ tant. Very im​ p or​ tant. Un​ derstand​ ing not only the cost of each phase, but where the money tends to come from, will therefore also be co​ v ered in the sec​ tions that fol​ low.

32

LEGAL RE ​ G IMES
L AND, M INE AND M INE R​ AL S OW​ NE RS HIP
Miner​ als in the ground may be owned by the state or be owned private​ ly. For in​ stan​ ce, in the Uni​ ted States, sub​ soil rights under private​ ly held land are private​ ly owned; sub​ soil rights under state or feder​ al lands and of​ fshore are held by the feder​ al and state govern​ ments. In most of the world, the state, or more broad​ ly, the peo​ p le, own all natur​ al re​ sour​ ces. This in​ cludes miner​ als below the sur​ face even when the sur​ face rights are held by oth​ ers. This ow​ nership is often set out in the Con​ stitu​ tion and re​ p eated, but in an in​ creasing​ ly specific form, in the min​ ing act and the contra​ ct it​ self. For ex​ am​ p le, Ar​ ticle 1 of Ecuador's Con​ stitu​ tion states: “Non-renewable natur​ al re​ sour​ ces of the State’s ter​ rito​ ry be​ long to its in​ alien​ able and ab​ solute as​ sets.” This gener​ al state​ ment of land rights be​ comes more specific in a miner​ al law. Ecuador’s Min​ ing Law states: “Art. 16: Ow​ nership of mines and de​ posits by the State. Non-renewable natur​ al re​ sour​ ces and, in gener​ al, un​ derground pro​ ducts, miner​ als and sub​ stan​ ces whose na​ ture dif​ f​ ers from that of the land, in​ clud​ ing those found in areas co​ vered by ter​ ritori​ al sea wat​ ers, are the in​ alien​ able pro​ per​ ty of the State and are not sub​ ject to the statutes of li​ mita​ tions or seizures. The State’s ow​ nership of the sub​ soil shall be ex​ er​ cised in​ depen​ dent​ ly of ow​ nership rights over the sur​ face land co​ ver​ ing the mines and de​ posits.”

33

Mine Op​ era​ tions

The Li​ beria - China Union contra​ ct shows how this gener​ al Con​ stitution​ al state​ ment makes its way from law to contra​ ct, con​ firm​ ing at the very out​ set of the ag​ ree​ ment the co​ untry's ow​ nership of miner​ al re​ sour​ ces: “A. Every Miner​ al on the sur​ face of the ground or in the soil or sub-soil, riv​ ers, water co​ ur​ ses, ter​ ritori​ al wat​ ers and con​ tinent​ al shelf of Li​ beria is the pro​ per​ ty and nation​ al wealth of Li​ beria and all rights re​ lated to the ex​ plora​ tion for and ex​ ploita​ tion of Miner​ als be​ longs ex​ clusive​ ly to Li​ beria.” Land rights and rights in miner​ als are two dif​ ferent th​ ings. In most juris​ dic​ tions, once the com​ p any gets the neces​ sa​ ry rights to miner​ als for its min​ ing op ​ era​ tions, it must reach an ag​ ree​ ment with the per​ sons who own the land above the de​ p osit or have the right to use it. These per​ sons may be the state, a private land owner, com​ munit​ ies hold​ ing use rights, or a mix of these. Private or com​ mun​ al lan​ down​ ers may negotiate these ag​ ree​ ments di​ rect​ ly with the min​ ing com​ p any. In many juris​ dic​ tions, if these part​ ies can​ not negotiate a sol​ u​ tion with​ out the state, the state will step in and negotiate for them, or in the most ex​ treme cir​ cumstan​ ces, may ex​ p rop ​ riate the land. These is​ sues of land rights can be ex​ treme​ ly con​ ten​ ti​ ous, and are also dealt with in the "En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues" chapt​ er, but could eas​ i​ ly fill their own book. The state could de​ v elop and ex​ p loit the miner​ als it owns by it​ self, using its own re​ sour​ ces, and in some cases does. More often, the state grants li​ cen​ sees or contra​ ct hold​ ers the right to ex​ p lore for and de​ v elop miner​ als.

CONTRA​ CT AND L I​ CE N​ SE RE​ G IM E S
Min​ ing contra​ cts and li​ cen​ ses are a com​ mon fea​ ture of miner​ al legal frameworks ac​ ross the globe. These in​ stru​ ments go by dif​ ferent names – li​ cen​ se, miner​ al de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ment, contra​ cts of work, “con​ v en​ tions” in civil law co​ unt​ ries - but they all serve the same pur​ p ose of fill​ ing out the ob​ liga​ tions and rights of the in​ v es​ tor that are not in the

34

Legal Re​ gimes

min​ ing law or other re​ levant laws and re​ gula​ tions. (See the chapt​ er, "Laws and Contra​ cts" for more in​ for​ ma​ tion about the broad​ er legal framework). Some com​ mon fea​ tures of contra​ ct and li​ cen​ se re​ gimes are de​ scribed below.

Contra​ ctu​ al Re​ gime
In a pure contra​ ctu​ al re​ gime, the prima​ ry docu​ ment govern​ ing the in​ v est​ ment is the contra​ ct. Very few co​ unt​ ries still have a pure contra​ ctu​ al re​ gime, but there are many co​ unt​ ries that have min​ ing laws yet still rely more heavi​ ly on contra​ cts to de​ ter​ mine most of the state and com​ p any ob​ liga​ tions. In a contra​ ctu​ al re​ gime, the miner​ als law will typical​ ly have less con​ tent than a miner​ als law in a li​ cen​ se re​ gime. It is often a long docu​ ment de​ fin​ ing the com​ p any's ob​ liga​ tions and rights with some specific​ ity. It will cover the in​ v es​ tor’s ob​ liga​ tions dur​ ing vari​ ous stages of de​ v elop ​ ment, its rights to extra​ ct miner​ als and what miner​ als are co​ v ered, and rights and ob​ liga​ tions with re​ spect to in​ frastruc​ ture. It may also give the in​ v es​ tor pro​ tec​ tions from un​ law​ ful tak​ ing of its pro​ p er​ ty, and will usual​ ly pro​ v ide for speci​ al dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion pro​ cedures. In many cases, the contra​ cts re​ fer​ ence and in​ cor​ p orate gener​ al law, but they can also pro​ v ide for de​ p ar​ tures from gener​ al law. For in​ stan​ ce, in the tax sec​ tions, the contra​ ct may mod​ ify cer​ tain of the in​ come tax rules or it may pro​ v ide for dif​ ferent tariffs. In civil law co​ unt​ ries “con​ v en​ tions” or contra​ cts will fill in holes in the law or fill out de​ tails of the in​ v es​ tor’s rights, but con​ v en​ tions can​ not free in​ v es​ tors from ob​ liga​ tions ot​ herw​ ise set out in the law. Contra​ cts can be in​ dividual​ ly negotiated, but they can also be in a stan​ dard form, with the form being up ​ dated from time to time. In​ donesia, for in​ stan​ ce, went through seven genera​ tions of model contra​ cts of work be​ fore re​ p lac​ ing them in 2009 with its pre​ sent li​ cens​ ing sys​ tem gover​ ned under statuto​ ry law.

Li​ cen​ se Re​ gime
Al​ ter​ native​ ly, in a pure li​ cen​ se re​ gime, all of the major ob​ liga​ tions applic​ able to min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are es​ tablis​ hed through legis​ la​ tion and re​ gula​ tions. Rath​ er than sign​ ing contra​ cts with in​ dividu​ al com​ p an​ ies, the govern​ ment es​ tablis​ hes a sys​ tem for com​ p an​ ies to apply for li​ cen​ ses to mine par​ ticular areas of land, and those li​ cen​ ses are sub​ ject to general​ ly applic​ able legis​ la​ tion re​ gard​ ing taxes, royalt​ ies, en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ q uire​ ments and so on. In this sense, com​ p an​ ies’ li​ cen​ ses con​ tain ident​ ical ob​ liga​ tions.

35

Mine Op​ era​ tions

In the chapt​ ers and sec​ tions that fol​ low we dis​ cuss the vari​ ous ob​ liga​ tions and rights that states, com​ munit​ ies, and in​ v es​ tors have, wheth​ er es​ tablis​ hed in contra​ cts, legis​ la​ tion, or li​ cen​ ses.

36

RE ​ C ON ​ N AIS ​ S ANCE AND EX ​ P LORA ​ T ION
It all starts here. What ot​ herw​ ise looks like a field of grass, barr​ en sand, or a body of water could have valu​ able miner​ als below the sur​ face. But fin​ d​ ing those miner​ als is a one-in-a-hundred busi​ ness. Or less, at least for gold, ac​ cord​ ing to the World Gold Co​ un​ cil: "Es​ timates vary wide​ ly but even the opt​ im​ ists re​ ckon that rath​ er less than 1% of the pro​ spects meet the thres​ hold to pro​ duce a vi​ able mine," they said in a re​ p ort at the end of 2013. So it's im​ p or​ tant to get the pro​ spect​ ing pro​ cess right. It usual​ ly starts these days with air​ borne stud​ ies and mapp ​ ing. Al​ though most miner​ als are found be​ neath the sur​ face of the earth, a cer​ tain amount of geolog​ ical an​ alysis can be con​ duc​ ted by in​ credib​ ly sen​ sitive re​ cord​ ing of gravitation​ al and mag​ netic fields. Next comes seis​ mic an​ alysis - an​ alyz​ ing rock struc​ tures by using sound waves - and sampl​ ing, pick​ ing up rocks and an​ alyz​ ing their chem​ ical com​ p osi​ tion and de​ n s​ ity. In the case of "green​ field" sites - places that have never been mined be​ fore - this must come from on-site work. "Brownfield" sites that have al​ ready been wor​ ked may have both seis​ mic and geologic sam​ p les held by the govern​ ment from pre​ v i​ ous pro​ jects. At this point, if all the re​ search looks good, the com​ p any will apply for an ex​ p lora​ tion per​ mit. The per​ mit grants the com​ p any the right to look for miner​ als, but not to take them, and is valid for a cer​ tain amount of time, say two or three years, often with a re​ -

37

Mine Op​ era​ tions

new​ al clause. The com​ p any will also have to sub​ mit work pro​ grams, de​ tail​ ing work and the bud​ get to be al​ located to each phase of the work. From the min​ ing com​ p any's per​ spec​ tive, an ex​ p lora​ tion li​ cen​ se will usual​ ly give the com​ p any ex​ clusive rights with re​ spect to the de​ sig​ nated area. Some co​ unt​ ries im​ p ose mini​ mum ex​ p lora​ tion ex​ p en​ di​ ture and/or in​ v est​ ment ob​ liga​ tions. Min​ ing codes, if they exist in a given co​ unt​ ry, will often pro​ v ide these terms, which will in​ clude a cer​ tain numb​ er of re​ p ort​ ing ob​ liga​ tions by the com​ p any. A contra​ ct will usual​ ly rea​ ffirm the right to ex​ p lora​ tion and ex​ tens​ ions. For ex​ am​ p le, the Li​ beria - Putu Apprais​ al and Ex​ p lora​ tion (2005) contra​ ct states: "3.1 Grant of Ex​ plora​ tion Rights: On the terms and con​ d i​ tions herein pro​ vided the Govern​ ment hereby grants to the op​ erator, dur​ ing the per​ iod hereinaft​ er de​ fined, com​ menc​ ing with the Ef​ fective Date plus any ex​ tens​ ion of such per​ iod to which the Govern​ ment may agree (re​ fer​ red to herein as the "Ex​ plora​ tion Per​ iod") the ex​ clusive right to ex​ plore for Iron Ore De​ posits and appra​ ise the ex​ ist​ ing Iron Ore de​ posits in the Ex​ plora​ tion Area."

And the mini​ mum ex​ p en​ di​ tures will often be specified in the contra​ ct, too. This is also from the Li​ beria - Putu Apprais​ al and Ex​ p lora​ tion (2005) contra​ ct: "3.4 Mini​ mum Ex​ pen​ d i​ tures: [...] (b) Dur​ ing the Ex​ plora​ tion Per​ iod, the Op​ erator shall ex​ pend not less than Uni​ ted States Dol​ lars one (US $1.00) per acre dur​ ing each calen​ dar year as Ex​ plora​ tion Costs [...]" If the right to ex​ p lora​ tion is gran​ ted, the com​ p any will then carry out on-site trench​ ing and drill​ ing. In some co​ unt​ ries, the govern​ ment will re​ q uire a com​ p any, even at the ex​ p lora​ tion stage, to set aside a cer​ tain per​ cen​ tage of the com​ p any’s ex​ p lora​ tion bud​ get to be spent on com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment pro​ jects negotiated by the com​ p any, local com​ munit​ ies and local, re​ gion​ al and pos​ sib​ ly nation​ al of​ fici​ als. Plus, the com​ p any will have to sub​ mit pro​ gress re​ p orts on work car​ ried out and money in​ v es​ ted.

38

Re​ con ​ n ais​ sance and Ex​ plora​ tion

As the trench​ ing and drill​ ing re​ sults are an​ alyzed, if the situa​ tion looks hope​ ful, the com​ p any will con​ tinue with more and more drill​ ing. At this point, the com​ p any will start an​ alyz​ ing bulk sam​ p les to es​ timate the size and qual​ ity of the miner​ als and begin pre​ para​ tion of a feasibil​ ity study. The com​ p any for a large pro​ ject may be spend​ ing mill​ ions of dol​ lars by now, but this is still con​ sidered an early stage and the com​ p any has not yet made a com​ mer​ ci​ al de​ cis​ ion to pro​ ceed. The crunch point comes when the ex​ p lora​ tion per​ mit ex​ p ires. The com​ p any must eith​ er in​ v est or give the site back to the govern​ ment. A com​ p any will not give up its ex​ clusive area lig​ ht​ ly. This is a strategic mo​ ment in the life of the contra​ ct. The com​ p any will need to de​ cide what areas it will re​ tain and which it will re​ lin​ q uish. When en​ ough geolog​ ical data has been col​ lec​ ted, an as​ sess​ ment will be made: can these miner​ als be extra​ cted at a pro​ fit? Is the poten​ ti​ al re​ turn en​ ough to just​ ify more re​ sour​ ces going in? If not, furth​ er work will be shel​ v ed. But if the as​ sess​ ment is positive, then what was the "miner​ al de​ p osit" now moves up to be​ come, of​ ficial​ ly, an "ore body". An ore body is a miner​ al de​ p osit that has economic value and may poten​ tial​ ly be pro​ fit​ able. De​ sig​ na​ tion as an ore body has a par​ ticular sig​ nifican​ ce to com​ p any man​ age​ ment and their in​ v es​ tors. Now the com​ p any's pro​ ject de​ v elop ​ ment de​ p art​ ment takes over. If the de​ p osit has been found by a "junior" com​ p any, it may de​ cide to try and sell to a major. In most cases, such a sale or trans​ f​ er is per​ mit​ ted, though in some juris​ dic​ tions, it may be sub​ ject to govern​ ment approv ​ al. Pro​ hibit​ ing the trans​ f​ er or sale of a li​ cen​ se en​ tire​ ly may act as a dis​ in​ centive for ex​ p lora​ tion and pro​ duc​ tion. (This issue of trans​ f​ er is addres​ sed again in the chapt​ er, "Plann​ ing for Troub​ le"). Very few finds, as we have seen, have the poten​ ti​ al to be​ come pro​ fit​ able mines. Be​ cause it's not just en​ ough to find stuff. Stuff is, broad​ ly speak​ ing, every ​ where in a geolog​ ical sense. Take iron ore. In 2012, about two bi​ ll​ ion ton​ nes of iron ore were extra​ cted. That seems like a lot. It is a lot, in fact. That amount of iron ore would fill out about half the volume of Mount Ever​ est. But it turns out that iron is the fourth most com​ mon ele​ ment in the Earth's crust, ac​ count​ ing for about 5% of a rock for​ ma​ tion which is rare​ ly less than 5 km deep (in the oc​ eans) and often rea​ ches as deep as 50km. That is, in fact, mill​ ions and mill​ ions of Ever​ ests. So what de​ ter​ mines which tiny frac​ tion of that iron gets extra​ -

39

Mine Op​ era​ tions

cted? Cost and con​ v eni​ ence. Of all that iron, only the tiniest frac​ tion is com​ mer​ cial​ ly extra​ ct​ able. Miner​ al ex​ p lora​ tion is a throw of the dice. You don't know until you throw the dice and put your money on the table, what will come up or what you will find, and wheth​ er you will lose or win. The un​ cer​ taint​ ies and costs as​ sociated with miner​ al ex​ p lora​ tion are a big part of the chal​ lenge faced by host govern​ ments in pro​ mot​ ing de​ v elop ​ ment of their co​ unt​ ries' miner​ al re​ sour​ ce end​ ow​ ments. The di​ ag​ ram below il​ lustrates the pro​ cess of gett​ ing to a mine, which is de​ scribed in great​ er de​ tail in the next chapt​ er.

40

FEASIB IL ​ I TY
In a hy ​ p ot​ het​ ical world, which could be your own bac​ kyard, your metal de​ tec​ tor sug​ gests you are stand​ ing on top of a major gold find. You are ecstatic. All you need to do is dig the gold out of the ground, run it down to the local gold buyer (lots of them around today), take the money and run to the bank. Time to dig the gold out of the ground. You've spent the whole morn​ ing di​ gg​ ing and sweat​ ing. You are now down six feet, still no gold, and the ground has be​ come too hard to dig with a shovel. Maybe you are di​ gg​ ing your own grave, but you will not give up. You go down to the local hardware store and rent a jackhamm​ er. Now you get busy, shake, jump, shake. This is great. You're generat​ ing lots of rock. Uh oh, how are you going to get it out of the pit? Back to the hardware store to rent a winch and some buc​ kets, but who will op ​ erate the winch? There's Joe; he's ag​ reed to help you out for a piece of the pro​ fits. Back to the pit. De​ ep ​ er and de​ ep ​ er you go; the waste pile is build​ ing up. Joe says there's no more room to put the stuff. Out you come and down to the equip ​ ment re​ nt​ al shop to pick up a truck and a mini-front end load​ er. This is be​ ginn​ ing to get ex​ p en​ sive. You take the time to haul away the waste and dump it at the dump. Oh no, the city wants you to pay for dump ​ ing the gunk. Back to the pit to con​ tinue drill​ ing and tak​ ing out the waste. Now you are down to 15 feet and the sign​ al from the metal de​ tec​ tor is gett​ ing strong​ er. One more foot and the de​ tec​ tor is going wild. There it is - an old gold watch band. Well, it looks like gold. Now off to the gold buyer. It's real 18 carat gold! What? Only $500? After Joe takes his cut, and you re​ turn all the re​ nt​ al equip ​ ment and pay every ​ body off, you are now $500 in the hole. This was not what you ex​ p ec​ ted - the shovel alone could not do the job; you needed a drill to break up the hard​ er rock; you had to set up an electric

41

Mine Op​ era​ tions

winch to get the waste out, then trans​ p ort the waste to the dump - none of this was anti​ cipated and it all cost money. Fin​ al​ ly you had to pay off Joe and the gold buyer took his cut too. The re​ turn cer​ tain​ ly did not just​ ify the ef​ fort. Maybe you should have taken a break at six feet, and figured out all the extra tools and equip ​ ment that you might need, and what it might cost you to con​ tinue di​ gg​ ing. You could have chec​ ked out your bank ac​ count and de​ cided how much money you were will​ ing or able to put at risk. You would never know until you got to the "gold" how much there was and wheth​ er it would be worth all the money and ef​ fort. Back to the real world.

THE FE AS IB IL ​ ITY S TUDY
There are many un​ knowns that need to be in​ v es​ tigated in order to come to a rea​ soned con​ clus​ ion about wheth​ er de​ v elop ​ ing a mine makes sense. Min​ ing pro​ fitab​ ly and re​ spon​ sib​ ly today poses many chal​ lenges. Apart from ques​ tions of the qual​ ity and quant​ ity of the miner​ al, how to get it out, and how the mar​ ket is doing, there are cost, in​ frastruc​ ture, soci​ al, en​ v iron​ ment​ al and polit​ ical risks. As​ sess​ ing these is​ sues and un​ derstand​ ing the risks and op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies are centr​ al to the feasibil​ ity study pro​ cess. A feasibil​ ity study - which may be pre​ limina​ ry or full - must con​ sid​ er a wide range of fac​ tors and con​ di​ tions. If you take just one key tech​ n​ ical area, geology, some of the ques​ tions that will need an​ sw​ ers in​ clude, but are not li​ mited to: what does the de​ p osit look like? what is the chem​ ical com​ p osi​ tion of the ore zone? what are the charac​ teris​ tics of the waste materi​ al? how much of the materi​ al can be clas​ sified as re​ ser​ v es? what are its pos​ sible min​ ing opt​ ions? how much of the ore materi​ al can be re​ covered from the mine (given that a cer​ tain amount will be left be​ hind)? are there any seis​ mic risks? what is the strength of the rock? what does all this mean for the de​ sign of pit slopes, un​ derground op ​ en ​ ings, waste dumps, leach pads, and tail​ ings dams? where is the water table? how does groundwat​ er flow? where does it come from? and where are the aquif​ ers loc​ ated? The mine de​ sign, pro​ cess​ ing or upgrad​ ing re​ q uire​ ments, and the mar​ ket​ ing approach are de​ p en​ dent on the type of miner​ al that is being mined and how it is de​ p osited in or

42

Feasibil​ ity

on the ground. Wheth​ er it is a fuel miner​ al like coal or uranium; an in​ dustri​ al miner​ al like salt, kaolin, potash, titanium di​ oxide, metal​ lurg​ ical coal; a base metal like co​ pp​ er, zinc, lead, tin; a ferr​ ous metal like iron ore, tungst​ en, man​ ganese; a pre​ ci​ ous miner​ al like gold, silv ​ er, platinum, di​ amonds and gemstones: their de​ p osition​ al charac​ teris​ tics will de​ ter​ mine how they are mined, pro​ ces​ sed and mar​ keted. For ex​ am​ p le, al​ luvi​ al gold may be mined using plac​ er or hy ​ draulic met​ hods, while gold in quartz veins may need to extra​ cted mech​ anical​ ly from the ground, crus​ hed and then pro​ ces​ sed using grav ​ ity re​ cove​ ry, mer​ cu​ ry amal​ gama​ tion or cyanida​ tion met​ hods to strip out the gold. In the case of cer​ tain polymetal​ lic ores, for ex​ am​ p le a nickel-copper-cobalt ore, the ore will have to be mined and con​ centrated, the con​ centrate smel​ ted to re​ cov ​ er all of the pay ​ able miner​ als. While nic​ kel may be the main pro​ duct, the co​ pp​ er and co​ balt may be value add​ ing co- or by-products, de​ p end​ ing on the ex​ tent to which they con​ tribute to the re​ v enue stream. De​ p end​ ing on the mar​ ket value of the miner​ al, it may be sold as run of mine ore, as con​ centrate, or as a metal matte or re​ fined metal. Whatev ​ er the mar​ ket​ able pro​ duct is, and de​ p end​ ing on the ex​ tent of the pro​ cess​ ing oc​ curr​ ing at the mine, the pro​ duct may need to be stockpiled or warehoused until such time as en​ ough materi​ al has been ac​ cumulated to meet the IMC's sales com​ mit​ ments, or until trans​ p ort con​ di​ tions per​ mit it to be sent out. Again de​ p end​ ing on the pro​ duct's charac​ teris​ tics and the pro​ xim​ ity of the mine to port or final mar​ ket, it will eith​ er be truc​ ked or railed out, ship ​ ped out, or flown out to get it to the buyer(s). Much of the in​ v es​ tiga​ tion of the ore body has to be done re​ mote​ ly, through drill hole sampl​ ing. But there are no guaran​ tees that you have cor​ rect​ ly charac​ terized the geology, the ore, the waste, the hy ​ drogeology, etc., until you ac​ tual​ ly de​ v elop the mine and get into the ore body. This will not happ ​ en until after a "go" de​ cis​ ion has been made, the mine con​ struc​ ted, and the ore body op ​ ened up or ex​ p osed. That could still be ten years down the road. This is why the feasibil​ ity study pro​ cess is so im​ p or​ tant and often lengthy. Once the pro​ ject is tur​ ned over by the geolog​ ists to the pro​ ject de​ v elop ​ ment (study) team, a more indepth and de​ tailed study of all the tech​ n​ ical, legal, mar​ ket, soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al as​ pects of the pro​ ject will begin. There are typical​ ly two phases to this study – a pre​ limina​ ry phase (which be​ comes the pre​ limina​ ry feasibil​ ity study), and a final phase (which re​ -

43

Mine Op​ era​ tions

sults in the final feasibil​ ity study). At​ tached to each of these phases are de​ cis​ ion points which pro​ v ide the com​ p any with an op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to re​ v iew what is known and what is still not known, what the crit​ ical risks are that still need to be addres​ sed, and wheth​ er there are any “show-stoppers.” At eith​ er of these de​ cis​ ion points, the pro​ ject team with the sen​ ior man​ age​ ment will have three choices - (1) de​ cide to shel​ v e the pro​ ject, (2) de​ cide to do some more stud​ ies of items that need to be bet​ t​ er un​ derstood or (3) de​ cide that en​ ough is un​ derstood and known at that stage to move on to the next phase. In the case of the pre​ feasibil​ ity study, the next phase is the com​ p le​ tion of a much more de​ tailed final feasibil​ ity study. In the case of the final feasibil​ ity study, the next phase is pro​ ject im​ p lemen​ ta​ tion (final de​ tailed en​ gineer​ ing and con​ struc​ tion). The Model Mine De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment (MMDA) sets out the major ele​ ments of a feasibil​ ity study. It states: "2.4.1 ... The Feasibil​ ity Study shall in​ clude [ele​ ments as the part​ ies may agree, such as the fol​ low​ ing]: (a) An es​ timate of min​ able re​ ser​ ves in ac​ cordan​ ce with in​ ter​ national​ ly ac​ cepted stan​ dards; (b) A mar​ ket study for all of the Miner​ als to be pro​ duced in the Min​ ing Area; (c) An evalua​ tion of the known de​ posits with​ in the boun​ da​ ries of the Min​ ing Area, as well as the Miner​ als which can be ex​ ploited in the pro​ ject facilit​ ies; (d) A de​ scrip​ tion of the tech​ nology pro​ cess to be used in each case, with the re​ sults of any laborato​ ry or other tests de​ sig​ ned to ident​ ify tech​ nological​ ly approp​ riate met​ hods for pro​ cess​ ing the ore or ores in​ vol​ ved; (e) An in​ iti​ al mine plan in​ dicat​ ing ex​ pec​ ted re​ cove​ ry rates; (f) A gener​ al de​ scrip​ tion of re​ quire​ ments as​ sociated with ob​ tain​ ing re​ quired per​ mits, in​ clud​ ing the es​ timated cost of com​ plian​ ce and im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of the en​ viron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment plan;

44

Feasibil​ ity

(g) A de​ scrip​ tion and plans of the area of the pro​ ject facilit​ ies, in​ clud​ ing a list of the main struc​ tures, mac​ hine​ ry and equip​ ment to be used, specifica​ tion of raw materi​ als and ser​ vices (in​ clud​ ing electr​ ical re​ quire​ ments and water); (h) An or​ ganiza​ tion chart and re​ quire​ ments for per​ son​ nel; (i) Schedules to in​ itiate con​ struc​ tion and con​ struc​ tion timet​ ables; (j) A de​ scrip​ tion and generalized plans for all in​ frastruc​ ture and as​ sociated facilit​ ies (such as power, com​ munica​ tion, trans​ por​ ta​ tion, roads, and fresh and re​ claimed water), in​ clud​ ing a list of main items, struc​ tures and raw materi​ als, and an as​ sess​ ment of the poten​ ti​ al for shar​ ing such in​ frastruc​ ture with other users in ways that pro​ mote sus​ tain​ able de​ velop​ ment of the com​ munit​ ies in the pro​ ject Area; (k) Plans for electric​ ity sup​ p​ ly for Min​ ing op​ era​ tions, in​ clud​ ing re​ liabil​ ity and cost of ser​ vices that in​ cludes an as​ sess​ ment of the poten​ ti​ al for shar​ ing electr​ ical sup​ p l​ ies and in​ frastruc​ ture with other users in ways that pro​ mote sus​ tain​ able de​ velop​ ment of the com​ munit​ ies in the pro​ ject Area; (l) Plans for dis​ pos​ al of tail​ ings from the ore pro​ cess​ ing plants and of waste rock and materi​ als from Min​ ing op​ era​ tions; (m) A de​ scrip​ tion of plans for any poten​ ti​ al re​ process​ ing of materi​ als or tail​ ings; (n) Es​ timates, ac​ curate to with​ in fif​ te​ en per​ cent (15%), of capit​ al costs and op​ era​ tion costs; (o) An economic evalua​ tion and fin​ an​ ci​ al an​ alysis (es​ timated rate of re​ turn of the in​ vest​ ment and cash flow for the vari​ ous phases of the ex​ ploita​ tion), in​ clud​ ing pro​ b​ able fu​ ture capit​ al in​ vest​ ments and com​ ments on the fin​ an​ ci​ al viabil​ ity of the ex​ ploita​ tion; (p) to the ful​ lest ex​ tent rea​ sonab​ ly prac​ tic​ able, de​ tailed pro​ pos​ als with re​ spect to any be​ neficia​ tion or furth​ er pro​ cess​ ing of Miner​ als pro​ posed to be car​ ried out by the Com​ pany with​ in the State; and

45

Mine Op​ era​ tions

(q) The es​ timated date of Com​ men​ ce​ ment of Com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion." It is dur​ ing the final feasibil​ ity phase that the pre​ fer​ red mine de​ sign and op ​ erat​ ing opt​ ion is opt​ imized, the soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment stud​ ies are com​ p leted and im​ p act man​ age​ ment plans fin​ alized, that all per​ mitt​ ing is un​ der​ way, that any ag​ ree​ ments with govern​ ments and com​ munit​ ies are being negotiated and fin​ alized, that the mar​ ket niche has been de​ fined and buy ​ ers lined up; that equip ​ ment has been selec​ ted and its specifica​ tions pre​ p ared for ten​ der​ ing; that all crit​ ical in​ frastruc​ ture needs have been iden​ tified and terms of con​ struc​ tion and op ​ era​ tion negotiated; that there is now en​ ough de​ tail and in​ for​ ma​ tion to de​ v elop good cost and re​ v enue es​ timates. These es​ timates will need to in​ clude any taxes that will have to paid to the govern​ ment, as well as the costs of any ad​ dition​ al com​ mun​ ity in​ v est​ ments, local busi​ ness de​ v elop ​ ment plans, and in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment, or other pro​ jects and pro​ grams ag​ reed on with the govern​ ment, or the local com​ munit​ ies. Only then can the cal​ cula​ tion be made, as to wheth​ er the be​ nefits of min​ ing the de​ p osit will out​ weigh its costs, and wheth​ er the pre​ dic​ ted re​ turns to the in​ ves​ tors, the govern​ ment and the com​ munit​ ies are en​ ough to just​ ify the mine’s con​ struc​ tion and op ​ era​ tion. And even then the numb​ ers used are only best es​ timates, based on the tech​ n​ ical, mar​ ket​ ing, taxa​ tion, and other de​ cis​ ions taken or negotiated. Some years ago, a study was un​ der​ tak​ en to try to un​ derstand why so many pro​ duc​ ing mines, which had been sub​ jec​ ted to full feasibil​ ity stud​ ies, were still fac​ ing seri​ ous op ​ erat​ ing pro​ blems. Of 18 pro​ jects re​ v iewed, only four were found to be un​ q ualified suc​ ces​ ses. Five were still op ​ erat​ ing but with net negative cash flows, and the re​ main​ ing nine had seri​ ous pro​ blems re​ flec​ ted in cost over​ runs, con​ struc​ tion de​ lays, and their re​ duced pro​ duc​ tion capacit​ ies. There were de​ sign is​ sues re​ lat​ ing to water, metal​ lurgy, equip ​ ment, ground con​ trol and even the mines' re​ mote loc​ a​ tions. There was labor un​ rest, and lower prices and pro​ duc​ tiv ​ ity than pre​ dic​ ted. Over time, es​ timat​ ing tech​ niques have im​ p roved and the level of due di​ lig​ ence and the care with which feasibil​ ity stud​ ies are un​ der​ tak​ en have in​ creased. With the dramatic es​ cala​ tion of costs over the past de​ cade, the feasibil​ ity study has taken on even great​ er im​ p or​ tance. We are no long​ er talk​ ing just about mill​ ion dol​ lar in​ v est​ ments. "Mega-

46

Feasibil​ ity

projects" - a term of art used to de​ scribe a pro​ ject that re​ q uires over a bi​ ll​ ion dol​ lars in​ vest​ ment - are now com​ mon ac​ ross glob​ al min​ ing. The list of risks has also chan​ ged over the past de​ cade. Ernst & Young, which pro​ duces an an​ nu​ al re​ v iew of min​ ing, now lists as project-related threats such fac​ tors as capit​ al re​ quire​ ments and al​ loca​ tions, re​ sour​ ce national​ ism, the soci​ al li​ cen​ se to op ​ erate, skill shor​ tages, price and cur​ ren​ cy volatil​ ity, and es​ calat​ ing costs. There are in​ creas​ ing de​ mands on a cash- and skill-constrained in​ dust​ ry to share more of the pie. Govern​ ments want a bi​ gg​ er take. Com​ munit​ ies de​ mand great​ er in​ v est​ ments, and the pub​ lic at large pay close at​ ten​ tion to en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al sus​ tainabil​ ity. When all is said and done, and the de​ cis​ ion is made to move to con​ struc​ tion, the feasibil​ ity study pro​ v ides the opt​ imized bluep ​ rint for the de​ v elop ​ ment of the mine: it will de​ scribe where min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are to be con​ duc​ ted; if there will be multi​ p le phases for mine con​ struc​ tion; what area will be mined first; wheth​ er rail, road, and power in​ frastruc​ ture is needed; it will in​ dicate pre​ fer​ red routes; and pro​ v ide the most ac​ curate es​ timates of costs and timef​ rames for con​ struc​ tion pos​ sible with​ out more de​ tailed en​ gineer​ ing; it will pro​ ject labor and em​ p loy ​ ment needs, de​ fine mine-site ser​ v ices re​ q uired, lay out en​ v iron​ ment​ al safeguards, com​ mun​ ity is​ sues and mitiga​ tion measures, and so on. It is the be​ nchmark docu​ ment for com​ p let​ ing the de​ tailed en​ gineer​ ing de​ sign, cost es​ timates, pro​ cure​ ment pro​ gram and schedules that will allow for the start of con​ struc​ tion and guide its com​ p le​ tion. But even if a full feasibil​ ity study looks good from the com​ p any's per​ spec​ tive, the ques​ tion is wheth​ er the govern​ ment is also on board.

47

Mine Op​ era​ tions

THE G OVERN​ M E NT PE R​ S PE C​ TIVE ON FE AS IB IL ​ ITY AND DE ​ VE L OP​ MENT
Many govern​ ments re​ q uire the com​ p any to pro​ v ide its feasibil​ ity study and all data used in it to the govern​ ment. While some​ times the com​ p any will re​ tain ow​ nership of the feasibil​ ity study, in other cases the com​ p any will have to trans​ f​ er ow​ nership of the study to the govern​ ment. The re​ cent​ ly negotiated (August 2011) Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween Li​ beria and a con​ sor​ tium of com​ p an​ ies op ​ erat​ ing in the Wes​ tern Clust​ er area il​ lustrates a re​ q uire​ ment for the com​ p any to dis​ close its pre-feasibility an​ alysis: "4.6 Pre-Feasibility Study: [...] the Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bea Moun​ tain De​ posit will be com​ pleted and a copy pro​ vided to the Govern​ ment no later than the third an​ niver​ sa​ ry of the Ef​ fective Date, it being un​ derstood that the PreFeasibility Re​ port will be pro​ vided for in​ for​ mation​ al pur​ poses only and not sub​ ject to approv​ al by the Govern​ ment." Similar​ ly, Ar​ ticle 2.4. from the MMDA quoted above re​ q uires the com​ p any to dis​ close its feasibil​ ity study to the govern​ ment prior to be​ ginn​ ing con​ struc​ tion on the pro​ ject. The government's need to re​ v iew the feasibil​ ity study can be a major burd​ en on agen​ cies with li​ mited staff and re​ sour​ ces. These stud​ ies may be thousands of pages long and are sup ​ p or​ ted by tech​ n​ ical stud​ ies based on sampl​ ing met​ hods with which only special​ ists may be familiar. Some​ times, the govern​ ment is ef​ fective​ ly in a posi​ tion of hav ​ ing to de​ p end on the pro​ fes​ sional​ ism and com​ p eten​ cy of the com​ p any. Nevertheless, the ab​ il​ ity to ac​ cess the in​ for​ ma​ tion is cruci​ al. As is being able to trust in it. To address that issue, in ad​ di​ tion to de​ tail​ ing the con​ tents of a feasibil​ ity study, contra​ cts might also im​ p ose re​ q uire​ ments re​ gard​ ing who pre​ p ares the an​ alysis. Ar​ ticle 2.4.1 from the MMDA quoted above, for in​ stan​ ce, re​ q uires the feasibil​ ity study to be pre​ pared by "(i) an in​ depen​ dent third-party or (ii) by the Com​ pany and verified by an in​ depen​ dent Sole ex​ pert, on the basis of sound en​ gineer​ ing and economic prin​ ci​ ples in ac​ cordan​ ce with good in​ dust​ ry prac​ tice."

48

Feasibil​ ity

Once a pro​ ject is approved and moves to de​ v elop ​ ment, the govern​ ment be​ comes the re​ gulator, en​ forc​ ing min​ ing, health and safety, en​ v iron​ ment​ al and fisc​ al con​ trols, and en​ sur​ ing com​ p lian​ ce with the terms of the min​ ing contra​ ct. Many dif​ ferent agen​ cies are now in​ v ol​ v ed. The En​ v iron​ ment​ al Pro​ tec​ tion Agen​ cy would typical​ ly re​ v iew and approve the En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Im​ p act As​ sess​ ment (ESIA), the En​ v iron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plans (EMPs) and the re​ clama​ tion or closure plan. The Minist​ ry of Labor approves train​ ing, re​ cruit​ ment and em​ p loy ​ ment plans. The Pub​ lic Health Agen​ cy approves de​ sign plans for clinics and health facilit​ ies. The Minist​ ry of Civil Works over​ sees road, township, water sup ​ p​ ly and sanita​ ry sys​ tems. And so on. If the co​ unt​ ry has a min​ ing cadastre unit or agen​ cy, it will be in​ v ol​ v ed in re​ cord​ ing claims and han​ dl​ ing applica​ tions for ex​ p lora​ tion per​ mits, and pos​ sib​ ly in the con​ v ers​ ion of ex​ plora​ tion to min​ ing li​ cen​ ses. The min​ ing per​ mits may be aut​ horized and is​ sued by the Minist​ ry of Mines, sig​ ned off on by the Minist​ er him or her​ self.

B UM PS IN THE ROAD Should we start di​ gg​ ing?
Re​ memb​ er our bac​ kyard gold mine at the be​ ginn​ ing of this chapt​ er, when we went through all the ef​ fort to dig up the gold and at the end of the day we lost money? Even if we found a bit more gold, en​ ough to cover our costs, the even​ tu​ al pro​ fit was not worth all the time and ef​ fort (not to men​ tion the fact that our bac​ kyard is now just an un​ sight​ ly hole in the ground). Eith​ er way, that mine is not com​ mer​ ci​ al, re​ gardless of wheth​ er the govern​ ment was going to tax it or not. This could cer​ tain​ ly be the case for a miner​ al dis​ cove​ ry, and all the study up front is the way com​ p an​ ies seek to minim​ ize the risk of this hap ​ p en​ ing. But we didn't even look at the taxes. The situa​ tion is more dif​ ficult when we throw that into the mix. Let's as​ sume our mine tur​ ned out to be quite full of gold in the end, and we stand to make a good pro​ fit be​ fore taxes. But the govern​ ment has a law that re​ q uires it to take 90% of our net pro​ fits. For al​ most any miner, bac​ kyard or ot​ herw​ ise, that mine is not com​ mer​ ci​ al eith​ er, at least not as long as the govern​ ment is going to take this deep cut of the pro​ fit.

49

Mine Op​ era​ tions

In a real world scenario, a miner may come to the govern​ ment to dis​ cuss chang​ ing the law that de​ mands an ot​ herw​ ise pro​ fit​ able mine to be un​ com​ merci​ al. In a contra​ ctu​ al sys​ tem, there may be room to negotiate this mine. And if the 90% tax is un​ reason​ able, this might pro​ v ide an op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to agree on some​ th​ ing lower, where both the govern​ ment and the com​ p any stand to gain from the mine going for​ ward. The feasibil​ ity study will cer​ tain​ ly be neces​ sa​ ry. More know​ ledge, for both part​ ies, should mean fewer un​ cer​ taint​ ies and therefore a quick​ er, more ef​ ficient negotia​ tion. Maybe so. Maybe the geologic stud​ ies and economic an​ alysis clear​ ly show a world class de​ p osit that, under many price and cost scenarios, looks good and will be com​ mer​ ci​ al under the cur​ rent tax sys​ tem in the law or model contra​ ct. But maybe not. The negotia​ tion of the min​ ing contra​ ct can be​ come a long and ar​ du​ ous pro​ cess in which the govern​ ment still knows re​ lative​ ly lit​ tle about the as​ sets it has. In these scenarios, a govern​ ment might hear a com​ mon re​ frain from its com​ p an​ ies: the mine is economic, but only if there are just a few neces​ sa​ ry chan​ ges to the model contra​ ct. Govern​ ment negotiators will hear this over and over again. If there is the op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to negotiate a lower tax or royal​ ty rate or any other pay ​ ment to govern​ ment, any ration​ al com​ p any would take it. If there is an ar​ gu​ ment that the pro​ posed ar​ range​ ments in the model ag​ ree​ ment are un​ economic, then a com​ p any would not be ir​ ration​ al to negotiate terms that made the mine economic under even the worst scenarios (though a forward-looking miner might be cauti​ ous about sign​ ing a deal that is "too good to be true", anti​ cipat​ ing govern​ ment dis​ satis​ fac​ tion and poten​ ti​ al con​ flict down the road). The com​ p any will want to make sure its equivalent of the bac​ kyard gold mine is still pro​ fit​ able after it has in​ cur​ red the costs of gett​ ing the gold out of the ground, to mar​ ket, and paid the govern​ ment its shares. But the govern​ ment will want to be sure of some th​ ings as well. Its job is not to bend over backwards, but to maxim​ ize the total be​ nefit to the co​ unt​ ry. Cor​ rec​ tion, the total NET be​ nefit. This is a key con​ cept. Min​ ing comes at a cost.

50

Feasibil​ ity

The feasibil​ ity study is thus the key here. What can govern​ ments do? What can com​ p an​ ies do to try to avoid lengthy negotia​ tions, just at the point that a mine looks pos​ sible?

Dis​ ag​ ree​ ments and De​ lays
Even if there is not a dis​ cuss​ ion about wheth​ er the mine may not be economical​ ly vi​ able under the taxa​ tion sys​ tem cur​ rent​ ly in place, the govern​ ment and com​ p any may not be al​ ig​ ned on other is​ sues. Maybe the govern​ ment pre​ f​ ers a cer​ tain rail or road route; or it is con​ cer​ ned about mov ​ ing com​ munit​ ies; or there is a de​ sire to use the power plant that will sup ​ p​ ly the mine to also sup ​ p​ ly near​ by areas. There could be any numb​ er of con​ cerns from a variety of agen​ cies. This may or may not be part of form​ al negotia​ tions; it can arise under any sys​ tem. It is not un​ com​ mon to see time frames in which the govern​ ment must eith​ er re​ spond to what the com​ p any has sub​ mit​ ted or it is de​ emed approved. The Model Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment pro​ v ides an ex​ am​ p le: "2.4.5 Com​ plian​ ce with Law; Re​ ques​ ted Chan​ ges by the State. The State shall cause its approp​ riate agen​ cies to re​ view the Docu​ ments as pro​ mpt​ ly as rea​ sonab​ ly pos​ sible after re​ ceipt and to pro​ vide com​ ments thereon to the Com​ pany of any failure to con​ form to Applic​ able Law or to the terms of this Ag​ ree​ ment. The Com​ pany shall cor​ rect any failures to con​ form to Applic​ able Law or to the terms of this Ag​ ree​ ment, or shall sub​ mit the matt​ er for re​ solu​ tion pur​ suant to Sec​ tion 32.2. If the State does not pro​ vide com​ ments of any failure of the Docu​ ments to con​ form with Applic​ able Law or to the terms of this Ag​ ree​ ment with​ in one hundred eighty (180) Days after re​ ceipt of the Docu​ ments, the Docu​ ments shall be de​ emed to have satis​ fied the re​ quire​ ments of this Ag​ ree​ ment, pro​ vided that the forego​ ing shall not re​ lieve the Com​ pany of its ob​ liga​ tion to com​ p​ ly with Applic​ able Law." There may be per​ mits needed be​ fore con​ struc​ tion and op ​ era​ tion, as part of gener​ al laws on busi​ ness, health, safety, labor or oth​ ers, at the local or nation​ al level. This may be han​ dled in the contra​ ct as is pro​ v ided in the Model Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment:

51

Mine Op​ era​ tions

"2.5 Re​ quire​ ment to Ob​ tain Per​ mits: Where the Com​ pany is re​ quired under this Ag​ ree​ ment or Applic​ able Law to ob​ tain a per​ mit, li​ cen​ se or approv​ al, the Com​ pany shall ob​ tain the neces​ sa​ ry per​ mit, li​ cen​ se of approv​ al from the approp​ riate State agen​ cy (in​ clud​ ing Local Govern​ ment) prior to pro​ ceed​ ing with or un​ der​ tak​ ing the ac​ tiv​ ity aut​ horized by the per​ mit, li​ cen​ se, or approv​ al." Any numb​ er of ex​ tern​ al events could also slow down the pro​ cess. New laws may cause the com​ p any to make a new as​ sess​ ment of the viabil​ ity of the mine. Com​ mun​ ity pro​ tests could re​ sult in local op ​ p osi​ tion. Dramatic chan​ ges in price could cause a reevaluation. Natur​ al dis​ ast​ ers could strike.

"Con​ struc​ tion!" or "Con​ struc​ tion?"
A com​ p any may not al​ ways be in a hurry to con​ duct op ​ era​ tions, par​ ticular​ ly if that phase is ex​ p en​ sive, like ex​ p lora​ tion and con​ struc​ tion. It might pre​ f​ er to use its funds on an​ oth​ er pro​ ject, or not at all. A com​ p any may need to raise funds, or just want to bide its time while a par​ ticular com​ mod​ ity price re​ cov ​ ers or the polit​ ical winds chan​ ge. A min​ ing contra​ ct has a value as an ex​ clusive right or opt​ ion to con​ duct the vari​ ous min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies dis​ cus​ sed so far. This ex​ clusive right is valu​ able in and of it​ self to a com​ p any, as poten​ ti​ al pro​ spects are li​ mited and keep ​ ing a com​ p etitor off a piece of land is an ad​ vantage unto it​ self. The com​ p any will not give up that right eas​ i​ ly. Some​ times tak​ ing th​ ings a lit​ tle bit slow​ ly seems like a good strategy. For these kinds of rea​ sons, govern​ ments might in​ clude a firm ob​ liga​ tion for the com​ p any to start de​ v elop ​ ment of the mine once all other ac​ tivit​ ies have fin​ is​ hed. After all this time, the govern​ ment will be keen to start col​ lect​ ing its share of the re​ v enues, to em​ p loy its citizens, and general​ ly to start rea​ p​ ing the be​ nefits it has de​ ter​ mined it stands to reap. Take the Model Mine De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment ar​ ticle 2.6 on Con​ struc​ tion: "(b) With​ in 180 Days after the last to occur of (i) the Com​ pany's re​ ceipt of all per​ mits re​ quired for con​ struc​ tion of the Pro​ ject and (ii) the Com​ pany's sub​ mitt​ al of the Docu​ ments, the Com​ pany shall com​ m​ ence and di​ ligent​ ly con​ tinue con​ struc​ tion of the Pro​ ject until its com​ ple​ tion in ac​ cordan​ ce with the Feasibil​ ity

52

Feasibil​ ity

Study and any non-material chan​ ges re​ sult​ ing from en​ gineer​ ing and other stud​ ies con​ duc​ ted by the Com​ pany after com​ ple​ tion of the Feasibil​ ity Study." Even with lan​ guage like this, when prices of a com​ mod​ ity crash or polit​ ical winds chan​ ge, it will be hard for a govern​ ment to con​ v in​ ce a com​ p any to keep calm and carry on with con​ struc​ tion. At the end of the day, con​ v inc​ ing a fund​ amen​ tal​ ly economical​ ly motivated actor like a com​ p any to con​ duct un​ economic ac​ tiv ​ ity is well nigh im​ p os​ sible. Yet there are still good rea​ sons to in​ clude this sort of lan​ guage. If the delay is not a gener​ al mar​ ket price crash which is ex​ p ec​ ted to end​ ure and that would keep al​ most any com​ pany from min​ ing the de​ p osit, but an issue uni​ q ue to the com​ p any (e.g., a shor​ tage of cash due to bad man​ age​ ment, per​ haps) the govern​ ment may be able to ter​ minate the contra​ ct for a failure to un​ der​ take this ob​ liga​ tion. Some​ times the ob​ liga​ tion is en​ for​ ce​ able with specific fin​ an​ ci​ al penalt​ ies rath​ er than ter​ mina​ tion. This avoids the "all-ornothing" approach. A strong contra​ ctu​ al pro​ v is​ ion might be the dif​ fer​ ence bet​ ween a com​ p any de​ cid​ ing to delay op ​ era​ tions in Co​ unt​ ry A in​ stead of op ​ era​ tions in Co​ unt​ ry B. A contra​ ct might also re​ q uire the sub​ miss​ ion of a con​ struc​ tion plan to the govern​ ment: "(a) [...] the Com​ pany shall sub​ mit to the State a de​ tailed schedule for the per​ for​ mance of all plan​ ned ac​ tivit​ ies dur​ ing the con​ struc​ tion per​ iod if such schedule is not in​ cluded in the Feasibil​ ity Study. The State shall have the right to com​ ment upon and re​ quest ex​ plana​ tion of such schedule and any chan​ ges that occur in the schedule." This lan​ guage from Ar​ ticle 2.6 of the MMDA addres​ ses con​ struc​ tion that is not con​ templated in the feasibil​ ity study, and il​ lustrates one of the cross-cutting themes of this chapt​ er: the com​ p any pro​ v ides a plan or re​ p ort or study to the govern​ ment, and the govern​ ment then must re​ v iew and approve or en​ sure it com​ p l​ ies with law. Ul​ timate​ ly, the min​ ing contra​ ct or code can be viewed as a se​ ries of pro​ p osed plans for every phase of op ​ era​ tions from the com​ p any to the govern​ ment. Not so much the re​ sult of a negotia​ tion, as the framework for a per​ manent and con​ tinu​ ous negotia​ tion.

53

PRO ​ D UC ​ T ION
After the mine, in​ clud​ ing any pro​ cess​ ing facilit​ ies, has been con​ struc​ ted, when the site has been cleared, ac​ cess roads put in place, sur​ face facilit​ ies erec​ ted (pro​ cess​ ing plant, water and or​ ganic waste treat​ ment plants, main​ tenan​ ce garages, warehouses, of​ fices, camp ac​ commoda​ tions, etc.), trans​ miss​ ion lines, water lines, slur​ ry (tail​ ings) pipelines and pump sta​ tions in​ stal​ led, waste and tail​ ings sites and dumps pre​ p ared, sur​ face drainage and water con​ trol sys​ tems put in, over​ burd​ en stripp ​ ing com​ men​ ced and the first cut of ore ex​ p osed, or the shaft or de​ cline ex​ cavated and the de​ v elop ​ ment drifts driv ​ en to the ore body, extra​ c​ tion of the ore can com​ m​ ence. The amount of materi​ al first pul​ led out will be less than the tar​ geted/desig​ ned pro​ duc​ tion rate, and there will be a gradu​ al ramp up to full capac​ ity, as more ground is op ​ ened up. Dur​ ing ramp up, the com​ p any may al​ ready have a full com​ p le​ ment of tech​ n​ ical, pro​ duc​ tion, main​ tenan​ ce and camp and mine ad​ ministrative staff on site, from mine geolog​ ists and en​ gine​ ers (plann​ ing, en​ v iron​ ment​ al, blast​ ing, ground con​ trol, ven​ tila​ tion (if un​ derground), safety, civil, miner​ al pro​ cess​ ing, mech​ an​ ical), to skil​ led trades​ p eo​ p le (electricians, plumb​ ers and hy ​ draulic tech​ nicians, en​ gine mech​ anics, metal work​ ers), to equip ​ ment and plant op ​ erators and other skil​ led labor, to super​ v isors, as​ sor​ ted un​ skil​ led labor, to sup ​ p ort staff (med​ ical staff, com​ mun​ ity re​ la​ tions, human re​ sour​ ces, ac​ count​ ing, in​ for​ ma​ tion tech​ nology, mine site secur​ ity among oth​ ers), man​ ag​ ers, and oth​ ers, or may still need to fin​ ish staff​ ing up. Many work​ ers and pro​ fes​ sion​ als may be housed on site for logist​ ical and op ​ erat​ ing rea​ sons. The mine may op ​ erate around the clock, al​ though in some cases, the mine may only run two shifts with the third re​ ser​ v ed for main​ tenan​ ce.

54

Mine Op​ era​ tions

At some point, if all goes ac​ cord​ ing to plan, the mine will reach and be able to main​ tain pro​ duc​ tion at its plan​ ned month​ ly (daily) rate. Materi​ al is fed to the mill (miner​ al pro​ cess​ ing plant), which will eith​ er re​ cov ​ er much of the metal di​ rect​ ly or pro​ duce a con​ centrate. Wheth​ er the mill meets its scheduled/plan​ ned pro​ duc​ tion of metal or con​ centrate de​ p ends on the ab​ il​ ity of the mine to pro​ v ide materi​ al that meets the mill's quant​ ity and qual​ ity criteria. The right peo​ p le are in place, all the equip ​ ment is there. All sys​ tems are go. Pro​ duc​ tion is humm​ ing along. At long last, your mine is con​ struc​ ted and the pro​ duc​ tion phase has star​ ted. Now you can sit back, relax and have 30 years of pro​ duc​ tion. As one might guess, it pro​ bab​ ly won't be that sim​ p le. There are a large numb​ er of pos​ sible in​ ter​ rup ​ tions to pro​ duc​ tion, and re​ lated is​ sues which may arise. The pro​ cess​ ing plant can fail to ac​ hieve its plan​ ned metal re​ cove​ ry rate or con​ centrate grade, and may need to be fine tuned. Plan​ ned mine pro​ duc​ tivit​ ies may have been over​ es ​ timated and the min​ ing sys​ tem and approach re​ fined, or equip ​ ment chan​ ged out or blast​ ing pat​ terns and load​ ings modified, and so on. Tail​ ings con​ tain​ ment dams can leak and con​ taminated wat​ ers can es​ cape. Even be​ fore the point of full pro​ duc​ tion is rea​ ched, the mine will reach the pro​ duc​ tion rate that meets the criteria set in the contra​ ct for com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion, which may range from 60 to 85% of the mine's pro​ duc​ tion at full plan​ ned capac​ ity. De​ p end​ ing on the con​ figura​ tion of the mine, com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion will be tied eith​ er to mine or pro​ cess​ ing plant pro​ duc​ tion. Why would there be a mini​ mum pro​ duc​ tion criteria in the contra​ ct? This is to en​ sure that the min​ ing com​ p any con​ tinues to pro​ duce ore even if its own busi​ ness strategy may di​ ctate ot​ herw​ ise. If a com​ p any has a numb​ er of iron ore mines ac​ ross the globe, and one is not per​ form​ ing as it wis​ hes, it might put that mine on care and main​ tenan​ ce. It may do so even if the glob​ al price for iron ore is, over​ all, quite good. Be​ cause of the re​ v enues it will lose due to de​ creased pro​ duc​ tion, the co​ unt​ ry would not want to see its mine pro​ -

55

Pro​ duc​ tion

duc​ tion de​ crease in an ot​ herw​ ise be​ nefici​ al mar​ ket for iron ore. Hence the need for pro​ duc​ tion mini​ mums. Dur​ ing ramp-up and then dur​ ing steady state pro​ duc​ tion, it will be in the in​ terest of both the mine op ​ erator and the govern​ ment of​ fici​ als char​ ged to monitor the pro​ ject to main​ tain re​ gular com​ munica​ tion. In​ spec​ tors from the govern​ ment mines in​ spec​ torate or from the Minist​ ry of the En​ v iron​ ment should make re​ gular visits to the site. Re​ lationship main​ tenan​ ce and com​ munica​ tion bet​ ween the mine/​ company and the govern​ ment and bet​ ween the mine and sur​ round​ ing com​ munit​ ies will be es​ senti​ al throug​ hout the pro​ duc​ tion per​ iod. If the mine is part of a horizon​ tal​ ly or vert​ ical​ ly in​ teg​ rated min​ ing and pro​ cess​ ing busi​ ness, the mine may be a cost cent​ er only. This has im​ p lica​ tions for how fisc​ al terms and taxa​ tion are as​ ses​ sed (dis​ cus​ sed in the next sec​ tion of the book), but will also have im​ plica​ tions for how the mine is op ​ erated and as​ sociated in​ frastruc​ ture re​ q uire​ ments met. Dur​ ing the op ​ erat​ ing life of the mine, the IMC may con​ tinue to ex​ p lore for near​ by or con​ tigu​ ous ex​ tens​ ions of the ore body, which could ex​ tend the life of the mine or re​ sult, de​ pend​ ing on mar​ ket con​ di​ tions, in pro​ duc​ tion capac​ ity ex​ p ans​ ion. In eith​ er case, there may also be im​ p lica​ tions for new approv ​ als or amend​ ments to ex​ ist​ ing ag​ ree​ ments or li​ cen​ ses. In the best of op ​ era​ tions, the mine op ​ erator will begin to re​ claim dis​ tur​ bed areas dur​ ing the mine's op ​ erat​ ing life and not wait until the mine rea​ ches the end of its life and is de​ com​ missioned. This is cal​ led pro​ gres​ sive re​ clama​ tion. This may be man​ aged by the op ​ era​ tion or contra​ cted out to local or nation​ al busines​ ses.

56

CLOSURE
In a nutshell, the clos​ ing of a mine is the pro​ cess dur​ ing which the com​ p any dis​ mantles some of the in​ frastruc​ ture and equip ​ ment that has been used to carry out the min​ ing op ​ era​ tions and en​ gages in en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ media​ tion tasks. It is what ul​ timate​ ly de​ ter​ mines the en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p act and much of the soci​ al im​ p act of the mine. This “nutshell” in​ cludes ex​ ten​ sive and com​ p licated pro​ ces​ ses that re​ q uire con​ sider​ able in​ vest​ ment and rigor​ ous con​ trol. The closure stage, like the oth​ ers, can be risky and volatile if care​ ful plann​ ing has not been done. In most cases, com​ p an​ ies negotiate the gener​ al con​ tours of their closure ob​ liga​ tions at the time of the negotia​ tion of the min​ ing contra​ ct. The de​ tails that must be in​ cluded in a closure plan will be specified in the min​ ing contra​ ct or in the min​ ing law in a li​ cen​ se re​ gime, or a bit of both. Then, as closure be​ comes a more pre​ ss​ ing matt​ er, the com​ p any will need to sub​ mit an up ​ dated plan that is more and more specific per​ iodical​ ly. Ar​ ticle 26 of the Model Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment pro​ v ides a good ex​ am​ p le of some parts of this pro​ cess: "26.1 Closure Plan and Closure Ob​ liga​ tions: (a) The Com​ pany shall pre​ pare and de​ liv​ er a closure plan to the State pur​ suant to Sec​ tion 2.4(e) of this Ag​ ree​ ment (“Closure Plan”). The Closure Plan shall address the anti​ cipated en​ viron​ ment​ al, soci​ al and economic state of the Pro​ ject Area dur​ ing the next five-year per​ iod of Min​ ing Op​ era​ tions, and shall be pre​ pared in Con​ sul​ ta​ tion with com​ munit​ ies in the Pro​ ject Area. It shall be con​ sis​ tent with any Com​ mun​ ity De​ velop​ ment Ag​ -

57

Mine Op​ era​ tions

ree​ ments, and pre​ pared con​ sis​ tent with guidan​ ce pro​ vided by the Plann​ ing for In​ teg​ rated Mine Closure Tool​ kit and re​ lated guidan​ ce pub​ lished by the In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ un​ cil on Min​ ing and Met​ als. The Closure Plan shall be up​ dated through the same pro​ cess by which it was pre​ pared each time that there is a sub​ stan​ ti​ al chan​ ge in Pro​ ject op​ era​ tions. In the event that no such up​ dated Closure Plan has been sub​ mit​ ted for five (5) years, the Com​ pany shall de​ liv​ er an up​ dated Closure Plan on the sixth an​ niver​ sa​ ry of the last such sub​ miss​ ion. (b) The Com​ pany shall, after Con​ sul​ ta​ tion with com​ munit​ ies in the areas af​ fected by Min​ ing Op​ era​ tions, de​ liv​ er to the State a pro​ posed final Closure Plan not later than twel​ ve months be​ fore the plan​ ned end of the Com​ mer​ ci​ al Pro​ duc​ tion. After re​ view and com​ ment by the State (with or with​ out modifica​ tion), the Com​ pany shall de​ liv​ er the final Closure Plan to the State by the plan​ ned end of Com​ mer​ ci​ al Pro​ duc​ tion. The final Closure Plan may be amen​ ded by ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Part​ ies, dur​ ing the per​ for​ mance of closure ac​ tivit​ ies, at the re​ quest of the Com​ pany or the State, sub​ ject to any approv​ al re​ quired by Applic​ able Law." The closure ob​ liga​ tions do not end with the sub​ miss​ ion of a closure plan. The com​ p any has to con​ tinue to ac​ tual​ ly im​ p le​ ment that plan. This is what that ob​ liga​ tion looks like: "(c) After ces​ sa​ tion of Com​ mer​ ci​ al Pro​ duc​ tion, the Com​ pany shall con​ tinue to per​ form the re​ quired en​ viron​ ment​ al man​ age​ ment of the Pro​ ject Area as set forth in the En​ viron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plan and the final Closure Plan." And further​ more, the com​ p any has to up ​ date the Govern​ ment on its pro​ gress of im​ plemen​ ta​ tion: "(d) After ces​ sa​ tion of Com​ mer​ ci​ al Pro​ duc​ tion, the Com​ pany shall pro​ vide to the State every 180 Days (or such al​ ter​ native per​ iod as may be ag​ reed by the Part​ ies from time to time) a re​ port ex​ plain​ ing pro​ gress in the im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of the final Closure Plan." Last​ ly, the Govern​ ment will need to in​ spect the final closure and cert​ ify that the com​ pany has ful​ filled its closure ob​ liga​ tions:

58

Closure

"(e) Upon com​ ple​ tion of the final Closure Plan, the State shall in​ spect the Min​ ing Area and pro​ vide the Com​ pany with Notice as to wheth​ er the Com​ pany has com​ pleted closure in ac​ cordan​ ce with the final Closure Plan." What if the govern​ ment is wor​ ried it might have a com​ p any that will not ful​ fill these ob​ liga​ tions? A com​ p any that will take its pro​ fits and run after pro​ duc​ tion has run out? What can the state do to pro​ tect it​ self? The sol​ u​ tion that most contra​ cts and laws use is to re​ q uire the com​ p any to pro​ v ide a fin​ an​ ci​ al guaran​ tee. General​ ly, in non-technical terms, a fin​ an​ ci​ al guaran​ tee is money that is set aside to en​ sure that an ob​ liga​ tion is met. The money can be ac​ cessed by the other party that be​ nefits from the ob​ liga​ tion of the com​ p ly ​ ing party, in this case closure of the mine. If the ob​ liga​ tion is ful​ filled, the fin​ an​ ci​ al guaran​ tee is re​ tur​ ned to the party that pro​ v ided the guaran​ tee and ful​ filled the ob​ liga​ tion: "26.2 Guaran​ tees for Closure Ex​ pen​ ses: The Com​ pany shall with​ in ninety (90) Days of the Ef​ fective Date, pro​ vide a mine closure guaran​ tee to the State. The pur​ pose of this mine closure guaran​ tee is to en​ sure the com​ ple​ tion of the Com​ pany’s Closure Plan. The mine closure guaran​ tee shall be in an amount cal​ culated to be neces​ sa​ ry to im​ ple​ ment the Closure Plan should the Com​ pany fail to im​ ple​ ment the Closure Plan dur​ ing the five-year per​ iod co​ vered by the then cur​ rent Closure Plan. The amount of the guaran​ tee shall be up​ dated any time the Closure Plan is up​ dated, or with the five-year up​ date of the Closure Plan under Sec​ tion 26.1, so that it con​ tinues to be suf​ ficient to en​ sure that all steps in the Closure Plan can be com​ pleted in a satis​ facto​ ry man​ n​ er should the Com​ pany fail to im​ ple​ ment the Closure Plan. [...] (d) The State shall re​ turn to the Com​ pany the full sum of the Com​ pany’s mine closure guaran​ tee with​ in [X] Days fol​ low​ ing verifica​ tion by the State that the Com​ pany has ful​ filled all the ob​ liga​ tions of the final Closure Plan. [...]"

59

Mine Op​ era​ tions

The Model Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment sug​ gests furth​ er monitor​ ing by the local com​ mun​ ity: "26.3 Post-Closure Monitor​ ing: The Com​ pany shall in Con​ sul​ ta​ tion with local com​ mun​ ity lead​ ers, de​ velop and im​ ple​ ment a post-closure monitor​ ing com​ mit​ tee, with the man​ date to super​ v​ ise the monitor​ ing of geop​ hys​ ical stabil​ ity, water qual​ ity, and re​ habilita​ tion of con​ taminated sites and re​ stora​ tion of land for post-closure use. The post-closure monitor​ ing shall take place for a per​ iod after the ces​ sa​ tion of Com​ mer​ ci​ al Pro​ duc​ tion, the length of which shall be ag​ reed in the Closure Plan." One issue which can arise is the ab​ il​ ity of the govern​ ment to pro​ p er​ ly monitor and ver​ ify the com​ p any’s com​ p lian​ ce with its ob​ liga​ tions. This will frequent​ ly re​ q uire tech​ n​ ical and monitor​ ing capac​ ity which the govern​ ment and its re​ gulato​ ry agen​ cies lack. When negotiat​ ing the closure terms and cost, the government's capac​ ity for over​ sight of the pro​ cess should be taken into ac​ count, and if re​ q uired, the costs should in​ clude fund​ ing of tech​ n​ ical ex​ p ert​ ise for the govern​ ment or the pro​ v is​ ion of third party verifica​ tion and over​ sight. One final issue may be the in​ frastruc​ ture as​ sociated with the mine being closed. If the in​ frastruc​ ture is pub​ lic use, there may be a pro​ v is​ ion that al​ lows the govern​ ment to take ow​ nership of that in​ frastruc​ ture and the re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies as​ sociated with it at the end of the mine's life.

60

FISC ​ A L IS ​ S UES
M ONE Y M ATT​ ERS FIS C​ AL RE ​ G IM E S S PE CI​ AL CHAL ​ LENGES HOW TO S PE ND IT

MONEY MATT ​ E RS
Let’s face it: most taxa​ tion re​ gimes are com​ p lex and op ​ aque. But it is taxes that fund the schools, hous​ ing, roads, rail and power. And at end of the day, it is what the govern​ ments and the com​ p an​ ies care about.

B ACK TO THE B AC​ K YA R D G O L D M I N E
Re​ memb​ er that goldmine you thought you found in your bac​ kyard back in the last sec​ tion, "Mine Op ​ era​ tions"? Let's think back to that for a minute. That gold was so hard to get out of the ground, you went $500 in the hole just try ​ ing to get this stuff out of the ground. Even with​ out taxes, it was not worth doing. It wasn't com​ mer​ cial​ ly vi​ able. But maybe you stop ​ p ed search​ ing too soon. Maybe it wasn't a gold watch after all. Your second round with the metal de​ tec​ tor seems to in​ dicate there's real gold down there. New tech​ nology makes it easy to get out of the ground. Maybe now it only costs $1000 an ounce to get out of the ground and to mar​ ket, whereas be​ fore it cost al​ most $1700 an ounce. With gold prices cur​ rent​ ly at $1200 and costs only at $1000, you get $200 an ounce in pro​ fit. When you sell your gold for $1200 an ounce, you'll make $200 pro​ fit. It is worth gett​ ing the gold out of the ground after all.

62

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

The govern​ ment, howev ​ er, will want to share in your $200 of pro​ fit. If it has a fisc​ al sys​ tem that takes near​ ly 90% or more of your $200, maybe spend​ ing that $1000 to get that ounce of gold out of the ground seems like a risky proposition--too risky in fact. Your once pro​ fit​ able mine now looks pre​ tty bleak. Your bac​ kyard gold was com​ mer​ cial​ ly vi​ able, but the in​ troduc​ tion of shar​ ing re​ v enues with the govern​ ment has re​ ndered your bac​ kyard mine un​ economic. It may seem quite ob​ v i​ ous though it bears re-stating: com​ pan​ ies will not un​ der​ take a pro​ ject if there is lit​ tle to no pos​ sibil​ ity of mak​ ing a pro​ fit from it. Be​ cause the govern​ ment will also be​ nefit from the ex​ p lora​ tion and de​ v elop ​ ment of a mine, it may negotiate its “share” in the pro​ fit in order to make sure you will still ex​ p lore and de​ v elop the re​ sour​ ces. This govern​ ment may need to do that, or maybe not. We can​ not know with just this in​ for​ ma​ tion in this high​ ly simplified and stylized ex​ am​ p le. This hy ​ p ot​ het​ ical does cap ​ ture the na​ ture of the com​ mer​ ci​ al as​ sess​ ment of a min​ ing op ​ era​ tion. Is it feasib​ le to make a pro​ fit from this de​ p osit? Then, if you take off the government's share of that, is it still pro​ fit​ able? Let's go back to our ex​ am​ p le and as​ sume you de​ cide to create your own min​ ing com​ pany, Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. Your com​ p any has the ex​ p ert​ ise and know​ ledge about how to get the gold out of the ground and sell it. But the govern​ ment owns the gold your com​ p any needs. The Bac​ kyard Goldmine Com​ p any is going to have to pay the govern​ ment for that gold. It is a partnership, if per​ haps one that feels a bit for​ ced at times. Most govern​ ments will pro​ bab​ ly want to levy a royal​ ty on the value of the gold be​ fore the de​ duc​ tion of costs. And it will want to re​ ceive cor​ p orate in​ come tax from pro​ fits in ad​ di​ tion to this royal​ ty. It might want a bonus when your first ship ​ ment of gold goes to mar​ ket. These dif​ ferent pieces, taken togeth​ er, are how the govern​ ment re​ ceives money from the goldmine. They are com​ mon​ ly cal​ led "the fisc​ al re​ gime". To un​ derstand a state’s min​ ing fisc​ al re​ gime, and to as​ sess its ef​ fective​ ness, one must first un​ derstand the multi​ p le ways in which a state can extra​ ct re​ v enues from a min​ ing pro​ ject. The prin​ cip ​ al “re​ v enue tools” in a "fisc​ al re​ gime" are:

63

Money Matt​ ers

royalt​ ies in​ come tax ex​ cess or windfall pro​ fit taxes re​ sour​ ce rent taxes sign​ ing bonuses and miles​ tone pay ​ ments equ​ ity par​ ticipa​ tions in the min​ ing com​ p any taxes on gains from the trans​ f​ er of in​ terests in the min​ ing com​ p any with​ hold​ ing taxes on cer​ tain pay ​ ments made by the in​ v es​ tor im​ p ort dut​ ies and VAT levied on im​ p orts and purchases by the in​ v es​ tor land or “sur​ face” re​ nt​ als Each of these com​ p onents of state re​ v enue is dis​ cus​ sed more fully in this sec​ tion.

64

FISC ​ A L RE ​ G IMES
When it comes to re​ v enue tools, not all are created equal. Or even equivalent. Or even ter​ rib​ ly similar. They are quite dif​ ferent in the way they are cal​ culated, the func​ tion they serve for poli​ cy pur​ p oses, and how dif​ ficult they are to col​ lect. Simp ​ ly put, a 5% royal​ ty is not equal to nor equivalent to a 5% tax. And as we'll see, even one 5% royal​ ty may not be equal to an​ oth​ er 5% royal​ ty.

Why is this the case?

65

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

There are many rea​ sons, but one of the prima​ ry rea​ sons is that dif​ ferent fisc​ al tools are applied to dif​ ferent bases. Mat​ hematical​ ly, 50% of 100 (50) is bet​ t​ er than 100% of 5 (5). Or as the an​ cient pro​ v erbs have said, a half of a goat is bet​ t​ er than a whole chick​ en. This chapt​ er will il​ lustrate just how dif​ ferent the vari​ ous re​ v enue tools are. The two most im​ p or​ tant miner​ al re​ v enue com​ p onents for most govern​ ments are royalt​ ies and in​ come tax, and this chapt​ er con​ sid​ ers them first and in the greatest de​ tail. In al​ most any co​ unt​ ry in the world, Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. is going to be sub​ ject to these re​ venue tools.

R O YA L T ​ IE S
We'll start with royalt​ ies. They are among the most com​ mon and sim​ p le of the re​ v enue tools.

Royalt​ ies Measured by Pro​ duct Value
Royalt​ ies are most com​ mon​ ly based on the value of the extra​ cted miner​ al pro​ ducts. In Latin, the re​ v enue tool goes by the name “ad valorem”. Let's re​ turn to our bac​ kyard gold mine. The royal​ ty rate in the co​ unt​ ry where Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. is min​ ing the gold is 5%. The value of the gold is $1200 an ounce. If one ounce of gold is extra​ cted and sold, the govern​ ment will take 5% of $1200, so Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. (nickname: BGC) will pay the govern​ ment $60 as the royal​ ty pay ​ ment. Under an ad valorem sys​ tem, as the price of a miner​ al rises, the royal​ ty that goes to the govern​ ment will too. So under that same 5% royal​ ty applic​ able to Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co., if the price of gold goes back up to $2000 an ounce, the royal​ ty pay ​ ment that BGC will make to the Govern​ ment will shoot up to $100 per ounce. Why? Be​ cause 5% of $2000 is $100. What does this lan​ guage look like in contra​ cts? Here is an ex​ am​ p le from Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009), Ar​ ticle 3.13:

66

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

"The In​ ves​ tor shall pay a royal​ ty under Ar​ ticle 47.3.2 of the Miner​ als Law at the date of this Ag​ ree​ ment equal to 5% (five per​ cent) of the sales value of all Pro​ ducts mined from the Contra​ ct Area that are sold, ship​ ped for sale, or used by the In​ ves​ tor. [. . .]" Hopeful​ ly, so far, so good. The royal​ ty cal​ cula​ tion is pre​ tty straightfor​ ward as re​ v enue tools go. Now for a bit more com​ p lex​ ity: how is value to be es​ tablis​ hed? This ques​ tion has two separate as​ p ects: (1) at what point in the mine-to-market pro​ cess is value to be measured, and (2) does the measure​ ment at the selec​ ted point rea​ l​ ly es​ tablish the “value” of the miner​ al in​ v ol​ v ed? One way to minim​ ize the valua​ tion pro​ blem and to simpl​ ify ad​ ministra​ tion is to use an in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price for the value of a miner​ al, such as the Lon​ don Met​ als Ex​ chan​ ge or other pub​ lished mar​ ket price. The price of gold is a good ex​ am​ p le of ex​ act​ ly this kind of in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price. Contra​ cts re​ gular​ ly refer to these in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence prices in order to have a value that is in​ depen​ dent​ ly es​ tablis​ hed by the mar​ ket. Take the gold contra​ ct, Afghanis​ tan Qara Zag​ han (2011): "Ar​ ticle 8. After the start of com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion and based upon a solar calen​ dar [Com​ pany] ag​ rees to pay, month​ ly, to the [Minist​ ry of Mines], royalt​ ies at the rate of twen​ ty six per​ cent (26%) of the gross re​ venue from sale of gold at a price set on the date of sale by the Lon​ don Met​ als Ex​ chan​ ge for each sale of gold. Pay​ ment of Royal​ ty to the [Minist​ ry] is due no later than on the seventh (7) work​ ing day after the end of the month, and is based on the sale of gold from that month." Even with an in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price, there may still be a numb​ er of ques​ tions about the approp ​ riate value of a miner​ al. The base for the royal​ ty is usual​ ly the value at a fixed point such as the mine mouth or the ex​ p ort point. There are a numb​ er of dif​ ferent terms that frequent​ ly arise in mine-to-market de​ ter​ mina​ tions, and for some​ one con​ cer​ ned about how and wheth​ er pro​ duct value is

67

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

measured, it is neces​ sa​ ry to be familiar with those terms. Some of the more com​ mon terms you might see are: Mine mouth valua​ tion: value is de​ ter​ mined at the en​ tran​ ce to the mine, with​ out re​ fer​ ence to any extra value created by fu​ ture pro​ cess​ ing or trans​ p or​ ta​ tion per​ for​ med by the mine owner. Net-Back value: where a miner​ al is sold in pro​ ces​ sed form and is not pro​ ces​ sed by the mine op ​ erator, the royal​ ty base is the price at which the pro​ ces​ sed miner​ al is sold less the cost of pro​ cess​ ing and the cost of trans​ p ort​ ing the miner​ al from the mine to the pro​ cess​ ing facil​ ity. Net Smelt​ er Re​ turn (NSR): the royal​ ty base is the amount paid by the smelt​ er or re​ fin​ er to the mine for miner​ al con​ tain​ ing materi​ al (which is based on the value of the miner​ al con​ tained in the materi​ al) less the trans​ p ort costs to the smelt​ er and the smelt​ er pro​ cess​ ing char​ ge. Free on Board (FOB): where a price is FOB, it in​ cludes the cost of gett​ ing the pro​ duct to the port and on board the ves​ sel, but does not in​ clude shipp ​ ing costs. If there is not an in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price for the miner​ al, there will still need to be an as​ sess​ ment of the mine-to-market point to fix the value of the miner​ al. This adds more com​ p lex​ ity to this de​ ter​ mina​ tion. And now you can see why a 5% royal​ ty is not al​ ways the same thing as a 5% royal​ ty. The big ques​ tion, which it pays to ask for most of these fisc​ al tools, is: "5% of what?" If you are a govern​ ment of​ fici​ al try ​ ing to col​ lect the right amount of royal​ ty, this is very im​ p or​ tant. You may find your​ self in a dis​ p ute over miner​ al valua​ tion quite re​ gular​ ly. Get ex​ p erts, hire lawy ​ ers, do whatev ​ er you need to do to en​ sure you're gett​ ing the royal​ ty that is due. The chapt​ er "So You Think You Need Help After All" addres​ ses these kinds of is​ sues. The second ques​ tion is a man​ ifes​ ta​ tion of the “trans​ f​ er pric​ ing” pro​ blem, dis​ cus​ sed more fully in chapt​ er 3 of this sec​ tion. In brief, while it is general​ ly un​ derstood that the value used as a base for the applica​ tion of an ad valorem royal​ ty should be a value based on so-called “arm’s-length” trans​ ac​ tions bet​ ween will​ ing and un​ related buy ​ ers and sell​ ers,

68

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

such trans​ ac​ tions may be hard to find. In​ deed, if the min​ ing pro​ ject is one com​ p onent of an in​ teg​ rated miner​ als pro​ ject that takes most or all of the out​ p ut to an​ oth​ er loc​ a​ tion for furth​ er pro​ cess​ ing or fab​ rica​ tion, or if the min​ ing com​ p any primari​ ly sells to af​ filiated com​ p an​ ies, there may be no arm’s-length trans​ ac​ tions. This is an​ oth​ er rea​ son why those Lon​ don Met​ als Ex​ chan​ ge and pub​ lished prices are so handy--who needs an arm's length trans​ ac​ tion when you can read the price in the newspap ​ er?

Royalt​ ies Measured by Pro​ duct Volume
Under a unit or volume-based royal​ ty, the com​ p any pays a fixed amount for each unit of pro​ duc​ tion. In these sys​ tems, wheth​ er gravel is sell​ ing for $5 or $50 dol​ lars per unit, only a set amount is paid to the state for it, maybe $1 per tonne. Unit royalt​ ies are rare and general​ ly are li​ mited to very low value com​ modit​ ies such as stone and gravel. With​ out in​ tend​ ing any of​ fen​ se against the gravel and stone in​ dust​ ry, this kind of royal​ ty is...well, not very im​ p or​ tant for most in​ dustri​ al min​ ing contra​ cts around the world, so don't worry too much about it.

Royalt​ ies Measured by Mine Pro​ fitabil​ ity
Some juris​ dic​ tions, in​ clud​ ing Canada and Botswana, util​ ize royalt​ ies based on pro​ ject pro​ fit levels. These royalt​ ies can be quite attrac​ tive to a com​ p any. Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. is rea​ l​ ly hop ​ ing for this one. Why? If there is no pro​ fit, no royal​ ty will be due. The royal​ ty level will in​ crease as pro​ fit in​ creases. This makes Canada and Botswana quite attrac​ tive to in​ v es​ tors, as they will not have to pay any royal​ ty in the early years when there is no pro​ fit. Profit-based royalt​ ies do not simpl​ ify the valua​ tion ques​ tion. . . they mere​ ly trans​ f​ er the ques​ tion from “what is the value?” to “what is the pro​ fit?” This can be hard​ er to figure. A profit-based royal​ ty can also be cal​ led a net pro​ fit royal​ ty, net in​ terest royal​ ty, or net pro​ ceeds royal​ ty. The royal​ ty rates set on a pro​ fit basis will be general​ ly higher-sometimes well above 5%-- than those set on the sale value basis (bet​ ween 1% and 4%). This will make more sense once you read the chapt​ er on in​ come tax, but just trust us for now: the al​ low​ able costs to be de​ duc​ ted for a royal​ ty measured by mine pro​ fitabil​ ity will

69

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

be much great​ er than in the case of ad valorem royalt​ ies (the first ones dis​ cus​ sed). Stay tuned for more on other profit-based re​ v enue tools in fu​ ture sec​ tions.

Slid​ ing Scale Royalt​ ies
So far, we've been talk​ ing about fixed rate royalt​ ies, but royal​ ty rates can vary as well. Let's say there is a new slid​ ing scale royal​ ty that will now apply to Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. When gold is at or below $1000 per ounce, the royal​ ty rate is 2.5%. When the gold price is bet​ ween $1001 to $1500 per ounce, the royal​ ty rate is 5%. When the gold price is bet​ ween $1501 to $2000 per ounce, the rate is 7.5%. If the gold price is $2001 per ounce or high​ er, the rate is 10%. As​ sume that Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. creates one ounce of gold each month and it sells that gold on the first day of each month. Furth​ er as​ sume that each month, the price goes up. A high​ er price will be​ nefit Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co., of co​ ur​ se, but it will also be good for the govern​ ment. Let's com​ p are a flat 5% royal​ ty ver​ sus the new slid​ ing scale royal​ ty. Janua​ ry 1 price is $900 per ounce: the slid​ ing scale is at 2.5% and yields $22.50 to the govern​ ment, while a flat 5% yields $45. Feb​ rua​ ry 1 price is $1300 per ounce: the slid​ ing scale is at 5% and yields $65 to the govern​ ment and the flat 5% royal​ ty pay ​ ment to the govern​ ment is $65. March 1 price is $1700 per ounce: the slid​ ing scale is at 7.5% and yields a pay ​ ment of $127.50, while the flat royal​ ty yields $85. April 1 price is $2100 per ounce: the slid​ ing scale is at 10% and yields a pay ​ ment of $210 while the flat 5% royal​ ty pay ​ ment to the govern​ ment is $105. While the slid​ ing scale yiel​ ded less to the govern​ ment at the lower price, the govern​ ment does much bet​ t​ er at the high​ er price. As​ sum​ ing the cost of gett​ ing that gold out of the ground is not going up too, a high​ er price leaves Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. and the govern​ ment bet​ t​ er off. This is what a slid​ ing scale royal​ ty looks like in the Li​ beria - China Union (2009) contra​ ct, Sec​ tion 15.1(b):

70

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

"The royal​ ty rate for ship​ ments or sales of Iron Ore in any month dur​ ing the Term shall be as fol​ lows: (i) when the Index Price is US$100 per met​ ric ton or less the royal​ ty will be 3.25%, (ii) when the Index Price is great​ er than US$100 per met​ ric ton and less than US$125 per met​ ric ton, the royal​ ty will be 3.5%, (iii) when the Index Price is great​ er than US$125 per met​ ric ton and less than US$150 per met​ ric ton, the royal​ ty will be 4%, and (iv) when the Index Price is US$150 per met​ ric ton or more the royal​ ty will be 4.5%. The "Index Price" shall be the CVRD spot price FOB Brazil for ship​ ments to China for the same pro​ duct of equivalent grade and qual​ ity pro​ duced at [the mine]." In this pro​ v is​ ion, "CVRD spot price FOB Brazil" re​ f​ ers to a pub​ lished price for iron ore that is com​ p ar​ able to the price of the pro​ duct pro​ duced at the mine. When that price is high, it is pre​ sumed that the pro​ fitabil​ ity of the pro​ ject is high, and thus a high​ er royal​ ty will be rea​ son​ able. In these ex​ am​ p les, the royal​ ty chan​ ged with the price, but other tri​ gg​ ers can be used. In South Af​ rica, the royal​ ty rate goes up from a minim​ al amount as pro​ fits go up, from 0.5% to 7% for un​ refined miner​ als. The theo​ ry be​ hind a royal​ ty is that it is a pay ​ ment to the state for the miner​ al re​ sour​ ces owned by the state on be​ half of the peo​ p le. A royal​ ty is not, strict​ ly speak​ ing, a “tax”. It is an ex​ chan​ ge for the right to mine. Therefore, royal​ ty pro​ v is​ ions are often found in a state’s min​ ing law rath​ er than in its tax law. Re​ gardless of the philosoph​ ical un​ der​ p inn​ ing, howev ​ er, royalt​ ies are a cost to the in​ v es​ tor, like taxes, and are viewed by in​ v es​ tors as the equivalent of a tax for fin​ anc​ ing plann​ ing pur​ p oses. Which br​ ings us to...

COR​ PORATE IN​ COM E TAX
A cor​ p orate in​ come tax is a stan​ dard ele​ ment of every min​ ing fisc​ al re​ gime. In​ deed, a cor​ p orate in​ come tax is a part of any busi​ ness en​ tity's life. Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. will de​ finite​ ly be sub​ ject to cor​ p orate in​ come tax. In​ deed, be​ cause it is a min​ ing com​ p any, it will li​ ke ​ ly be sub​ ject to speci​ al in​ come tax rules for min​ ing pro​ jects, some of which may be use​ ful for it to re​ coup the large costs as​ sociated with the min​ ing in​ dust​ ry, while oth​ ers may tax the high pro​ fits that can occur.

71

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Cor​ p orate in​ come taxes are measured by the total in​ come of the busi​ ness less op ​ erat​ ing costs and an al​ lowan​ ce that per​ mits the cost of the com​ p any’s in​ v est​ ment in the mine to be re​ covered over a numb​ er of years. Most other amounts pay ​ able by the min​ ing com​ pany to the govern​ ment, such as royalt​ ies, im​ p ort dut​ ies, bonuses, and the like, will be de​ duc​ ted in de​ ter​ min​ ing the com​ p any’s tax​ able in​ come. (Some pay ​ ments might be cal​ culated after the tax, but let's leave that aside for now.) Let us il​ lustrate. As​ sume that Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. man​ aged to generate $12,000 in total re​ v enues in its first year of busi​ ness from sell​ ing a few pieces of gold here and there while it set up its of​ fice, hired staff, and the like. As​ sume that it had over​ head costs of $500 for the year (for those that might be wor​ ried about wheth​ er any capit​ al ex​ p en​ di​ ture has been in​ v es​ ted in the gold mine, as​ sume that the an​ sw​ er is "no, not yet" de​ spite the fact that this would be well near im​ p os​ sible in real life). For simplic​ ity, as​ sume that the com​ p any sold 10 oun​ ces of gold, and the price is $1200 an ounce, yield​ ing $12,000 in com​ p any re​ venues. Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. pro​ p er​ ly paid its royal​ ty on the value of the gold it sold, which is still a rate of 5%, and 5% of $12,000 is $600. It still costs $1000 an ounce. The cor​ porate in​ come tax rate is 25%. What is the cor​ p orate in​ come tax due on this ex​ am​ p le? Start with $12,000, the total re​ v enues Bac​ kyard Mine Co. generated. If there were no de​ duc​ tions for costs or an​ y th​ ing else al​ lowed at all, the govern​ ment would get 25% of $12,000. But that's not the way cor​ p orate in​ come tax typical​ ly works. It is try ​ ing to tax pro​ fit, so it al​ lows for the de​ duc​ tion of costs (contra​ st this to royal​ ty above, which did not). We need to start de​ duct​ ing costs (that are al​ lowed to be de​ duc​ ted by the tax code) to get to the base to which the in​ come tax rate will apply. Put simp ​ ly, we need to find the "tax​ able in​ come" of Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. and then apply the 25% rate to it. The royal​ ty pay ​ ment to govern​ ment will be sub​ trac​ ted first, so $12,000-$600 = $11,400. Now sub​ tract the cost of extra​ ct​ ing the gold, $10,000, from the $11,400, leav ​ ing $1400. Now we need to de​ duct over​ head costs of $500 from $1400. This gets us to $900 of tax​ able in​ come. It is on this amount, our tax​ able in​ come of $900, that we apply the 25% cor​ -

72

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

porate in​ come tax rate. Bac​ kyard Goldmine's cor​ p orate in​ come tax pay ​ ment for this year would be $225. Be​ fore we move on to more com​ p licated de​ duc​ tions, it bears not​ ing that cor​ p orate in​ come taxes around the world have fall​ en in re​ cent years, and now are general​ ly in the range of 25% to 35%. Check your local and nation​ al tax code for de​ tails on your applic​ able cor​ p orate in​ come tax rate. As im​ p or​ tant as the in​ come tax rate is, the rules for measur​ ing in​ come are equal​ ly vital in de​ ter​ min​ ing the im​ p act of the in​ come tax, as we saw above with our first ex​ am​ p le. These measure​ ment rules can be quite com​ p lex and have a sig​ nificant im​ p act on the tim​ ing of in​ come tax pay ​ ments when tax codes start to take ac​ count of the huge los​ ses that min​ ing com​ p an​ ies accrue in the early years of a min​ ing pro​ ject. The cal​ cula​ tion of tax​ able in​ come is an area that could be a whole book on its own. For ex​ am​ p le, de​ p recia​ tion of as​ sets and the de​ duc​ tion of in​ terest from debt both re​ duce tax​ able in​ come. These are dis​ cus​ sed more below and in the next chapt​ er. We look at a few of the key rules below.

De​ precia​ tion of Capit​ al In​ vest​ ments
It’s easy to un​ derstand the basics of a tax cal​ cula​ tion. You take money com​ ing in, sub​ tract money going out, and voila … that’s your in​ come tax base. Th​ ings get a lit​ tle tri​ ckier —but not too much—with the large in​ v est​ ments general​ ly made at the start of a min​ ing pro​ ject. In that case, rath​ er than sub​ tract​ ing the costs paid in one lump sum, tax rules pro​ v ide de​ p recia​ tion rules that make a com​ p any sub​ tract those ex​ p en​ ses a lit​ tle at a time for a numb​ er of years. From a com​ p any’s per​ spec​ tive, the fast​ er the bet​ t​ er, as it’s al​ ways bet​ t​ er for tax​ p ay ​ ers to pay their taxes as far in the fu​ ture as pos​ sible. That’s why many min​ ing com​ p an​ ies will push for so-called “ac​ celerated de​ p recia​ tion”.

73

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Loss Carry For​ ward
A typ ​ ical min​ ing com​ p any that is un​ der​ tak​ ing a min​ ing pro​ ject from the be​ ginn​ ing will have much high​ er ex​ p en​ di​ ture than in​ come in its in​ iti​ al years, as it needs to in​ v est in miner​ al dis​ cove​ ry and mine con​ struc​ tion be​ fore it can begin re​ ceiv ​ ing any re​ v enue. The hy ​ p ot​ het​ ical com​ p any, Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co., would be no dif​ ferent. It has never mined in any other juris​ dic​ tion be​ fore, so when it starts it has no other pro​ jects with in​ come that could af​ fect how it is taxed. How would Loss Carry For​ ward help Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co.? In​ come tax laws re​ cogn​ ize that sever​ al years of ex​ p en​ di​ ture with no pro​ fit is hard on a min​ ing com​ p any, or any com​ p any. Thus, the law per​ mits tax​ p ay ​ ers to de​ duct in fol​ low​ ing tax years items that could have been de​ duc​ ted in de​ ter​ min​ ing tax​ able in​ come in the cur​ rent year but were not “used” be​ cause other per​ mit​ ted de​ duc​ tions had al​ ready been applied to re​ duce tax​ able in​ come to zero in the cur​ rent year. For ex​ am​ p le, let's say the Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. had $5000 in over​ head costs for the year in​ stead of $500. We start still with $12,000, de​ duct a royal​ ty pay ​ ment to the govern​ ment of $600 and the cost of extra​ ct​ ing the gold, $10,000, leav ​ ing us with the same $1400 be​ fore the de​ duc​ tion of over​ head costs. If we now de​ duct $5000 from $1400, we are in the red, -$3600. At this point, the govern​ ment does not want 25% of $3600! In​ stead, the cor​ p orate in​ come tax pay ​ ment on that negative amount will be con​ sidered zero, and 25% of zero is zero. But what hap ​ p ens to that -$3600? The de​ duc​ tions ex​ ceed​ ing in​ come for year one can be car​ ried over to year two, and of​ fset against year two in​ come to re​ duce taxes pay ​ able in year two. Un​ used de​ duc​ tions that can be car​ ried for​ ward for use in fol​ low​ ing years are cus​ tomari​ ly cal​ led “loss carry for​ wards". Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. will be able to carry that loss for​ ward into the next year and de​ duct it from its re​ v enues next year, in ad​ di​ tion to the other de​ duc​ tions (royal​ ty, cost of extra​ ct​ ing the gold, etc.). Most tax codes will limit the length of time com​ p an​ ies can con​ tinue car​ ry ​ ing for​ ward such un​ used de​ duc​ tions, and if they can​ not be of​ fset against in​ come with​ in the re​ levant time per​ iod, they are forev ​ er lost. Some com​ mon per​ iods are 5 years, 7 years, 10

74

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

years, and even an un​ limited carry for​ ward. In co​ unt​ ries where there is a limit, the dis​ ap ​ pearan​ ce of un-utilized loss carry for​ wards can be per​ ceived as a positive re​ sult for the state be​ cause it will ac​ celerate (and in​ crease) the in​ come taxes paid by the com​ p any. Min​ ing com​ p an​ ies will often press for ex​ tens​ ions for long​ er per​ iods of the basic loss carry for​ ward pro​ v is​ ions in the tax law in order to en​ sure that all al​ low​ able los​ ses can be used to of​ fset in​ come and thereby re​ duce total cor​ p orate tax li​ abilit​ ies. Mine ex​ p lora​ tion may last 10 years, then an​ oth​ er 4 years for con​ struc​ tion. If loss carry for​ wards run out dur​ ing this time per​ iod in which the min​ ing com​ p any is only in​ curr​ ing steep los​ ses, there is hard​ ly any point to the loss carry for​ ward. At the point the com​ p any is generat​ ing re​ v enues, in year 14, there would be no loss carry for​ ward avail​ able. That would, to say the least, not be the out​ come Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. would hope for. And it is li​ ke ​ ly that Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. would not in​ v est in a co​ unt​ ry with such a re​ gime, un​ less there was some other very com​ p ell​ ing rea​ son. Some tax codes per​ mit loss carry for​ wards to sur​ v ive forev ​ er. These tax codes limit the amount that can be used in any year as a way to limit the ef​ fect of the un​ limited carry for​ ward. We will leave this chapt​ er with a point to con​ sid​ er: min​ ing is hard​ ly the only capit​ al in​ ten​ sive in​ dust​ ry. From this view, de​ spite the ar​ gu​ ments that Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. will cer​ tain​ ly try to get as much loss carry for​ ward be​ nefit as pos​ sible, is speci​ al tax treat​ ment de​ ser​ v ed?

Ring Fenc​ ing
Ring fenc​ ing. Out of all the tax phrases we have dis​ cus​ sed so far, this might be the one you would puzzle over the most with​ out a bit of ex​ p lana​ tion. Rings? F​ ences? Am I still in the tax sec​ tion? Yes, you are. Let us ex​ p lain. For in​ come tax pur​ p oses, min​ ing pro​ jects are often "ring fen​ ced." This means that the items of in​ come and de​ duc​ tion or loss from one pro​ ject can​ not be com​ bined with the items of in​ come and de​ duc​ tion or loss from an​ oth​ er pro​ ject for in​ come tax pur​ p oses. The con​ sequ​ ence to a min​ ing com​ p any of a “ring fenc​ ing” re​ q uire​ ment is that the min​ ing com​ p any can​ not com​ bine the de​ duc​ tion and loss items that arise in its de​ v elop ​ ment of a

75

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

second mine to of​ fset the in​ come aris​ ing from an older mine where all loss carry for​ wards have been used and in​ come tax is now being paid. So if Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. finds an​ oth​ er gold de​ p osit sever​ al hundred miles down the road, ring fenc​ ing rules will de​ ter​ mine wheth​ er ex​ p en​ ses from the second mine can be used to of​ fset taxes from the first mine.

From the government’s view​ p oint, ring fenc​ ing ac​ celerates the col​ lec​ tion of in​ come tax re​ v enue by the host govern​ ment, and it also keeps an ear​ li​ er in​ v es​ tor from hav ​ ing an ad​ vantage in bi​ dd​ ing for new pro​ jects. From the min​ ing com​ p any’s view​ p oint, the ab​ s​ ence of ring fenc​ ing makes it eas​ i​ er to de​ v elop a second mine in the juris​ dic​ tion in which it has the first mine, be​ cause it can use the ex​ p lora​ tion and de​ v elop ​ ment ex​ p en​ ses of the second mine to of​ fset taxes pay ​ able on the in​ come from the first mine. This re​ sults in a large re​ duc​ tion in the cost of de​ v elop ​ ing the second mine: if the in​ v es​ tor has $100,000,000 of tax​ able in​ come at the first mine in year 8, and $50,000,000 of ex​ p lora​ tion ex​ p en​ ses at the second mine, and could use those ex​ p en​ se to of​ fset the in​ come from the first mine, tax​ able in​ come would drop by $50,000,000. At a 30% tax rate, the in​ v es​ tor would have saved $15,000,000 that ot​ herw​ ise would have gone to the govern​ ment that year. If the second mine is suc​ cess​ ful, the gain would not be a per​ manent gain to the in​ v es​ tor, be​ cause that $50,000,000 would not be avail​ able to of​ fset in​ come from the second mine when it starts to accrue, but it could ef​ fective​ ly delay the flow of that $15,000,000 tax to the govern​ ment by many years.

76

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

Most govern​ ments will seek ring fenc​ ing be​ cause of its re​ lative​ ly favor​ able ef​ fect on short term tax re​ v enues, and be​ cause it is be​ lieved to level the play ​ ing field on new ex​ plora​ tion ven​ tures bet​ ween min​ ing com​ p an​ ies al​ ready op ​ erat​ ing in the co​ unt​ ry and poten​ ti​ al new en​ trants.

Separate Tax Rates for the Min​ ing In​ dust​ ry
One last point. While cor​ p orate in​ come taxes general​ ly apply to all sec​ tors, it is not un​ com​ mon for speci​ al rules to apply to the min​ ing sec​ tor. These may be speci​ al rules for de​ precia​ tion, or speci​ al li​ mita​ tions on the ab​ il​ ity to de​ duct cer​ tain “home of​ fice” costs from in​ come, or they may in​ clude speci​ al rates. With re​ gard to the ques​ tion of speci​ al rates, in​ v es​ tors may argue the min​ ing busi​ ness is so capit​ al in​ ten​ sive that min​ ing in​ v est​ ment should be en​ couraged through a lower tax rate, whereas the state may argue that be​ cause min​ ing utilizes a de​ p let​ ing re​ sour​ ce that can​ not be re​ newed, it should be taxed at a high​ er rate than other busi​ ness. Well, that wraps up our dis​ cuss​ ion of cor​ p orate in​ come tax. With​ out a doubt, it is a sub​ ject that can and does have en​ tire books de​ v oted to it. We hope this sec​ tion pro​ v ided an ac​ cessib​ le prim​ er to the topic and to royalt​ ies, the two most im​ p or​ tant re​ v enue tools used by govern​ ments to re​ ceive a moneta​ ry re​ turn on their miner​ als.

B ONUS ES
Bonuses are a com​ mon ele​ ment of a min​ ing fisc​ al re​ gime in which miner​ al rights are primari​ ly es​ tablis​ hed through specific contra​ cts rath​ er than through the grant of li​ cen​ ses under a re​ gime that does not re​ q uire negotia​ tion for the is​ suan​ ce of the li​ cen​ se. Bonus ob​ liga​ tions are typical​ ly stated in terms of ob​ liga​ tions to pay fixed amounts on the oc​ curr​ ence of specific events, such as the ef​ fective​ ness of a contra​ ct, the com​ men​ ce​ ment of com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion, or the rea​ ch​ ing of stated pro​ duc​ tion levels.

77

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Sig​ na​ ture Bonus
As the name im​ p l​ ies, a “sig​ na​ ture bonus” is paid in con​ nec​ tion with the sig​ na​ ture or ef​ fective​ ness of a min​ ing contra​ ct or a min​ ing li​ cen​ se. One of the origin​ al pur​ p oses of a sig​ na​ ture bonus is to help the govern​ ment re​ coup its negotia​ tion costs. While the amount may be the sub​ ject of negotia​ tion, the sig​ na​ ture bonus nor​ mal​ ly in​ vol​ v es the sim​ p le pay ​ ment of a lump-sum amount. A gener​ al rule is the high​ er the ex​ pec​ ted value of the de​ p osit, the high​ er the sig​ na​ ture bonus. From the state’s view​ p oint, a sig​ na​ ture bonus should be paid con​ cur​ rent​ ly with contra​ ct sig​ na​ ture and not at some later date, after the contra​ ct has be​ come ef​ fective. Why? Be​ cause the state may have no ef​ fective re​ medy for failure to pay at that time other than ter​ mina​ tion of the contra​ ct. This may be very dif​ ficult for the state to do if the contra​ ct ot​ herw​ ise is viewed as a good deal for the state. No one wants to have to start over again. If the pay ​ ment must be made be​ fore the contra​ ct be​ comes ef​ fective, and the com​ p any fails to make it, then the state does not have to go through the pro​ cess of ter​ minat​ ing the contra​ ct, it can find a new com​ p any in​ stead. For a com​ p any, the lack of a bi​ nd​ ing contra​ ct in place makes pro​ v id​ ing a large upfront pay ​ ment a risky pro​ p osi​ tion. On the other hand, sig​ na​ ture bonuses or other pay ​ ments made to the state be​ fore a de​ velop ​ ment de​ cis​ ion has been made are dis​ liked by in​ v es​ tors. Prior to the time the in​ v es​ tor de​ cides to de​ v elop a dis​ covered de​ p osit, the in​ v es​ tor will view all its ex​ p en​ di​ tures as speculative and high​ ly risky. Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. will not want to pay any bonus, and sig​ na​ ture bonuses are par​ ticular​ ly harsh on pro​ ject economics since pro​ fitabil​ ity may never occur if miner​ als are not found; and even if it does, it is years away. It is therefore often eas​ i​ er for a state to re​ quest and ob​ tain size​ able bonuses as​ sociated with specific stages of de​ v elop ​ ment and pro​ duc​ tion.

Pro​ duc​ tion Bonuses
By contra​ st, pro​ duc​ tion bonuses are treated by the in​ v es​ tor as part of over​ all pro​ duc​ tion costs, and are part of the total de​ cis​ ion made to de​ v elop the mine. An ex​ am​ p le of a staged pro​ duc​ tion bonus from DRC - Tenke Fun​ gurume contra​ ct (2010), Ar​ ticle 4(d):

78

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

"In ad​ d i​ tion, TFM [Min​ ing Com​ pany] will pay to Gecamines [Nation​ al Min​ ing Com​ pany] the fol​ low​ ing ad​ dition​ al amounts: - US$ 5 mm after the con​ d i​ tions set forth in Ar​ ticle 15 herein have been met in full force and ef​ fect - US$ 5 mm at 0.5 mm ton​ nes cum​ ulative co​ pp​ er pro​ duc​ tion from the Pro​ ject - US$ 5 mm at 1.0 mm ton​ nes cum​ ulative co​ pp​ er pro​ duc​ tion from the Pro​ ject - US$ 5 mm at 1.5 mm ton​ nes cum​ ulative co​ pp​ er pro​ duc​ tion from the Pro​ ject - US$ 5 mm at 2.0 mm ton​ nes cum​ ulative co​ pp​ er pro​ duc​ tion from the Pro​ ject - US$ 5 mm at 2.5 mm ton​ nes cum​ ulative co​ pp​ er pro​ duc​ tion from the Pro​ ject." Bonuses are the most sim​ p le of all re​ v enue tools. Lest you get too com​ fort​ able, let's go to the most con​ trover​ si​ al of re​ v enue tools.

S TATE E QU​ ITY PAR​ TICIPA​ TION
Im​ agine that Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. has been doing fair​ ly well for the past few years and it is about to go into com​ mer​ ci​ al pro​ duc​ tion of gold, at long last. Just at this point, your lawy ​ er gets out the Min​ ing Contra​ ct and tells you to sit down, she has some im​ p or​ tant news for you: the state is about to come in as a sharehold​ er in Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co.. You have no choice in the matt​ er what​ soev ​ er. The state has the right to join in as a legal in​ terest hold​ er in the min​ ing com​ p any. The issue of state equ​ ity par​ ticipa​ tion in min​ ing contra​ cts may be the most con​ trover​ si​ al as​ p ect of any com​ p onent of the fisc​ al re​ gime. State par​ ticipa​ tion in pro​ ject equ​ ity can take many forms: the state could par​ ticipate as a norm​ al in​ v es​ tor, and pay a share of pro​ ject ex​ p en​ ses pro​ p or​ tionate to its ac​ q uired equ​ ity in​ terest.

79

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

the state could re​ ceive what is cal​ led a “car​ ried in​ terest” where the in​ v es​ tor pays all or a por​ tion of the state’s nomin​ al share of pro​ ject costs, and re​ cov ​ ers that amount, plus a re​ turn, from di​ v idends that would ot​ herw​ ise be paid to the state. the state could make some non-cash con​ tribu​ tion to the pro​ ject in re​ turn for its equ​ ity, such as the pro​ v is​ ion of in​ frastruc​ ture facilit​ ies. the state could trade re​ duc​ tions in fu​ ture tax li​ abilit​ ies for a pre​ sent equ​ ity in​ terest in the pro​ ject. the state could re​ ceive ab​ solute free in​ terest, pur​ suant to which it would pay noth​ ing for its in​ terest and would be en​ tit​ led to di​ v idends as soon as any other in​ v es​ tor in the min​ ing com​ p any re​ ceived any dis​ tribu​ tion. While the chal​ lenges of state par​ ticipa​ tion are many, a few are im​ p or​ tant to highlight. The pre​ ssure for state equ​ ity par​ ticipa​ tion usual​ ly comes from both politicians and or​ dina​ ry citizens. There is com​ mon​ ly a gener​ al feel​ ing that be​ cause the miner​ al is the pro​ per​ ty of the state, the state should par​ ticipate in the ex​ p loita​ tion of and share in the “upside” of its miner​ al de​ p osits – and the ob​ v i​ ous way to do this is to par​ ticipate in pro​ ject ow​ nership. It is ar​ gued, not with​ out just​ ifica​ tion, that state par​ ticipa​ tion in ow​ nership can as​ s​ ist in the trans​ f​ er of tech​ nology and in the de​ v elop ​ ment of man​ age​ ment capac​ ity, and place the state in a bet​ t​ er posi​ tion to take over full ow​ nership and op ​ erat​ ing re​ spon​ sibil​ ity upon ex​ p ira​ tion of the min​ ing contra​ ct or the un​ der​ ly ​ ing min​ ing li​ cen​ se. Some states have been re​ lative​ ly suc​ cess​ ful with this strategy. But state par​ ticipa​ tion in a pro​ ject com​ p any is a double-edged sword. Par​ ticipa​ tion in ow​ nership im​ p l​ ies, in the first in​ stan​ ce, par​ ticipa​ tion in the costs of de​ v elop ​ ing the mine, un​ less the state re​ ceives an ab​ solute free carry, which has its own is​ sues. De​ v elop ​ ing states, which most com​ mon​ ly make this de​ mand, typical​ ly do not have that amount of money rea​ di​ ly avail​ able, which means that they have to ask the in​ v es​ tor com​ p any to pay the state share of de​ v elop ​ ment costs as well as the in​ v es​ tor’s share. And if the state does try to make the pay ​ ment it​ self, it will pro​ bab​ ly be di​ v ert​ ing funds from ur​ gent in​ frastruc​ ture or other de​ v elop ​ ment needs.

80

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

Furth​ er, un​ less the state uses great care in struc​ tur​ ing its in​ v est​ ment in the min​ ing com​ pany, it may also find it​ self in a re​ lative​ ly power​ less posi​ tion. In a cor​ p orate struc​ ture, the major​ ity owner can nor​ mal​ ly con​ trol the pay ​ ment of di​ v idends and make most cor​ porate de​ cis​ ions, so that a minor​ ity state sharehold​ er must negotiate a com​ p licated sharehold​ er ag​ ree​ ment to pro​ tect it​ self from such th​ ings as a de​ cis​ ion to use all avail​ able free cash to upgrade the mine rath​ er than to dis​ tribute di​ v idends to the com​ p any’s own​ ers. Such par​ ticipa​ tion can lead to an ac​ rimoni​ ous re​ lationship bet​ ween the state and the com​ p any. There can be many dis​ ag​ ree​ ments over costs, strategy, and other areas that typical​ ly fall ex​ clusive​ ly with​ in the decision-making power of the com​ p any. Therefore, if the state is truly look​ ing for re​ v enue and not pre​ stige, it should at least con​ sid​ er wheth​ er the ex​ p ec​ ted be​ nefits of equ​ ity ow​ nership can be sub​ stan​ tial​ ly ac​ hieved through the use of other more flexib​ le fisc​ al in​ stru​ ments. Fin​ al​ ly, com​ p an​ ies, par​ ticular​ ly private com​ p an​ ies, are general​ ly free to partn​ er with whomev ​ er they would like to con​ duct their busi​ ness. Putt​ ing togeth​ er the right peo​ p le for a team of any kind, wheth​ er as sharehold​ ers or joint ven​ ture partn​ ers, can be critical​ ly im​ p or​ tant for the suc​ cess of a pro​ ject. State par​ ticipa​ tion li​ mits the choice of partn​ ers a com​ p any can choose for man​ age​ ment and ow​ nership. While there may be be​ nefits to the state, it can pre​ sent ad​ dition​ al chal​ lenges for a com​ p any.

CAPIT​ A L G A I N S T A XE S
In ad​ di​ tion to the pro​ fits generated through the sale of miner​ als, min​ ing com​ p an​ ies and in​ v es​ tors may also rea​ l​ ize pro​ fits through the sale of a pro​ ject or min​ ing right to other com​ p an​ ies. In some cases, the gains from such trans​ ac​ tions have been quite spec​ tacular, and com​ pan​ ies and govern​ ments have been high​ ly criticized and the pub​ lic frustrated when the co​ unt​ ry does not share in the gain. This is par​ ticular​ ly so when the in​ v es​ tor is sell​ ing or “flipp ​ ing” its in​ v est​ ment early in the in​ v est​ ment life when the govern​ ment may not yet have re​ ceived any sig​ nificant re​ v enues.

81

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

The bi​ ggest chal​ lenge for the host govern​ ment is juris​ diction​ al – ac​ tual​ ly hav ​ ing power over the sell​ er or the buyer. If the local com​ p any sells the li​ cen​ se, its gain will be sub​ ject to the same tax rules applic​ able to any other capit​ al gain in the host co​ unt​ ry. But typical​ ly, the local com​ p any will be held by a hold​ ing com​ p any loc​ ated out​ side of the host co​ unt​ ry, often in a low or no tax juris​ dic​ tion. If the in​ v es​ tor sells an in​ terest in the hold​ ing com​ p any, neith​ er the sell​ er nor the buyer will be pre​ sent in the host co​ unt​ ry. Be​ cause of the dif​ ficul​ ty in rea​ ch​ ing the sell​ er – and in some cases be​ cause of re​ stric​ tive tax treat​ ies – most juris​ dic​ tions have until re​ cent​ ly left such gains un​ touc​ hed by contra​ ct or statute. The size of re​ cent gains rea​ lized by sell​ ing sharehold​ ers in some less de​ v eloped co​ unt​ ries has attrac​ ted clos​ er scrutiny, and govern​ ments are now in the early stages of de​ velop ​ ing contra​ ctu​ al and statuto​ ry approac​ hes for rea​ ch​ ing such gains. Some contra​ cts al​ ready re​ q uire govern​ ment approv ​ al of chan​ ges of con​ trol which would in​ clude in​ direct chan​ ges re​ sult​ ing from sales of a con​ troll​ ing in​ terest in the hold​ ing com​ p any. The approv ​ al can re​ q uire de​ monstra​ tion that the upstream sell​ er has paid any tax due to the co​ unt​ ry on the gain, but wheth​ er a tax is pay ​ able still de​ p ends upon modifica​ tion of contra​ cts or chan​ ges in tax law or re​ gula​ tions. Moreov ​ er, such rules only reach cases where the sale of in​ terest is suf​ ficient to cause a chan​ ge of con​ trol. Al​ though we have not seen it in the min​ ing area, some re​ cent contra​ cts in the pet​ roleum sec​ tor have specifical​ ly addres​ sed the tax ob​ liga​ tions of the upstream in​ v es​ tor if an in​ terest is sold. It should be noted that the con​ cept of “con​ trol” is it​ self chal​ leng​ ing. Lawy ​ ers can spend many words try ​ ing to en​ sure that any ac​ tion which re​ sults in a new per​ son, group of per​ sons or com​ p any hav ​ ing the di​ rect or in​ direct ab​ il​ ity to elect a major​ ity of the di​ rec​ tors of the min​ ing com​ p any is treated as a chan​ ge of con​ trol.

WITH​ HOL D​ I N G T A XE S
As the owner of Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co., you will cer​ tain​ ly want di​ v idends from your in​ vest​ ment. And the govern​ ment will want to with​ hold taxes on that di​ v idend, as some​ th​ ing like a pre-payment against your year-end in​ come tax li​ abil​ ity (this is similar in prac​ tice to many taxes that are with​ held from the payc​ hecks that em​ p loyees re​ ceive from their em​ p loy ​ ers).

82

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

With​ hold​ ing taxes are an im​ p or​ tant and often poor​ ly un​ derstood ele​ ment of a min​ ing fisc​ al sys​ tem. The pay ​ ments made by a min​ ing com​ p any to its lend​ ers (in​ terest), to its own​ ers (di​ v idends), or to its contra​ ctors, ser​ v ice pro​ v id​ ers and con​ sul​ tants are usual​ ly sub​ ject to with​ hold​ ing taxes. When Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. hires a drill​ ing com​ p any to take core sam​ p les, it will "with​ hold" a cer​ tain amount of the pay ​ ment to that drill​ ing com​ p any on its in​ come tax form at the end of the year. The first thing to un​ derstand about with​ hold​ ing taxes is that they are not taxes on the local min​ ing com​ p any at all. They re​ p resent amounts the min​ ing com​ p any is re​ q uired to “with​ hold” from the kinds of pay ​ ments li​ sted in the pre​ ced​ ing para​ graph and to pay over to the state on ac​ count of the ac​ tu​ al or pro​ jec​ ted tax li​ abilit​ ies of the pay ​ ment re​ cipients. For ex​ am​ p le, as​ sume a contra​ ct or law calls for a 10% with​ hold​ ing tax on pay ​ ments to sub​ contrac​ tors. If the sub​ contrac​ tor char​ ges $1 mill​ ion for a ser​ v ice, the min​ ing com​ p any would be re​ q uired to with​ hold $100,000 from its pay ​ ment. The sub​ contrac​ tor would thus re​ ceive only $900,000 (in prac​ tice, a sub​ contrac​ tor might ad​ just its fee to $1.1 mill​ ion to make sure it re​ ceives its full mill​ ion dol​ lars). If that sub​ contrac​ tor is a re​ sident tax​ pay ​ er, the money with​ held by the min​ ing com​ p any will be treated as a tax paid by that sub​ contrac​ tor and would be credited to its even​ tu​ al tax bill. If the sub​ contrac​ tor is not a re​ sident, howev ​ er, the amount with​ held will often be treated as a “final” tax, fully satis​ fy ​ ing any tax li​ abil​ ity the contra​ ctor may ot​ herw​ ise be de​ emed to have to the state with re​ spect to in​ come from that contra​ ct. The rea​ son for this, in a nutshell, is prac​ tical​ ity and ease of ad​ ministra​ tion. The im​ p or​ tance of with​ hold​ ing taxes can be eas​ i​ ly seen with a sim​ p le ex​ am​ p le. As​ sume Com​ p any A, Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co., is a local min​ ing com​ p any using no sub​ contrac​ tors. It does all of the drill​ ing, waste treat​ ment, and all other min​ ing op ​ era​ tions it​ self. The pro​ fits from the min​ ing ac​ tiv ​ ity would be tax​ able in​ come of Com​ p any A (we're simplify ​ ing th​ ings here for pur​ p oses of il​ lustra​ tion), and the state would col​ lect taxes on that in​ come through the gener​ al cor​ p orate in​ come tax. Now as​ sume Com​ p any B, Fron​ tyard Goldmine Co., op ​ erates an ident​ ical mine, but re​ l​ ies on over​ seas sub​ contrac​ tors for most of its op ​ era​ tions. In this case, in​ stead of all of the pro​ fits from min​ ing accru​ ing to the local op ​ erator, as in the case of Com​ p any A, some

83

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

share of the pro​ fits are in fact ear​ ned by the over​ seas sub​ contrac​ tors. Those pro​ fits are part of the pay ​ ments made by Com​ p any B and de​ duc​ ted in com​ p ut​ ing its in​ come tax, and with​ out a with​ hold​ ing tax or some other way to reach the sub​ contrac​ tors, the pro​ fits would go com​ p lete​ ly un​ taxed. General​ ly applic​ able rates of with​ hold​ ing are typical​ ly in​ cluded in in​ come tax legis​ la​ tion, but min​ ing contra​ cts may pro​ v ide for full or par​ ti​ al ex​ emp ​ tions of these taxes or may stabil​ ize them for some per​ iod of time as an in​ cen​ tive. Prac​ tice va​ ries wide​ ly both in terms of the rate of with​ hold​ ing and in terms of dif​ ferent treat​ ment of vari​ ous kinds of pay ​ ments – in​ terest, di​ v idends, or ser​ v ices – and rates may be lowered for some in​ iti​ al per​ iod as an in​ cen​ tive. Rates at the level of 5% and 10% are com​ mon. It is also com​ mon for doub​ le taxa​ tion treat​ ies to limit with​ hold​ ing taxes as dis​ cus​ sed in more de​ tail in chapt​ er 3 of this sec​ tion and thus what is writt​ en in statute or contra​ ct may not be the ac​ tu​ al rate when the in​ v es​ tor is able to take ad​ v antage of a lower treaty rate. Below is an ex​ am​ p le of the issue of with​ hold​ ing taxes being treated in a min​ ing contra​ ct, Li​ beria - China Union (2009), Sec​ tion 14.3(c): "In lieu of the with​ hold​ ing rates pro​ vided by Sec​ tion 806 of Schedule 6 for nonresidents and as pro​ vided by the Re​ venue Code for re​ sidents, the Con​ ces​ sionaire shall with​ hold tax on pay​ ments made to non-residents and re​ sidents at the fol​ low​ ing rates for the first 12 Years: (i) Di​ vidends, 0 per​ cent; (ii) In​ terest, 5 per​ cent; (iii) Pay​ ments for ser​ vices, 5 per​ cent. Thereaft​ er with​ hold​ ing shall be at the rates pro​ vided by Sec​ tion 809 of Schedule 6 for non-residents and as ot​ herw​ ise pro​ vided by applic​ able Law for re​ sidents." One im​ p or​ tant issue with re​ spect to with​ hold​ ing taxes that is too com​ p licated to dis​ cuss in de​ tail here is the ques​ tion of wheth​ er a state’s with​ hold​ ing tax ob​ liga​ tions should ex​ tend to pay ​ ments made by the min​ ing com​ p any for ser​ v ices per​ for​ med by a nonaffiliated com​ p any done at loc​ a​ tions out​ side of the state, when that ser​ v ice pro​ v id​ er has no con​ nec​ tion with the state other than the fact that it is bi​ ll​ ing the in-state min​ ing com​ pany for the work. For ex​ am​ p le, Bac​ kyard Min​ ing Co. sends core sam​ p les to an​ oth​ er co​ unt​ ry for test​ ing for its gold con​ tent. Should that core sam​ p le test​ ing com​ p any, which has no re​ lationship with the host co​ unt​ ry of Bac​ kyard Goldmine, be sub​ ject to with​ hold​ -

84

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

ing tax in that other co​ unt​ ry? This book does not take a posi​ tion on this ques​ tion, but it is one that is sub​ ject to much de​ bate.

F L E XI B ​ L E T O O L S A N D R E N T T A XE S
Miner​ al prices are in​ herent​ ly un​ p redict​ able and may rise and fall dramatical​ ly over the co​ ur​ se of a given mine's life. Costs may also fluc​ tuate sig​ nificant​ ly. One chal​ lenge govern​ ments face in the de​ sign of fisc​ al sys​ tems is how to cap ​ ture a size​ able share of un​ usual​ ly high pro​ fits with​ out mak​ ing pro​ jects un​ sus​ tain​ able dur​ ing times of lower pro​ fitabil​ ity. For this pur​ p ose, states now are favor​ ing pro​ gres​ sive re​ v enue tools that will cap ​ ture an in​ creas​ ing share of re​ v enues as pro​ fitabil​ ity rises. As dis​ cus​ sed with re​ spect to profit-based ad valorem royalt​ ies ear​ li​ er in this chapt​ er, the hope is that re​ gimes con​ tain​ ing such tools will be more st​ able over time be​ cause they pro​ v ide equit​ able re​ turns to the min​ ing com​ p any and to the state over a wider range of cir​ cumstan​ ces. Such re​ v enue tools usual​ ly come in the form of ad​ di​ tions to other base-line fisc​ al in​ stru​ ments. While the ac​ tu​ al names of these taxes dif​ f​ er from co​ unt​ ry to co​ unt​ ry, they usual​ ly are ex​ p res​ sed as: Windfall or ex​ cess pro​ fits taxes, which de​ spite the names are typical​ ly tri​ ggered by high prices with​ out re​ gard to the as​ sociated level of pro​ fits; Re​ sour​ ce rent taxes; and Sliding-scale royalt​ ies based on pro​ duc​ tion: In ad​ di​ tion to the ad valorem and profit-based royalt​ ies dis​ cus​ sed above, there is the poten​ ti​ al for a production-based royal​ ty. While these are com​ mon in oil, they are less com​ mon in min​ ing, but are pos​ sible. First, some ter​ minology. "Rent" is the term used by econom​ ists to de​ scribe the re​ turn in ex​ cess of the mini​ mum re​ turn an in​ v es​ tor re​ q uires in order to make an in​ v est​ ment. Thus, if an in​ v es​ tor re​ q uires a 25% ex​ p ec​ ted re​ turn for a given in​ v est​ ment, re​ turns in ex​ cess of 25% are the "rent." Theoretical​ ly, these could be taxed at a 100% rate with​ out af​ fect​ ing the in​ v es​ tor’s de​ cis​ ion to in​ v est. In prac​ tice there is no clear line re​ gard​ ing the

85

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

mini​ mum re​ turn re​ q uired by in​ v es​ tors and there is no seri​ ous at​ tempt to tax all “rents” over and above the pro​ fits tax ex​ cept in modest amounts. Flexib​ le tools to cap ​ ture rents are quite pre​ v alent in the pet​ roleum sec​ tor, but less so in min​ ing. But there is in​ creas​ ing in​ terest in such taxes in mineral-rich co​ unt​ ries in​ tent on cap ​ tur​ ing a larg​ er share of rents with​ out over​ tax​ ing the in​ dust​ ry dur​ ing per​ iods of lower pro​ fitabil​ ity. Each of these may be found in legis​ la​ tion and/or contra​ cts. While the em​ phasis and polit​ ical motiva​ tion in in​ troduc​ ing pro​ gres​ sive tax in​ stru​ ments has been on cap ​ tur​ ing up ​ side re​ v enue or pro​ fit poten​ ti​ al, they are also ex​ p ec​ ted to bring fisc​ al flexibil​ ity or robust​ ness to the over​ all fisc​ al re​ gime, i.e., auto​ matic ad​ just​ ment to chang​ ing cir​ cumstan​ ces - lower govern​ ment take when pro​ fitabil​ ity is low, high​ er take when pro​ fitabil​ ity is high. This con​ cept is typical​ ly cal​ led "pro​ gres​ siv ​ ity" and it is im​ p or​ tant to un​ derstand. While all fisc​ al tools will give the govern​ ment more money as prices rise, some do so bet​ t​ er than oth​ ers. For in​ stan​ ce, if a co​ unt​ ry only col​ lects a royal​ ty, it may get more money as the price of gold rises, but the extra money it gets will not measure up to the extra money the com​ p any will get. The com​ p any's "share" of the total re​ v enues will be great​ er as the prices rise. This is cal​ led a re​ gres​ sive tax. With a pro​ gres​ sive tax, the situa​ tion is re​ v er​ sed. Both the com​ p any and the govern​ ment will do bet​ t​ er with high​ er prices, but the government's share will rise fast​ er than the com​ p any's. Govern​ ments like this, of co​ ur​ se. One last thing to re​ memb​ er ... while each fisc​ al tool can be eith​ er pro​ gres​ sive or re​ gres​ sive, it is im​ p or​ tant to look at how they all work togeth​ er. A fisc​ al re​ gime can have a royal​ ty and in​ come tax and a more pro​ gres​ sive tool and still come out re​ gres​ sive on the whole. The devil is in the de​ tails.

Re​ sour​ ce Rent Tax (RRT)
RRTs are the most sop ​ histicated of the vari​ ous mech​ an​ isms used to cap ​ ture rents. A typ ​ ical RRT has three basic com​ p onents: (1) a thres​ hold rate of re​ turn for the min​ ing com​ pany (or sever​ al thres​ holds) above which the tax appl​ ies, (2) the specified tax rate(s) that apply once that thres​ hold has been ex​ ceeded, and (3) a tax base, which is typical​ ly cash flow from a par​ ticular pro​ ject. Whereas an in​ come tax appl​ ies to tax​ able in​ come, RRTs will typical​ ly apply to cum​ ulative cash flow – look​ ing at the cash out (pay ​ ments for

86

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

capit​ al and equip ​ ment, goods and ser​ v ices) and cash in (re​ v enues from sales). (In measur​ ing cash flows, costs and pay ​ ments re​ lat​ ing to the fin​ anc​ ing of the pro​ ject are not taken into ac​ count.) If pro​ fitabil​ ity ex​ ceeds the thres​ hold, for ex​ am​ p le a 20% thres​ hold rate of re​ turn, a tax is paid on the ex​ cess. While measure​ ment of the rate of re​ turn at a given point in time sounds some​ what com​ plex, in prac​ tice this is a mech​ an​ ical cal​ cula​ tion re​ ly ​ ing on some of the same ele​ ments needed to com​ p ute tax​ able in​ come. There are re​ lative​ ly few ex​ am​ p les of min​ ing pro​ jects sub​ ject to RRTs (they are more com​ mon in the oil sec​ tor), but grow​ ing con​ sidera​ tion is being given to them. Those contra​ cts utiliz​ ing RRTs eith​ er have de​ tailed an​ nexes sett​ ing out the com​ p uta​ tion or refer to legis​ la​ tion.

Price-Based Tools
Rath​ er than at​ tempt to measure pro​ fitabil​ ity di​ rect​ ly through the cal​ cula​ tions in an RRT, an​ oth​ er approach is to use com​ mod​ ity prices as a rough proxy for pro​ fitabil​ ity under the as​ sump ​ tion that high​ er miner​ al prices lead to high​ er pro​ fits. A slid​ ing scale royal​ ty, for in​ stan​ ce, could apply a high​ er royal​ ty rate for a price high​ er than the be​ nchmark re​ fer​ ence price. In some cases co​ unt​ ries have applied “windfall” pro​ fit taxes when prices ex​ ceed cer​ tain levels. The windfall pro​ fit tax is usual​ ly a per​ cen​ tage of the re​ v enues attribut​ able to the dif​ fer​ ence bet​ ween what the in​ v es​ tor would have ear​ ned at the thres​ hold level and what the in​ v es​ tor earns at the ac​ tu​ al high​ er price. Be​ cause such taxes do not take ac​ count of costs, they are only loose​ ly re​ lated to pro​ fits, and have often been re​ p ealed after in​ v es​ tor op ​ p osi​ tion to the tax (see, for ex​ am​ p le, Zam​ bia's ex​ p eri​ ence).

Com​ mun​ ity De​ velop​ ment
An em​ erg​ ing prac​ tice is for af​ fected com​ munit​ ies to share im​ mediate​ ly in the fin​ an​ ci​ al be​ nefits of a min​ ing pro​ ject by hav ​ ing a de​ dicated re​ v enue stream that goes straight to them and not through the centr​ al tax aut​ hor​ ity first. Some​ times this re​ v enue stream is negotiated with​ in the fisc​ al pac​ kage bet​ ween the nation​ al govern​ ment and the com​ p any. This is the case in Guinea for ex​ am​ p le. In this sys​ tem, the nation​ al govern​ ment may negotiate the com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment re​ v enue stream with the min​ ing com​ p any on be​ half of the com​ mun​ ity. The Guinean Min​ ing

87

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Code, Ar​ ticle 130, re​ q uires that 1% of the tur​ nov ​ er of gold min​ ing com​ p an​ ies be paid into a local de​ v elop ​ ment fund that will be ad​ minis​ tered at the local level. Under a dif​ ferent sys​ tem, com​ munit​ ies may negotiate with the com​ p any di​ rect​ ly. This is the case in Canada or Australia, where in​ digen​ ous com​ munit​ ies are con​ sidered sovereign na​ tions. In Canada, for ex​ am​ p le, Fal​ conbrid​ ge, a min​ ing com​ p any, sig​ ned what was cal​ led an “Im​ p act and Be​ nefits Ag​ ree​ ment” di​ rect​ ly with the Inuit peo​ p le of Rag​ lan in northern Quebec. In the 20 years since, the com​ p any has made di​ rect pay ​ ments to the Inuit in a model that created a pre​ cedent re​ p eated el​ sewhere, at Quin​ tette in the Yukon, for ex​ am​ p le. A similar ar​ range​ ment holds at the Kakadu uranium mine in Australia’s Northern Ter​ rito​ ry. It is im​ p or​ tant to un​ derstand that these ex​ am​ p les de​ scribe a situa​ tion of di​ rect pay ​ ment from the com​ p any to the com​ mun​ ity, not simp ​ ly an ag​ reed re​ v enue shar​ ing mech​ an​ ism from the centr​ al govern​ ment down to sub-national in​ stitu​ tions.

O T H E R T A XE S Im​ port Dut​ ies
A some​ times con​ ten​ ti​ ous and com​ p licated as​ p ect of many fisc​ al re​ gimes is the applica​ tion of the gener​ al im​ p ort tariff re​ gime to the min​ ing sec​ tor. Such dut​ ies are often sig​ nificant re​ v enue sour​ ces in low-income co​ unt​ ries; they also may be used to pro​ tect domes​ tic in​ dust​ ry. Im​ p ort dut​ ies can make a huge dif​ fer​ ence to the over​ all pro​ fitabil​ ity of a mine. Be​ cause min​ ing is capit​ al in​ ten​ sive, over​ all com​ p any pro​ fitabil​ ity de​ p ends a great deal on the tim​ ing of costs and re​ v enues. Heavy up-front costs are only amplified by the ad​ di​ tion of sig​ nificant im​ p ort dut​ ies. Moreov ​ er, many of the goods im​ p or​ ted dur​ ing ex​ p lora​ tion and de​ v elop ​ ment often can​ not be ob​ tained loc​ al​ ly (thus mak​ ing the domes​ tic sec​ tor pro​ tec​ tion ob​ jec​ tives ir​ relevant). In re​ cog​ ni​ tion of this, many co​ unt​ ries will re​ duce or eliminate im​ p ort dut​ ies on capit​ al goods or goods specifical​ ly in​ ten​ ded for pro​ ject use. If the Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. has to pay im​ p ort dut​ ies on every earth-mover, front-end load​ er,

88

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

and other piece of equip ​ ment needed to mine, it is easy to see how this could make al​ ready steep upfront costs that much high​ er. One speci​ al pro​ blem oc​ curs with goods like gasoline which are fun​ gible and can eas​ i​ ly make their way into the non-mining economy, thus avoid​ ing the tariff. Many min​ ing contra​ cts will have specific pro​ v is​ ions such as volumet​ ric li​ mita​ tions to deal with these pro​ blems. If, howev ​ er, the state con​ tinues to col​ lect im​ p ort dut​ ies, it would re​ ceive the im​ p ort duty tax re​ v enues much soon​ er than it would re​ ceive the ad​ dition​ al in​ come tax re​ v enues. From the state’s point of view, this would be a use​ ful tradeoff. Con​ sider​ ing im​ p ort dut​ ies alone, if the im​ p ort duty is 5% and the contra​ ctor must bring in $250 mill​ ion of goods and equip ​ ment, this is an ad​ dition​ al $12.5 mill​ ion of re​ v enue that will be avail​ able far ear​ li​ er than any in​ come tax pro​ ceeds to the state. Very often, in​ v es​ tors will seek ex​ emp ​ tions from these im​ p ort taxes.

Value Added Tax
Value Added Taxes (VATs) are a com​ mon type of con​ sump ​ tion tax, i.e., they are applied to a tax​ p ayer's con​ sump ​ tion rath​ er than its in​ come. VATs apply to domes​ tic con​ sump ​ tion, and thus VAT is general​ ly paid on im​ p orts and re​ fun​ ded on ex​ p orts. Since it is com​ mon for a min​ ing com​ p any to ex​ p ort the bulk of its miner​ al pro​ duc​ tion to in​ ter​ nation​ al mar​ kets, it is con​ sis​ tent with the prin​ ci​ p le of a VAT that these ex​ p orts not bear the burd​ en of a VAT and are ex​ empted or ot​ herw​ ise re​ ceive a re​ fund of VAT paid. Be​ cause re​ fund mech​ an​ isms are frequent​ ly in​ adequate, contra​ cts often will ex​ empt min​ ing com​ p an​ ies from hav ​ ing to pay VAT on their capit​ al im​ p orts or other materi​ als used in min​ ing.

Sur​ face Re​ n t​ al Pay​ ments
An​ oth​ er ele​ ment of many fisc​ al re​ gimes is a sur​ face re​ nt​ al pay ​ ment to the centr​ al govern​ ment, or some​ times to sub​ nation​ al govern​ ments. (These should be dis​ tin​ guis​ hed from pay ​ ments to private lan​ down​ ers, which are not a part of the state's re​ v enues.) Sur​ face re​ nt​ al pay ​ ments will usual​ ly be a fixed or per acre fee and may ad​ just auto​ matical​ ly for in​ fla​ tion. They are not or​ dinari​ ly a sig​ nificant re​ v enue sour​ ce, but they dis​ courage ex​ ces​ sive land hold​ ings.

89

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

B UIL D​ ING THE RE ​ VE NUE M IX
It is clear that there are a numb​ er of re​ v enue tools that can apply to a min​ ing pro​ ject. It can​ not be said en​ ough: re​ v enue tools ab​ solute​ ly can​ not be viewed or evaluated in isola​ tion. They must be as​ ses​ sed as a whole, as a "Fisc​ al Re​ gime." One must take ac​ count of the dif​ fer​ ences among tools. In​ come taxes do not begin to generate sig​ nificant re​ v enue for a numb​ er of years after pro​ duc​ tion be​ gins. Why? Be​ cause in​ come tax laws allow tax​ p ay ​ ers to de​ duct op ​ erat​ ing costs and the cost of their plant and equip ​ ment from their sales re​ v enues to de​ ter​ mine tax​ able in​ come. Min​ ing com​ p an​ ies ac​ cumulate very large costs of these kinds be​ fore they ever see sig​ nificant op ​ erat​ ing re​ v enue. Therefore, al​ though they may have a large cash in​ come once op ​ era​ tions begin, they may have lit​ tle or no tax​ able in​ come until they have re​ covered their early op ​ erat​ ing costs and much of their capit​ al costs. Royalt​ ies, on the other hand, have the ad​ v antage of pro​ v id​ ing an in​ come flow to a govern​ ment from the be​ ginn​ ing of pro​ duc​ tion. But this ad​ v antage to the govern​ ment is hard on the in​ v es​ tor: it is sen​ d​ ing cash to the govern​ ment when it still is re​ coup ​ ing its costs and may even be in​ v est​ ing in mine ex​ p ans​ ion or other large in​ v est​ ments. Be​ cause most royalt​ ies take a fixed per​ cen​ tage of total in​ come, they have the ef​ fect of “squeez​ ing” the in​ v es​ tor. As miner​ al prices fall, min​ ing costs do not fall pro​ p or​ tionate​ ly, so that the mar​ gin bet​ ween min​ ing costs and re​ v enues avail​ able to the min​ ing com​ p any after royal​ ty pay ​ ments will fall. This can lead to pre​ ma​ ture de​ cis​ ions to close a mine or to cur​ tail pro​ duc​ tion. Con​ v er​ s e​ ly, the pro​ fit spread will widen with only li​ mited govern​ ment par​ ticipa​ tion if royalt​ ies alone are used. Over the life of a mine, the dif​ ferent re​ v enue tools may fit togeth​ er to look some​ th​ ing like the di​ ag​ ram below over the li​ fetime of a pro​ ject. Of co​ ur​ se, it will de​ p end on which fisc​ al tools a co​ unt​ ry uses, among a numb​ er of other fac​ tors. This is just il​ lustrative of one pos​ sible out​ come in a stylized model.

90

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

It is im​ p or​ tant to re​ memb​ er the trade off of upfront pay ​ ments. Upfront pay ​ ments can be "ex​ p en​ sive" for the state. In​ v es​ tors ex​ p ect that many ex​ p lora​ tion ex​ p en​ di​ tures will go un​ recovered. The rate of re​ turn they ex​ p ect from suc​ cess​ ful pro​ jects must be en​ ough to com​ p en​ sate them both for the costs of that pro​ ject and to com​ p en​ sate for some of their un​ recovered ex​ p lora​ tion costs from other un​ suc​ cess​ ful pro​ jects. An up-front pay ​ ment made be​ fore any dis​ cove​ ry will be treated by the in​ v es​ tor as a high-risk ex​ p lora​ tion cost; even a seeming​ ly small front-end pay ​ ment may be high en​ ough to per​ suade an in​ v es​ tor that an ex​ p lora​ tion pro​ gram is too risky. Re​ sour​ ce rent taxes have the ad​ v antage of not im​ p act​ ing the in​ v es​ tor ex​ cept when the in​ v est​ ment has been high​ ly suc​ cess​ ful. They pro​ v ide the govern​ ment with a measure of as​ suran​ ce that the state will have a larg​ er share in pro​ fits when there are high re​ turns but do not burd​ en the in​ v es​ tor when re​ turns are lower. This may pro​ v ide a bet​ t​ er balan​ ce of the economic and polit​ ical in​ terests. How does one evaluate a par​ ticular fisc​ al re​ gime or re​ gimes in a given co​ unt​ ry? For this, a tool cal​ led a fin​ an​ ci​ al model is needed.

91

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

FIN​ AN​ CI​ AL M ODE L ​ ING
While govern​ ments and citizens of co​ ur​ se want to maxim​ ize the be​ nefits from an in​ v est​ ment through taxes, in​ frastruc​ ture, cor​ p orate soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity and other means, the rea​ l​ ity is that a com​ p any's bud​ get is not end​ less. The trick for govern​ ments is to know how much they can get from in​ v es​ tors with​ out putt​ ing their in​ v est​ ments at risk. And for this, you need a fin​ an​ ci​ al model. Fin​ an​ ci​ al models are fund​ ament​ al in​ stru​ ments of plann​ ing, negotia​ tion and fisc​ al poli​ cy. They will tell you such th​ ings as : What is the trade-off bet​ ween “quick money” through sig​ na​ ture bonuses and a high​ er share of long-term pro​ fits? What is the ef​ ficien​ cy of tax in​ cen​ tives? What is the equitabil​ ity of the fisc​ al re​ gime for in​ v es​ tors and govern​ ment? If we chan​ ge the tax re​ gime, what is the im​ p act for the part​ ies? How does one fisc​ al re​ gime com​ p are with oth​ ers? What is the fair​ ness of the cur​ rent and poten​ ti​ al deals? What long-term pub​ lic in​ v est​ ment poli​ cy can be fund​ ed and plan​ ned? What are the ef​ fects from chang​ ing prices? All com​ p an​ ies generate a fin​ an​ ci​ al model (usual​ ly a spreadsheet in Excel or a similar pro​ gram) show​ ing cash flows, mine op ​ era​ tions and vari​ ous taxes under dif​ ferent scenarios, to con​ sid​ er their side of the fin​ an​ ci​ al story. When pre​ ssures are made on com​ p an​ ies, the cost im​ p lica​ tions are plug​ ged into the model to de​ ter​ mine the ef​ fects or im​ p act on the rest of the min​ ing op ​ era​ tions. Some de​ cis​ ions that are im​ p or​ tant for the co​ untry's economic de​ v elop ​ ment may have lit​ tle im​ p act on a com​ p any’s op ​ era​ tions, and some may even im​ p rove their cash flows. An ex​ am​ p le is power sup ​ p​ ly. A com​ p any may de​ ter​ mine that a cer​ tain capit​ al ex​ p en​ di​ ture

92

Fisc​ al Re​ gimes

on power will be needed to en​ sure the mine has a re​ li​ able power sup ​ p​ ly. Doing this alone, as in most cases in the past, would in​ v ol​ v e high upfront costs for the com​ p any. Partner​ ing with the pub​ lic sec​ tor to pro​ v ide larg​ er sup ​ p l​ ies could mean lower unit costs and even lower in​ iti​ al capit​ al ex​ p en​ ses. It is therefore use​ ful to know the com​ p any's fin​ an​ ci​ al model or to generate a proxy model in cases where the com​ p any will not share theirs with the govern​ ment. This will not only give the govern​ ment an idea of how vi​ able a de​ cis​ ion may be, but also, at which point cer​ tain is​ sues can be raised with the greatest chan​ ce of suc​ cess. The same govern​ ment "take" can be ar​ rived at using dif​ ferent tax in​ stru​ ments, so model​ ing can help the part​ ies negotiate a dif​ ferent set of tools that will ar​ rive at a similar total shar​ ing of the re​ v enues over the life of a pro​ ject. Moreov ​ er, the tim​ ing of govern​ ment re​ v enues will be sig​ nificant​ ly af​ fected by the choice of in​ stru​ ments. To rea​ l​ ly un​ derstand this in​ terac​ tion and the im​ p act of dif​ ferent tax in​ stru​ ments, it is im​ p or​ tant to build fin​ an​ ci​ al models that forecast the re​ v enue/profit flows of a pro​ ject ac​ ross the life of the mine and under vari​ ous pos​ sible scenarios, tak​ ing into ac​ count the in​ herent un​ cer​ taint​ ies, es​ p ecial​ ly of fu​ ture mar​ ket prices. But it is also pos​ sible to get a lit​ tle car​ ried away with model​ ing. You have to keep in mind that a model only pre​ dicts out​ comes under a range of as​ sump ​ tions (prices, costs, etc.), and that those as​ sump ​ tions are just that ... as​ sump ​ tions. Howev ​ er im​ p or​ tant and use​ ful they are, they will sel​ dom if ever per​ fect​ ly pre​ dict rea​ l​ ity. If used to as​ s​ ist in pre​ dict​ ing re​ v enues (for nation​ al bud​ get​ ing pur​ p oses, etc.), they will need to be con​ tinual​ ly up ​ dated to ad​ just as​ sump ​ tions and ac​ count for past ac​ tiv ​ ity.

93

SPECI ​ A L CHAL ​ L ENGES
In this chapt​ er, we sum​ mar​ ize some of the is​ sues that pre​ oc​ cupy those tas​ ked with de​ sign​ ing and en​ forc​ ing a fisc​ al re​ gime for min​ ing.

H O W M U C H D I D YO U E A R N ?
Re​ v enues raised by taxes de​ p end not only on the tax rate but also on the rules for cal​ culat​ ing the tax base. You might think this should be straightfor​ ward - Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. de​ clares what it sold the gold for and what its costs were, and the state taxes the dif​ fer​ ence - the pro​ fit - at a given rate. But there are some sig​ nificant ways that this crisp pic​ ture gets blur​ red. Bac​ kyard's own fin​ anc​ ing costs may eat up a large amount of in​ come ("thin capitaliza​ tion"), and need to be evaluated. Or Bac​ kyard may buy many of its in​ p uts from, and sell much of its gold to, other com​ p an​ ies it con​ trols ("Bac​ kyard Goldmine Hold​ ing BV" in the Net​ herlands, "Bac​ kyard Goldmine Trad​ ing Inc." in the Cayman Is​ lands), mak​ ing it hard to know what the real price is (an issue of "trans​ f​ er pric​ ing"). Or it may have loc​ ked in a price ahead of time to deal with its own cash flow needs that ends up being con​ siderab​ ly more - or less - than the known mar​ ket price ("hedg​ ing"). Let's take each of those in turn.

The In​ terest De​ duc​ tion and De​ bt/Equ​ ity Li​ mita​ tions
Min​ ing contra​ cts or legis​ la​ tion often es​ tablis​ hes a maxi​ mum ratio of debt to equ​ ity fin​ anc​ ing for a pro​ ject. An ex​ am​ p le from Li​ beria - Mitt​ al (2006), Ar​ ticle 14:

94

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

"At no time shall the ratio of Debt of the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE to Equ​ ity of the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE ex​ ceed 3:1.[. . .] For pur​ poses of this Sec​ tion 3, “Debt” shall mean the long-term debt of the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE and “Equ​ ity” shall mean the sharehold​ ers’ equ​ ity in the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE as de​ fined by stan​ dard ac​ count​ ing prac​ tices.[. . .]" The contra​ ct pre​ v ents the com​ p any from bor​ row​ ing more than 75% of the money it needs to in​ v est in the pro​ ject. This is be​ cause the in​ terest on debt fin​ anc​ ing is al​ low​ able as a com​ p any cost. And that means that, given the choice, com​ p an​ ies will often pre​ f​ er to fin​ an​ ce their op ​ era​ tions through debt rath​ er than tie up their own capit​ al. The Li​ berian contra​ ct addres​ ses that issue by capp ​ ing the pro​ p or​ tion of debt to equ​ ity. An​ oth​ er approach to the same issue is not to cap the debt, just the de​ gree to which in​ terest pay ​ ments on it are an al​ low​ able cost, in a rule known as “thin capitaliza​ tion.” Below is an ex​ am​ p le of such a pro​ v is​ ion from the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) ag​ ree​ ment: "Sec​ tion 2.31.1. if the In​ ves​ tor's debt to equ​ ity ratio ex​ ceeds 3:1, any in​ terest attribut​ able to the ex​ cess debt will not be de​ duc​ tible for Tax pur​ poses; 2.31.2. if the In​ ves​ tor's debt to equ​ ity ratio ex​ ceeds 3:1, any in​ terest attribut​ able to that part of the debt that does not ex​ ceed the ratio strict​ ly re​ mains de​ duc​ tible for Tax pur​ poses; 2.31.3. for the measure​ ment of total debt for the pur​ pose of the ratio, both re​ lated party and non-related party debt are in​ cluded, howev​ er, any noninterest-bearing li​ abilit​ ies are specifical​ ly ex​ cluded; 2.31.4. for the measure​ ment of total equity/​ capit​ al for the pur​ pose of the ratio, both com​ mon shares and pre​ fer​ red shares are in​ cluded; and 2.31.5. any non-tax de​ duc​ tible in​ terest shall be de​ emed to be a di​ vidend and taxed in ac​ cordan​ ce with laws and re​ gula​ tions and applic​ able doub​ le tax treat​ ies. Any such non-tax de​ duc​ tible in​ terest will not be sub​ ject to any in​ terest with​ hold​ ing tax."

95

Speci​ al Chal​ lenges

There are other approac​ hes as well. Under some sys​ tems, in​ terest de​ duc​ tions are li​ mited to some specified per​ cen​ tage of tax​ able in​ come. This means that, even in early stages of the pro​ ject when the com​ p any might have huge debt from capit​ al out​ lays, the in​ terest de​ duc​ tion can never total​ ly eliminate tax​ able in​ come. An​ oth​ er key goal of debt-equity li​ mits is to en​ sure the com​ p any has a stake in the game. It has to have some of its own money at risk. But how do you check all of this stuff out? After all, the govern​ ment now has to an​ alyze sub​ miss​ ions made to it by the com​ p any not only about its costs and sales, but also about its terms of bor​ row​ ing. And if in​ terest pay ​ ments are de​ duc​ tible from the over​ all tax bill, how does the govern​ ment en​ sure that they are rea​ son​ able? While some contra​ cts spec​ ify using be​ nchmark in​ terest rates, re​ lated, for in​ stan​ ce, to LIBOR (the Lon​ don In​ ter​ bank Over​ night Rate used by banks to bor​ row from each other), many more do not. This could be a par​ ticular​ ly chal​ leng​ ing issue if the com​ p any is bor​ row​ ing from an af​ filiate - as it often does.

Trans​ f​ er Pric​ ing
More than half of all cross-border trans​ ac​ tions around the world are hap ​ p en​ ing bet​ ween com​ p an​ ies that are af​ filiated. This is equal​ ly the case in min​ ing. As it has now be​ come an in​ ter​ nation​ al op ​ era​ tion, Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. may buy a lot of goods or ser​ v ices from Bac​ kyard Goldmine In​ dustri​ al LLC, in​ cor​ p orated in Be​ rmuda, and sell a lot of its gold to Bac​ kyard Goldmine Trad​ ing SA, for​ mal​ ly in​ cor​ p orated in the small Swiss town of Baar but most​ ly ac​ tive in East Asian mar​ kets. The prices in such trans​ ac​ tions are known as “trans​ f​ er prices.” The ques​ tion is, how do we know that these prices re​ flect true mar​ ket value? The term "trans​ f​ er pric​ ing" or "TP" has be​ come syn​ onym​ ous in some cir​ cles with nefari​ ous prac​ tice. But it is im​ p or​ tant to un​ derstand that trans​ f​ er pric​ ing it​ self is a centr​ al in​ stru​ ment of in​ ter​ nation​ al glob​ al mar​ kets. Tax ac​ coun​ tants have fier​ ce de​ bates about which TP rules are the most approp ​ riate. OECD has a sys​ tem of TP guidelines. The UN has an​ oth​ er sys​ tem. Many co​ unt​ ries have de​ v eloped their own approac​ hes. The pro​ blem is if trans​ f​ er pric​ ing rules are ab​ used.

96

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

How might that happ ​ en? Well, sup ​ p ose Bac​ kyard Goldmine buys all its in​ p uts from af​ filiates in the Cayman Is​ lands, a low-tax juris​ dic​ tion, and pays twice the going rate for those goods. Sup ​ p ose it also sells the gold for a 30% dis​ count off world mar​ ket prices to an af​ filiate in an​ oth​ er low-tax juris​ dic​ tion - one might even say "haven." It would find it​ self with far less in​ come in its host co​ unt​ ry - and therefore have to pay far less tax. It might have more in​ come in those other co​ unt​ ries, but since those co​ unt​ ries have low rates of cor​ p orate taxa​ tion or none at all, the tax bill is going to be low. Th​ ings are look​ ing good for Bac​ kyard Goldmine. How to guard against it in the contra​ ct? It's quite dif​ ficult, but there are a few th​ ings that can be done to help. Most tax codes or min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments re​ q uire prices in such trans​ ac​ tions to be at the same price as a com​ p any would ob​ tain in an "arm’s-length" trans​ ac​ tion. But de​ ter​ min​ ing the arm’s-length price and monitor​ ing such trans​ ac​ tions can be chal​ leng​ ing. To as​ s​ ist govern​ ments in this re​ spect, some min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments con​ tain pro​ v is​ ions re​ q uir​ ing re​ p ort​ ing of such trans​ ac​ tions, documen​ ta​ tion of the basis of the arm’slength prices used and, in some cases, a cer​ tifica​ tion from a com​ p any of​ fic​ er about such prices, such as the fol​ low​ ing, from Li​ beria - Putu (2010), Sec​ tion 17.4(e): "Each year’s fin​ an​ ci​ al state​ ments shall be ac​ companied by a cer​ tificate of the chief fin​ an​ ci​ al of​ fic​ er of the Com​ pany to the ef​ fect that (i) with re​ spect to goods or ser​ vices co​ vered by any Pric​ ing Ag​ ree​ ment in ef​ fect dur​ ing the re​ levant per​ iod, the Com​ pany’s trans​ f​ er prices dur​ ing such year were com​ puted in ac​ cordan​ ce with the re​ quire​ ments of such Pric​ ing Ag​ ree​ ment and (ii) with re​ spect to goods or ser​ vices sold or pro​ vided in a trans​ ac​ tion bet​ ween the Com​ pany and an Af​ filiate or a Re​ lated Per​ son of the Com​ pany which are not co​ vered by such Pric​ ing Ag​ ree​ ment, the prices thereof im​ posed dur​ ing the re​ levant per​ iod were com​ puted in ac​ cordan​ ce with Sec​ tion 20.7." One crit​ ical part of the cost-sales dynamic is the mar​ ket value of the com​ mod​ ity. For royalt​ ies, this may some​ times be han​ dled by bas​ ing the royal​ ty cal​ cula​ tion on a pub​ lic in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price rath​ er than on the ac​ tu​ al price re​ ceived by the sell​ er (see the dis​ cuss​ ion of royalt​ ies). But this may not al​ ways be pos​ sible. Not all miner​ als in all mar​ kets have real-time pub​ lished prices, al​ though more "be​ nchmarks" for more com​ modit​ ies have be​ come avail​ able in re​ cent years. One small caveat: even when an in​ ter​ -

97

Speci​ al Chal​ lenges

nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price is being used, there may be a qual​ ity dif​ feren​ ti​ al off that in​ ter​ nation​ al re​ fer​ ence price, up ​ ward or downward, that needs to be taken into ac​ count. And just one more "Ex​ cept...". Some​ times the price in the ex​ p ort mar​ ket might not ac​ curate​ ly re​ flect a fair price for any given sour​ ce co​ unt​ ry. In that case a "net-back" price re​ lat​ ing the pub​ lic price to the price in the min​ ing juris​ dic​ tion could be used. This means sub​ tract​ ing all the trans​ p ort, in​ suran​ ce and other costs it took to get the com​ mod​ ity from the host co​ unt​ ry to mar​ ket. Some​ times an es​ timate of the miner​ als’ value in the min​ ing juris​ dic​ tion may be ag​ reed ahead of time by the govern​ ment and the com​ p any in what is cal​ led an "Ad​ v anced Pric​ ing Ag​ ree​ ment" (APA). Rath​ er than the govern​ ment check​ ing costs ship ​ ment by ship ​ ment, both sides agree on a met​ hod of doing the valua​ tion to save them​ selves the troub​ le of ar​ gu​ ing over it later. APAs are general​ ly not in​ cluded in the min​ ing contra​ ct it​ self, al​ though the contra​ ct could re​ q uire the com​ p any and govern​ ment to make one be​ fore pro​ duc​ tion starts. Man​ age​ ment fees paid by the local com​ p any, “Bac​ kyard Goldmine”, to its parent for ser​ vices pro​ v ided by the parent are an​ oth​ er dif​ ficult trans​ f​ er pric​ ing area. These are often cal​ culated as a per​ cen​ tage of op ​ erat​ ing costs or in​ v est​ ment with per​ cen​ tages rang​ ing wide​ ly. Such char​ ges can sig​ nificant​ ly re​ duce tax​ able in​ come, and fin​ d​ ing com​ p ar​ able mar​ ket trans​ ac​ tions is dif​ ficult. Some govern​ ments limit such de​ duc​ tions to a fixed per​ cen​ tage, e.g., two per​ cent of op ​ erat​ ing costs. In some cases char​ ges by the home com​ pany may be li​ mited to ac​ tu​ al cost with some ag​ reed pro​ fit mark-up. In all cases it is de​ sir​ able to be clear what ser​ v ices by the parent or af​ filiates are co​ v ered by the man​ age​ ment fee, per​ haps by a schedule iden​ tify ​ ing any char​ ges or ser​ v ices not co​ v ered. In par​ ticular it is im​ p or​ tant to know wheth​ er such char​ ges in​ clude all the neces​ sa​ ry know-how or in​ tel​ lectu​ al pro​ p er​ ty that is re​ q uired by the mine The com​ p lex​ ity of the sup ​ p​ ly chain in the modern world is hard to over​ es ​ timate. Just one ex​ am​ p le: when the govern​ ment of Ugan​ da ex​ er​ cised its right to audit an oil com​ p any at a very early stage in the pro​ ject, the com​ p any had al​ ready contra​ cted with over 200 other com​ p an​ ies. Lots of what it bought were ser​ v ices for which no ready mar​ ket price ex​ is​ ted. The same is true for min​ ing op ​ era​ tions.

98

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Hedg​ ing
To pro​ tect against price fluc​ tua​ tions, com​ p an​ ies often “hedge.” For in​ stan​ ce, some lend​ ers may re​ q uire min​ ing com​ p an​ ies who bor​ row from them to re​ duce their ex​ p osure to fu​ ture drops in com​ modit​ ies prices by sell​ ing some por​ tion of their fu​ ture pro​ duc​ tion at a price ag​ reed today. This is typical​ ly cal​ led a “fu​ tures contra​ ct.” Or it may pay a small sum now to buy the "opt​ ion" to sell at a given price a few months from now - which it will eith​ er ex​ erc​ ise or not de​ p end​ ing on mar​ ket prices at that time. These fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stru​ ments - and many oth​ ers - may pro​ tect the com​ p any against a price crash (the trade-off is that they may not get the full be​ nefit of fu​ ture price in​ creases). Hedg​ ing can help a com​ p any negotiate volatile mar​ kets and en​ sure that pro​ jects re​ main economical​ ly vi​ able. As a side note, many think the mas​ sive "fin​ an​ cializa​ tion" of com​ modit​ ies mar​ kets has also hel​ p ed fuel the un​ p receden​ ted price rises of the last de​ cade, though that is not our sub​ ject here. But hedg​ ing can also mean ac​ tu​ al sales re​ v enues of the mine com​ p any are quite dif​ ferent from what is ob​ ser​ v ed in the mar​ ket. For in​ stan​ ce, if Bac​ kyard Goldmine Co. has ag​ reed to sell all of its pro​ duc​ tion for the next five years at a price of $1,200 per ounce but prices rise to $1,600 per ounce, the com​ p any will not be as pro​ fit​ able as it would have been with​ out the hedge. On the other hand, if prices in that per​ iod fall to $800 per ounce, it will be much more pro​ fit​ able - and its re​ v enues will be pro​ tec​ ted. From a host government’s per​ spec​ tive, this can have un​ desired con​ sequ​ ences. Most simp ​ ly, in the case in which the sales price is below the mar​ ket price, the hedg​ ing trans​ ac​ tion could cut the royalt​ ies re​ ceived by the govern​ ment if the royal​ ty were based on the re​ ceived sales price (rath​ er than a pub​ lished mar​ ket price). To avoid this, some juris​ dic​ tions spec​ ify that royalt​ ies be based on spot (pre​ sent) rath​ er than fu​ ture mar​ ket prices and specifical​ ly ex​ clude hedg​ ing op ​ era​ tions from de​ ter​ min​ ing tax​ able in​ come. The com​ p any can still hedge, eith​ er through its in​ ter​ nation​ al op ​ era​ tions or through a separate local en​ t​ ity. But state tax re​ v enue will be in​ sulated from those fin​ an​ ci​ al de​ cis​ ions.

99

Speci​ al Chal​ lenges

S T A B I L I ZA ​ TION
A sig​ nificant min​ ing pro​ ject and as​ sociated in​ frastruc​ ture can re​ q uire bi​ ll​ ions of dol​ lars of capit​ al. Once in place this capit​ al can​ not for the most part be rea​ di​ ly moved. As a re​ sult, in​ v es​ tors have a strong in​ terest in the stabil​ ity of the fisc​ al re​ gime dur​ ing the li​ fetime of the pro​ ject - which as we have seen could be as long as 50 years or more. The govern​ ment it​ self may also want to rea​ ssure the in​ v es​ tor. This is es​ p ecial​ ly an issue in juris​ dic​ tions with weak​ er in​ stitu​ tions or with​ out an ex​ ten​ ded per​ iod of polit​ ical stabil​ ity. This issue is frequent​ ly re​ sol​ v ed through the use of a stabiliza​ tion clause in the contra​ ct, which can take dif​ ferent forms. An ex​ am​ p le from Li​ beria - Putu (2010), Sec​ tion 14.3: "The Govern​ ment hereby ag​ rees that with re​ spect to those items set out in this Sec​ tion 14.3 the rates and pro​ vis​ ions pro​ vided in this Ag​ ree​ ment shall be fixed as of the Ef​ fective Date for the Term of this Ag​ ree​ ment but not to ex​ ceed 15 years from the grant of the first Min​ ing Li​ cen​ se (which shall ex​ tend to the end of the fisc​ al year applic​ able to the Com​ pany in which the 15th an​ niver​ sa​ ry of the grant of the first Min​ ing Li​ cen​ se oc​ curs to the ex​ tent the an​ niver​ sa​ ry does not fall on such date). . . For the avoidan​ ce of doubt, dur​ ing such per​ iod, any fu​ ture amend​ ment, ad​ d i​ tions, re​ vis​ ions, modifica​ tions or other chan​ ges to any Taxes and Dut​ ies (or the pro​ vis​ ions or prac​ tice re​ lat​ ing to any Taxes and Dut​ ies) applic​ able to the Com​ pany or the Op​ era​ tions that would have the ef​ fect of im​ pos​ ing an ad​ dition​ al or high​ er Tax or similar char​ ge on the Com​ pany or the Op​ era​ tions shall not apply to the ex​ tent it would re​ quire the Com​ pany to pay such ad​ dition​ al or high​ er Tax or similar char​ ge, in​ clud​ ing any fu​ ture amend​ ment, ad​ d i​ tions, re​ vis​ ions, modifica​ tions or other chan​ ges [..]" This par​ ticular pro​ v is​ ion has two im​ p or​ tant fea​ tures. First, it is li​ mited to specific por​ tions of the fisc​ al re​ gime and does not ex​ tend to other areas of the law such as health and safety re​ gula​ tion, em​ p loy ​ ment, or en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ gula​ tion. Many stabiliza​ tion clauses in ear​ li​ er contra​ cts (some of which are still in force) are much broad​ er and have been high​ ly criticized for the negative im​ p act on evolv ​ ing soci​ al and gener​ al wel​ fare poli​ cies, par​ ticular​ ly given the long dura​ tion of many min​ ing leases. They are some​ times known as "freez​ ing clauses" be​ cause they freeze new law​ mak​ ing in broad areas of pub​ lic

100

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

poli​ cy. But second​ ly, with​ in the fisc​ al sphere, it does op ​ erate as an ab​ solute bar to apply ​ ing high​ er char​ ges to the com​ p any. It freezes the fisc​ al law. As you can im​ agine, govern​ ments and the pub​ lic do not react well to the idea that their sovereignty should be in​ hibited for the in​ terests of a foreign com​ p any, howev ​ er much money has been in​ v es​ ted. One al​ ter​ native, more wide​ ly used today, moves the de​ bate from law to money. An "economic equilib​ rium" clause basical​ ly says the state can pass any new laws it likes but calls for negotia​ tions bet​ ween the part​ ies if the chan​ ges have re​ duced the "economic in​ terest" of the pro​ ject to the in​ v es​ tor, or, in its strong​ er form, re​ q uires the state to com​ p en​ sate the min​ ing com​ p any to the ex​ tent re​ q uired to re​ store the same state of pro​ fitabil​ ity. This is an ex​ am​ p le from an oil contra​ ct, though similar clauses can be found in min​ ing contra​ cts: "If at any time after the Ef​ fective Date, there is any chan​ ge in the legal, fisc​ al and/or economic framework under the Kur​ distan Re​ g​ ion Law . . . which de​ trimen​ tal​ ly af​ fects the Contra​ ctor, the terms and con​ d i​ tions of the Contra​ ct shall be al​ tered so as to re​ store the Contra​ ctor to the same over​ all economic posi​ tion as that which Contra​ ctor would have been in, had no such chan​ ge in the legal, fisc​ al and/or economic framework oc​ cur​ red." The li​ mita​ tion on what is sub​ ject to stabiliza​ tion and an af​ firma​ tion of the prima​ cy of domes​ tic law on gener​ al economic and soci​ al poli​ cies is some​ times specifical​ ly addres​ sed: "Ex​ cept as ex​ plicit​ ly pro​ vided in this Ag​ ree​ ment and the Re​ venue Code, the Com​ pany shall be sub​ ject to all of the in​ tern​ al laws of Li​ beria as in ef​ fect from time to time, in​ clud​ ing with re​ spect to labor, en​ viron​ ment​ al, health and safety, cus​ toms and tax matt​ ers." Two other fea​ tures of stabiliza​ tion clauses are worth not​ ing. First, they may con​ tain socalled "one-way street” clauses that allow the in​ v es​ tor to opt into any gener​ al re​ duc​ tions in rates of taxa​ tion, with​ out be​ ar​ ing the burd​ en of any gener​ al rate in​ creases -- a ques​ tion​ able but not un​ com​ mon prac​ tice. Second​ ly, some co​ unt​ ries, for ex​ am​ p le, Chile and

101

Speci​ al Chal​ lenges

Afghanis​ tan, will pro​ v ide stabil​ ity but only if the in​ v es​ tor ag​ rees to a high​ er base tax rate, i.e., the in​ v es​ tor has to pay for the ad​ dition​ al as​ suran​ ce. In​ teres​ ting​ ly, no in​ v es​ tors in Chile have elec​ ted stabiliza​ tion. Last​ ly, some​ times in ad​ di​ tion to and other times in lieu of stabiliza​ tion, some contra​ cts in​ clude pro​ v is​ ions which allow eith​ er party to re​ q uest con​ sul​ ta​ tions with re​ spect to the contra​ ct if there have been fund​ ament​ al chan​ ges in cir​ cumstan​ ces. As an ex​ am​ p le, Li​ berian min​ ing contra​ cts usual​ ly give the part​ ies rights to re​ q uest (but do not com​ p el) re​ vis​ ions where there have been “Pro​ found Chan​ ges in Cir​ cumstan​ ces." From the Li​ beria Putu (2010) min​ ing contra​ ct: “Pro​ found Chan​ ges in Cir​ cumstan​ ces” means such chan​ ges, since the re​ levant base per​ iod under Sec​ tion 31.1, in the economic con​ d i​ tions of the miner​ al and min​ ing in​ dust​ ry worldwide or in Li​ beria, or such chan​ ges in the economic, polit​ ical or soci​ al cir​ cumstan​ ces ex​ ist​ ing in Li​ beria specifical​ ly or el​ sewhere in the world at large as to re​ sult in such a materi​ al and fund​ ament​ al al​ tera​ tion of the con​ d i​ tions, as​ sump​ tions and bases re​ lied upon by the part​ ies at such base per​ iod that the over​ all balan​ ce of equit​ ies and be​ nefits rea​ sonab​ ly anti​ cipated by them will no long​ er as a pract​ ical matt​ er be ac​ hiev​ able." It is im​ p or​ tant to stress here that this is not an ob​ liga​ tion to re​ negotiate by eith​ er party. It is only an ob​ liga​ tion to sit togeth​ er and talk. This is a weak​ er ob​ liga​ tion than an ob​ liga​ tion to negotiate.

DOUB ​ L E TAX TRE AT​ IE S
An​ oth​ er set of poten​ ti​ al snares lie in in​ ter​ nation​ al treaty ob​ liga​ tions, and the way they can af​ fect contra​ cts. For in​ stan​ ce, many co​ unt​ ries have en​ tered into bi​ later​ al “Doub​ le Taxa​ tion Treat​ ies” in which two co​ unt​ ries agree on how and when each will tax ac​ tivit​ ies of the re​ sidents (per​ sons and legal en​ tit​ ies) of the other with re​ spect to cer​ tain items of in​ come. There are now more than 3,000 such treat​ ies bet​ ween the 200-odd juris​ dic​ tions around the world, al​ though the numb​ er of treat​ ies a co​ unt​ ry has can vary dras​ tical​ ly.

102

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

But with re​ spect to min​ ing law and contra​ cts, these treat​ ies can limit the government’s power to im​ p ose with​ hold​ ing taxes. Typical​ ly, doub​ le tax treat​ ies will re​ duce the with​ hold​ ing rates below those im​ p osed by statute, some​ times to zero. Also, an in​ v es​ tor can shop for in​ ter​ mediate juris​ dic​ tions which offer the stron​ gest ad​ v antages from these treat​ ies. For ex​ am​ p le, even if the parent com​ p any of a local min​ ing en​ t​ ity is based in Co​ unt​ ry X, it may make loans to the pro​ ject through a re​ lated en​ t​ ity in Co​ unt​ ry Y if it finds that there is a tax treaty with Co​ unt​ ry Y pro​ v id​ ing for a zero with​ hold​ ing rate on in​ terest. Tax treat​ ies may also limit the host government's ab​ il​ ity to tax non-residents on capit​ al gains.

M OS T-FAVORE D CONTRA​ CTOR
There is also the ques​ tion of treat​ ing all in​ v es​ tors the same. Some contra​ cts con​ tain a pro​ v is​ ion re​ q uir​ ing the govern​ ment to ex​ tend to the contra​ ctor any be​ nefits that the govern​ ment may ex​ tend to other in​ v es​ tors in the fu​ ture. Here is a typ ​ ical ex​ am​ p le: "In the event that the Govern​ ment of Co​ unt​ ry A en​ t​ ers into a contra​ ct or ag​ ree​ ment with a third party en​ gaged in the min​ ing or in​ dustri​ al sec​ tors that, based on the laws in force in Co​ unt​ ry A at the time, af​ fords more favor​ able treat​ ment with re​ spect to the stabil​ ity of fisc​ al or other tax terms than have been gran​ ted to Co​ pper​ C o under this Min​ ing Contra​ ct, the Part​ ies agree that the Min​ ing Contra​ ct shall be amen​ ded to apply the more favor​ able treat​ ment to Co​ pper​ Co." [adap​ ted from un​ pub​ lished contra​ ct] Whatev ​ er the rationale for such clauses, they make it dif​ ficult for the govern​ ment to chan​ ge its poli​ cies and contra​ ct terms over time to meet chang​ ing cir​ cumstan​ ces with​ in the co​ unt​ ry, or to address the uni​ q ue is​ sues pre​ sen​ ted in a par​ ticular mine, or simp ​ ly to upgrade their poli​ cies. Con​ sid​ er the fol​ low​ ing: A govern​ ment has en​ tered into a contra​ ct with Bac​ kyard Goldmine pro​ v id​ ing for a 3% royal​ ty and a 35% in​ come tax and in​ clud​ ing a “mostfavored com​ p any” clause similar to the ex​ am​ p le above. But, a year later, it de​ cides to move in a new di​ rec​ tion and wants to emphasize royal​ ty pay ​ ments in its fisc​ al re​ gime. It en​ t​ ers into an ag​ ree​ ment with Backyard's com​ p etitor, Mot​ herlode Re​ sour​ ces Inc., call​ ing

103

Speci​ al Chal​ lenges

for a 5% royal​ ty and a 25% in​ come tax rate. It seems as though this could tri​ gg​ er the “most-favored com​ p any” clause, and that Mot​ herlode might pro​ test. But it is ac​ tual​ ly only pos​ sible to com​ p are the two fisc​ al re​ gimes by fin​ an​ ci​ al model​ ing to de​ monstrate the ef​ fect over time of a high​ er royal​ ty co​ up​ led with a lower in​ come tax. In some scenarios, over​ all re​ v enues may go up, but in oth​ ers, they may go down. It may also be im​ p os​ sible to make com​ p arisons if the mines are very dif​ ferent (e.g., dif​ ferent costs struc​ tures, re​ sour​ ce bases, etc.). These is​ sues raise the pro​ spect of a poten​ tial​ ly con​ ten​ ti​ ous de​ bate about the pro​ p​ er baseline to use for evaluat​ ing the net ef​ fect. It is also pos​ sible that Bac​ kyard could argue (de​ p end​ ing on how the “most-favored com​ pany” clause is draf​ ted) that it should be​ nefit from the re​ duced tax rate, but keep the ag​ reed royal​ ty rate. Could Mot​ herlode come back and then claim that it should get the same re​ gime? The mere pos​ sibil​ ity of this highlights the pro​ blematic na​ ture of these pro​ vis​ ions, and it is easy to see how this would re​ sult in a gradu​ al “ratchet​ ing down” of the fisc​ al re​ gime that appl​ ies to com​ p an​ ies. To avoid these pro​ blems, many contra​ cts do not con​ tain such clauses, or if in​ cluded, they are li​ mited to com​ p an​ ies in sub​ stan​ tial​ ly similar cir​ cumstan​ ces.

TAX IN​ CE N​ TIVE S
Fin​ al​ ly, a prin​ cip ​ al chal​ lenge fac​ ing policymak​ ers and negotiators is how to cap ​ ture an ac​ cept​ able amount of re​ v enue from mining—und​ er a variety of economic cir​ cumstan​ ces —while main​ tain​ ing a re​ gime that attracts the de​ sired type of in​ v es​ tor. One way that co​ unt​ ries have at​ tempted to walk this tightrope is by in​ stitut​ ing a robust gener​ al fisc​ al re​ gime but co​ upl​ ing it with a variety of specific tax in​ cen​ tives. One old form of such in​ cen​ tives, still seen in many contra​ cts, is to pro​ v ide tax “holidays” in which the in​ v es​ tor is freed from some or all taxes for a per​ iod of time. This can rea​ l​ ly slash govern​ ment re​ v enues. There have been oc​ cas​ ions in which mines were de​ v eloped and went into full pro​ duc​ tion while a tax holiday was still on, leav ​ ing the govern​ ment with no in​ come tax re​ v enue at all. It is hard to im​ agine any govern​ ment seek​ ing that par​ ticular out​ come.

104

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

Even in less ex​ treme cases, holidays re​ sult in long post​ p one​ ment of govern​ ment re​ venue, well past the ex​ p i​ ry of the tax holiday if de​ p recia​ tion and loss carry-forward rules let a com​ p any start writ​ ing off its ex​ p en​ ses after the holiday is over. Moreov ​ er, there is very lit​ tle evi​ d​ ence that such holidays - much less any in​ cen​ tive - are ac​ tual​ ly de​ ter​ minative of the de​ cis​ ion to in​ v est in extra​ ctive in​ dust​ ries. One al​ ter​ native to the tax holiday which could also meet the in​ v es​ tor con​ cern of rapid re​ cove​ ry of in​ v est​ ment is ac​ celerated de​ p recia​ tion rules. If the in​ v es​ tor is al​ lowed to de​ duct a great​ er share of capit​ al costs early in the life of the pro​ ject, then there will be great​ er de​ ferr​ al of taxes. This type of pro​ v is​ ion at least ties the in​ cen​ tive to the ac​ tu​ al capit​ al in​ v est​ ment and avoids the pos​ sibil​ ity of taxes being sides​ tepped en​ tire​ ly (i.e., the tax is de​ fer​ red but not eliminated).

105

HOW TO SPEND IT
Once the state has col​ lec​ ted the money from the vari​ ous re​ v enue tools in the fisc​ al re​ gime, how the state should spend it be​ comes the burn​ ing ques​ tion. This sec​ tion focuses on how the state can ob​ tain money from its min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies. The money should en​ able a govern​ ment to pro​ v ide the goods and ser​ v ices es​ senti​ al to the pro​ sper​ ity and growth of the co​ unt​ ry. A co​ unt​ ry can in​ v est in state-of-the-art min​ ing laws, min​ ing contra​ cts and re​ v enue laws, but if the money flow is not used well, the ef​ fort could be was​ ted. While this book is not about how to spend the money - that too could be a book unto it​ self - the basic con​ sidera​ tions are clear. What govern​ ments seek to do is to con​ v ert wealth in the ground into wealth for their society. Simp ​ ly mak​ ing the state's miner​ al re​ v enues avail​ able to citizens, thereby in​ creas​ ing li​ v​ ing stan​ dards, will not be sus​ tain​ able be​ cause the miner​ al re​ v enues will even​ tual​ ly run out when the miner​ als run out. This is a fac​ tor that drives govern​ ment poli​ cy and com​ pany strategy: miner​ als are fin​ ite re​ sour​ ces that will not last forev ​ er. Even if a mine lasts 100 years, it still runs out. What this means is that govern​ ments have one shot at spend​ ing miner​ al re​ v enues well. Most peo​ p le who have studied the chal​ lenge of sus​ tainabil​ ity con​ clude that states should in​ v est as much as pos​ sible of their natur​ al re​ sour​ ce re​ v enues to in​ crease phys​ ical in​ frastruc​ ture, skills and labor pro​ duc​ tiv ​ ity, and thereby bring about a sus​ tain​ able in​ crease in the co​ untry's economy and in in​ dividu​ al li​ v​ ing stan​ dards. In prac​ tice, this means be​ ginn​ ing with the fund​ ament​ als: prima​ ry and secon​ da​ ry educa​ tion, health

106

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

care, basic trans​ p or​ ta​ tion and, in most places, electric​ ity sup ​ p​ ly and water sup ​ p​ ly and treat​ ment. Some co​ unt​ ries have made di​ rect trans​ f​ ers of cash to citizens. Mon​ golia’s ex​ p eri​ ence is dis​ cus​ sed below. But attrac​ tive as di​ rect cash trans​ f​ ers may be, govern​ ments in co​ unt​ ries with weak ad​ ministra​ tion and high levels of il​ litera​ cy will need to con​ sid​ er the dif​ ficul​ ty of con​ struct​ ing sys​ tems to dis​ tribute that money fair​ ly, ef​ ficient​ ly, and with​ out leakage. Polit​ ical pre​ ssures may also lead to cam​ p aigns to subsid​ ize "es​ senti​ al" consum​ er purchases, like electric​ ity or gasoline or rice. This can im​ p rove li​ v​ ing stan​ dards, but is dan​ ger​ ous be​ y ond the very short run, as it can stimulate was​ te​ ful con​ sump ​ tion, lead to smuggl​ ing (where tan​ gible goods are in​ v ol​ v ed), and, as ex​ p erien​ ced in many co​ unt​ ries, can be very hard to re​ v er​ se.

HIG H PUB ​ L IC E X​ PE C​ TA​ TIONS , L OW RE ​ VE NUE IN​ FLOW
When the pub​ lic learns of big miner​ al dis​ cove​ ries, or hears that a major IMC has come to their co​ unt​ ry to negotiate a min​ ing contra​ ct, pub​ lic ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions can shoot through the roof. There are many rea​ sons for this, but polit​ ical rea​ sons dominate. Politicians may rush to seek credit for the news and make in​ flated pre​ dic​ tions of the im​ p act. Opt​ imis​ tic investor state​ ments aimed at poten​ ti​ al home co​ unt​ ry in​ v es​ tors leak back to the host co​ unt​ ry. Newspap ​ ers fan the flames with bann​ er head​ lines. The rea​ l​ ity, of co​ ur​ se, is that ex​ cept for the oc​ casion​ al sign​ ing bonus and a small bump in local em​ p loy ​ ment when mine de​ v elop ​ ment be​ gins, money will not start to flow until the mine goes into op ​ era​ tion, many years later. Govern​ ments and civil society should anti​ cipate this gap bet​ ween ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions and rea​ l​ ity, and should ac​ tive​ ly con​ trol ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions by keep ​ ing the pub​ lic in​ for​ med as to the pro​ gress of the min​ ing sec​ tor and educat​ ing the pub​ lic about the time frames in​ v ol​ v ed.

107

How to Spend It

This can be dif​ ficult to do, as it is tempt​ ing to take credit for each new dis​ cove​ ry and each new contra​ ct, and it is natur​ al to pre​ sent them as though the pot of gold at the end of the rain​ bow has been un​ v eiled. A thought​ ful, on-going ef​ fort to educate the pub​ lic and jour​ nal​ ists about min​ ing pro​ ject time lines and re​ v enue ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions should help. If the non-political op ​ in​ ion lead​ ers un​ derstand rea​ l​ ity, the im​ p act of over-exuberant or selfaggrandizing an​ noun​ ce​ ments can be re​ duced.

The Mon​ golian Ex​ peri​ ence
Fol​ low​ ing a major miner​ al dis​ cove​ ry in Mon​ golia, the govern​ ment created a Human De​ velop ​ ment Fund that was de​ sig​ ned to func​ tion as a trans​ f​ er of money to in​ dividu​ al citizens under a struc​ ture that would force most of the money into in​ v est​ ments used to fund educa​ tion, hous​ ing, health and pens​ ion plans over time, the type of ex​ p en​ di​ ture needed for growth. Polit​ ical pre​ ssures, spur​ red by popul​ ist polit​ ical claims, re​ sul​ ted in the pro​ m​ ise of cash trans​ f​ ers to in​ dividu​ al citizens in amounts that far ex​ ceeded the then-existing min​ ing re​ v enue. The govern​ ment had to fund the shortfall in the in​ ter​ nation​ al debt mar​ kets, where it was re​ q uired to pled​ ge fu​ ture mine re​ v enues to secure the loan.

108

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

This ex​ p eri​ ence was so sober​ ing that Mon​ golia's polit​ ical part​ ies were able to agree upon a se​ ries of laws de​ sig​ ned to limit the ab​ il​ ity of politicians to make impossible-to-fulfill pro​ mises. In sum​ ma​ ry form, the prin​ cip ​ al com​ p onents of this ef​ fort were the fol​ low​ ing: The new Elec​ tion Law, adop ​ ted in 2011, pro​ hibits polit​ ical part​ ies from in​ clud​ ing in their elec​ tion plat​ forms, among other th​ ings, pro​ mises of cash, pro​ p er​ ty, pro​ p er​ ty rights, shares or end​ ow​ ments from pro​ ceeds of miner​ als and oil or pro​ mises that are of a similar na​ ture. It also pro​ v ides that if an elec​ tion plat​ form de​ clares that the party in​ v ol​ v ed will enact a new pro​ gram with ex​ p en​ di​ ture pro​ p os​ als, the ex​ p en​ di​ tures pro​ p osed must com​ p​ ly with specific re​ q uire​ ments of the bud​ get stabil​ ity law, and the com​ p lian​ ce must be verified and cer​ tified by the State Audit aut​ hor​ ity. (The law is on​ line in Mon​ golian at www.legalin​ fo.mn/law/, law 351.) Laws like this, while dif​ ficult to fol​ low (and which, in​ evitab​ ly, have not been strict​ ly fol​ lowed), can help to create a "cul​ ture of pub​ lic prud​ ence". Even in a co​ unt​ ry in which the pas​ sage of similar laws can be dif​ ficult, a de​ bate on the sub​ ject can educate peo​ p le of the risks of plac​ ing the ap ​ p earan​ ce of large re​ v enue gains be​ fore op ​ p or​ tunis​ tic mem​ b​ ers of the polit​ ical class.

Bot​ tomless Bud​ get: Where to Stop?
A co​ unt​ ry with a re​ lative​ ly small economy and major miner​ al de​ p osits will have two dis​ tinct bud​ get​ ing pro​ blems. First, as soon as there is a major miner​ al dis​ cove​ ry, there will be a polit​ ical in​ stinct to start spend​ ing the be​ nefits. But, dur​ ing the long per​ iod bet​ ween dis​ cove​ ry and op ​ era​ tions, there is no cash flow. Any in​ creased ex​ p en​ di​ ture will have to be fund​ ed by bor​ row​ ing against the pro​ spect of fu​ ture min​ ing re​ v enues. This is al​ ways dan​ ger​ ous for economic stabil​ ity, par​ ticular​ ly when there are also pre​ ssures, as there were in Mon​ golia, to dis​ tribute the funds di​ rect​ ly to citizens. Mon​ golia tried to limit this pro​ blem by adopt​ ing a bud​ get stabil​ ity law de​ sig​ ned to limit mineral-driven de​ ficit spend​ ing. Ar​ ticle 6.1 pro​ v ides that any bud​ get de​ ficit should be li​ mited to two per​ cent, that bud​ get in​ creases must not ex​ ceed the average rate of growth

109

How to Spend It

of the non-mineral sec​ tor, and that govern​ ment debt must not ex​ ceed 40 per​ cent of GDP. (The law is on​ line in Mon​ golian at www.legalin​ fo.mn/law/, law 503.) Mon​ golia's ex​ p eri​ ence, fol​ low​ ing adop ​ tion of this law, ac​ tual​ ly de​ monstrates that en​ act​ ing laws of this kind will be eas​ i​ er than li​ v​ ing with​ in their li​ mita​ tions, but they do create the basis for pub​ lic dis​ cuss​ ion of the is​ sues and af​ fect the tone of legis​ lative bud​ get de​ bates. The second bud​ get​ ing pro​ blem when min​ ing does begin is learn​ ing to live with the fact that miner​ al re​ v enues (and natur​ al re​ sour​ ce re​ v enues general​ ly) are typical​ ly quite cycl​ ical be​ cause of the volatil​ ity of com​ mod​ ity prices. This volatil​ ity can re​ sult in stop-and-go pro​ gram fund​ ing, ex​ ces​ sive ex​ p en​ di​ ture com​ mit​ ments at the top of the re​ v enue cycle and pub​ lic up ​ roar when bud​ gets shrink at the bot​ tom of the re​ v enue cycle. Chile, with an economy very de​ p en​ dent on co​ pp​ er and molyb​ denum ex​ p orts and an ear​ li​ er his​ to​ ry of over-expenditure and boom-and-bust spend​ ing, tried to deal with this issue early in this cen​ tu​ ry. The core of the poli​ cy is the no​ tion of ac​ hiev ​ ing "struc​ tur​ al balan​ ce", which, in very rough terms, re​ q uires es​ timat​ ing the govern​ ment in​ come that would accrue if the over​ all im​ p act of the economic cycle were levelized, and spend​ ing no more than would be net of that levelized amount, even when ac​ tu​ al re​ v enues are high​ er. In prac​ tice, this re​ sults in a sur​ p lus when re​ v enues are up, which can be used to cover de​ ficits when re​ v enues are down. Chile built a large sur​ p lus after the pro​ gram took ef​ fect, but then was able to use it dur​ ing 2009 to main​ tain ex​ p en​ di​ tures through the in​ ter​ nation​ al fin​ an​ ci​ al crisis.

Sav​ ings Funds
A few co​ unt​ ries will be for​ tunate en​ ough to have large re​ v enue flows which ex​ ceed their ab​ il​ ity to use or “ab​ sorb” them in domes​ tic spend​ ing. In ad​ di​ tion, some co​ unt​ ries want to hold some funds for fu​ ture genera​ tions. The most well-known re​ sour​ ce fund is that of Nor​ way. Nor​ way's fund, based on its pet​ roleum in​ come, had rea​ ched over $750 bi​ ll​ ion by late 2013. It is man​ aged on be​ half of the Minist​ ry of Fin​ an​ ce and in​ v es​ ted out​ side of Nor​ way to avoid the in​ flationa​ ry im​ p act of try ​ ing to in​ v est all that money in Nor​ way. Trans​ f​ ers

110

Fisc​ al Is​ sues

from the fund to Nor​ way's cur​ rent bud​ get are in​ ten​ ded to be li​ mited by the real re​ turn on the fund. Nor​ way's fund is focused primari​ ly on in​ ter​ generation​ al equ​ ity, en​ sur​ ing that a large por​ tion of its oil re​ v enues re​ main avail​ able to the co​ unt​ ry and its citizens after the oil runs out. This is approp ​ riate for Nor​ way, which is a high​ ly de​ v eloped co​ unt​ ry with a small popula​ tion and a large oil sur​ p lus. It is not approp ​ riate for an economy with large soci​ al and phys​ ical in​ frastruc​ ture de​ ficien​ cies, ex​ cept, per​ haps, in the rare in​ stan​ ce in which the popula​ tion is very small in re​ la​ tion to the re​ sour​ ce re​ v enues.

111

EN ​ V IRON ​ M ENT ​ A L AND SOCI ​ A L IS ​ S UES
WHAT ARE THE IS ​ SUES? US ING THE CONTRA​ CT TO M AN​ AG E THE IS ​ SUES FIN​ D​ ING G UIDAN​ CE AND AN​ S W​ ERS OUT​ S IDE OF THE M IN​ ING CONTRA​ CT

WHAT ARE THE IS ​ S UES?
Min​ ing can be trans​ for​ mative, with a poten​ tial​ ly en​ orm​ ous en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p acts. This sec​ tion de​ scribes some of the en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al is​ sues that can arise with min​ ing pro​ jects, as well as the contra​ ct pro​ v is​ ions that address those im​ p acts. It also out​ lines some of the broad​ er legal and poli​ cy frameworks that can apply to and help shape the im​ p acts of a mine.

EN​ VIRON​ MENT​ AL IS ​ SUES
Min​ ing is typical​ ly con​ sidered to have sig​ nificant im​ p acts on the en​ v iron​ ment. Pol​ lu​ tion of land, water and air, strains on water and other natur​ al re​ sour​ ces, eros​ ion, de​ fores​ ta​ tion, loss of habitat, and dis​ rup ​ tion of lives and li​ v elihoods are among the negative im​ pacts that min​ ing pro​ jects can have. What are the is​ sues and how can they be man​ aged?

Water
This is where the en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p act of min​ ing is often greatest. Pol​ lu​ tion and scarc​ ity are the two major is​ sues. In tem​ p erate or trop ​ ical climates, a key chal​ lenge is pre​ v ent​ ing in​ filtra​ tion of toxic ele​ ments into the water table (such as mer​ cu​ ry in ar​ tisan​ al or il​ leg​ al min​ ing), which can re​ sult even from sur​ face min​ ing and pro​ cess​ ing op ​ era​ tions be​ cause of high water t​ ables. In parts of the world where water is scar​ ce, the en​ orm​ ous con​ sump ​ tion of water by min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies is the fund​ ament​ al issue, lower​ ing the water table and dry ​ ing up riv ​ ers and lakes.

113

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

Wheth​ er through use, di​ v ers​ ion, and/or pol​ lu​ tion, min​ ing op ​ era​ tions can poten​ tial​ ly star​ v e downstream or near​ by com​ munit​ ies of the water they need, and de​ stroy the farm lands and other natur​ al re​ sour​ ces on which they de​ p end. The ef​ fect of the mine on water qual​ ity and availabil​ ity, and wheth​ er sour​ ces of sur​ face and groundwat​ er will re​ main adequate and fit for humans, plants, and an​ im​ als are cruci​ al ques​ tions; and the an​ sw​ ers to these ques​ tions may de​ ter​ mine wheth​ er a com​ pany gets a min​ ing li​ cen​ se. Ac​ curate aware​ ness of and anti​ cipa​ tion of these con​ sequ​ ences is a first step towards de​ sign​ ing approp ​ riate mech​ an​ isms to avoid or cor​ rect them. It is no sur​ p r​ ise therefore that com​ p an​ ies like Rio Tinto and in​ dust​ ry as​ socia​ tions like ICMM have re​ cog​ nized the im​ p or​ tance of water im​ p acts, is​ su ​ ing their own stan​ dards and best prac​ tice guidelines for re​ spon​ sible water man​ age​ ment.

Toxic Materi​ als and Acid Drainage
Min​ ing op ​ era​ tions pro​ duce large quan​ tit​ ies of solid and slur​ ry waste. Dif​ ferent kinds of waste come at dif​ ferent stages in the pro​ cess. First, there is the “over​ burd​ en” and waste rock which has to be re​ moved be​ fore you can get to the materi​ al to be mined. While this materi​ al is not mineralized, or does not con​ tain en​ ough re​ cover​ able miner​ als to be pro​ ces​ sed, it has to be stored, typical​ ly on the sur​ face of the land but some​ times in ab​ an​ doned mine pits or un​ derground op ​ era​ tions. Un​ derstand​ ing the pro​ p or​ tions is key. While iron ore typical​ ly con​ tains up ​ wards of 3060% iron con​ tent, this is ex​ cep ​ tion​ al. Most metal​ lic and pre​ ci​ ous miner​ als con​ tain very small pro​ p or​ tions of the miner​ al (typical​ ly less than 2%), which means the other 98% of materi​ al is waste. When you con​ centrate the ore or extra​ ct the metal, you create an​ oth​ er major waste stream, cal​ led tail​ ings. Tail​ ings are not just about volume. Be​ cause they are the waste pro​ duct of ores that have been treated, this slur​ ry can in​ clude heavy met​ als, cyanide and chem​ ical pro​ cess​ ing agents, sul​ fides, and sus​ p en​ ded sol​ ids which have to be con​ tained. Tail​ ings storage therefore needs to be in​ sulated, some​ times for de​ cades, often well be​ y ond the life of the mine, to allow de​ com​ p osi​ tion and settl​ ing. If these facilit​ ies fail, the im​ p act can be seri​ ous.

114

What Are the Is​ sues?

Air Pol​ lu​ tion
Tech​ nology has im​ p roved sig​ nificant​ ly but there can still be is​ sues with air​ borne pol​ lu​ tion. Min​ ing op ​ era​ tions can generate a lot of dust, which can tri​ gg​ er re​ spirato​ ry dis​ eases in peo​ p le, and as​ p hyxia of flora (plants). If the mine in​ cludes a smelt​ ing plant, gas em​ iss​ ions can also be toxic and a long-term risk for human life and health. This can be a major pro​ blem around the older smelt​ ing op ​ era​ tions, such as the lead-zinc smelt​ ers at Brok​ en Hill in Australia, La Oroya in Peru, and the re​ cent​ ly closed Her​ culaneum smelt​ er in Mis​ souri, USA. De​ p end​ ing on the quant​ ity and con​ centra​ tion, these sub​ stan​ ces may con​ tribute to an in​ crease in mor​ tal​ ity or il​ l​ ness.

Bi​ odivers​ ity
Min​ ing can im​ p act bi​ odivers​ ity by chang​ ing the re​ lative popula​ tions of spe​ cies in the same ecosys​ tem, as some spe​ cies are more tolerant than oth​ ers to land dis​ tur​ bance, loss of habitat and ex​ p osure to high met​ als and acid. While wholesale habitat de​ struc​ tion might be re​ lative​ ly rare, there is also the issue of habitat frag​ menta​ tion.

The Local Ef​ fects of Noise, Vib​ ra​ tions and Blast​ ing
These can im​ p act the stabil​ ity of in​ frastruc​ ture, build​ ings, and homes of peo​ p le li​ v​ ing near min​ ing op ​ era​ tions, as well as peo​ p le’s peace and tran​ q uil​ ity.

Re​ habilita​ tion of Mined Areas
The glob​ al trend in min​ ing is towards what is cal​ led “pro​ gres​ sive re​ clama​ tion,” mean​ ing that dis​ tur​ bed areas be​ come re​ claimed dur​ ing the life of the mine as well as after it has closed. Closure it​ self is now often plan​ ned and de​ sig​ ned from pro​ ject start-up in order to make re​ clama​ tion eas​ i​ er and more suc​ cess​ ful. The trick is to monitor what hap ​ p ens right from the be​ ginn​ ing and en​ sure that mech​ an​ isms are in place to guaran​ tee that the even​ tu​ al cost of re​ habilita​ tion is adequate​ ly fund​ ed.

S OCI​ AL IS ​ SUES
The soci​ al im​ p act of min​ ing pro​ jects can be seri​ ous and com​ p licated, par​ ticular​ ly when min​ ing takes place in loc​ a​ tions where peo​ p le are al​ ready li​ v​ ing. Min​ ing can serious​ ly dis​ -

115

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

rupt com​ mun​ ity stabil​ ity and dis​ tort or damage local econom​ ies and li​ v elihoods. In sever​ al co​ unt​ ries, the be​ ginn​ ing of a large min​ ing pro​ ject has been documen​ ted to im​ pact the economy of a town or com​ mun​ ity, and bring pro​ blems such as pro​ stitu​ tion, drugs and crime. His​ torical​ ly, the costs of min​ ing have been borne lar​ ge​ ly by the di​ rect​ ly af​ fected popula​ tions while the be​ nefits have ten​ ded to accrue to the nation​ al govern​ ment, select elites or the private sec​ tor. Soci​ al im​ p acts at the local level may therefore be quite dif​ ferent than at the nation​ al (or in​ ter​ nation​ al) level - a scenario that can lead to tens​ ions, con​ flicts and in​ stabil​ ity. In the last de​ cade, the avoidan​ ce and mitiga​ tion of negative soci​ al im​ p acts have come to be seen as critical​ ly im​ p or​ tant. When pro​ p er​ ly man​ aged, soci​ al im​ p acts of a mine can even be positive.

Land Ac​ quisi​ tion and Re​ settle​ ment Is​ sues
Land ac​ q uisi​ tion is a com​ mon and sig​ nificant cause of re​ sent​ ment and con​ flict as​ sociated with large min​ ing pro​ jects, re​ lated es​ p ecial​ ly to the amount and type of land used and the way in which it is ac​ q uired. In ad​ di​ tion to land being needed at the minesite, it can also be re​ q uired to es​ tablish trans​ p ort cor​ ridors and trans​ miss​ ion lines, as well as around new or upgraded port facilit​ ies needed by the mine. In many cases, en​ tire com​ munit​ ies or sig​ nificant parts of them may have to be moved el​ sewhere. This in​ v ol​ v es the phys​ ical re​ loca​ tion of households and their real as​ sets, but can also lead to their “economic dis​ p lace​ ment”, that is, the loss of their li​ v elihoods and in​ come sour​ ces, which must be re-established or re-created in their new loc​ a​ tions. The major risk of re​ settle​ ment, volun​ ta​ ry or in​ v olun​ ta​ ry, is the poten​ ti​ al to im​ p overish com​ munit​ ies and leave them worse off than they were be​ fore the mine neces​ sitated their re​ loca​ tion. In ad​ di​ tion to creat​ ing chal​ lenges for re​ settled peo​ p le, re​ settle​ ment can also be dif​ ficult for the places and com​ munit​ ies that re​ ceive them. Al​ ter​ native​ ly, new purpose-built settle​ ments may need to be built, but these might not meet needs. For ex​ am​ p le, the houses built and the lands al​ located may not allow for fami​ ly growth, or even the re​ -

116

What Are the Is​ sues?

stora​ tion of in​ comes or li​ v elihoods. Peo​ p le may have to chan​ ge their li​ v elihoods in order to sur​ v ive. Par​ ticular​ ly chal​ leng​ ing can be the dis​ p lace​ ment of in​ digen​ ous peo​ p le that have cul​ tur​ al ties to the land, and a single de​ fined li​ v elihood. There are also situa​ tions where ar​ tisan​ al min​ ers, often re​ gar​ ded as barefoot pro​ spec​ tors and fin​ d​ ers of new miner​ al de​ p osits, are min​ ing in areas where IMCs have applied for ex​ p lora​ tion and/or min​ ing per​ mits. The dis​ p lace​ ment of ar​ tisan​ al min​ ers, who often work areas with​ out legal aut​ hor​ ity, poses a dif​ ferent kind of chal​ lenge to govern​ ments and IMCs. This often has led to con​ fron​ ta​ tions and con​ flict bet​ ween IMCs and ar​ tisan​ al min​ ers, and bet​ ween ar​ tisan​ al min​ ers and the govern​ ment. Com​ p an​ ies traditional​ ly held much wider sway on these is​ sues. The re​ loca​ tion of popula​ tions has in the past been car​ ried out by the govern​ ment or the IMC with the approv ​ al of the govern​ ment. But there is now a grow​ ing ex​ p ec​ ta​ tion loc​ al​ ly, national​ ly and in​ ter​ national​ ly, that these pro​ ces​ ses will be done in con​ sul​ ta​ tion with the af​ fected com​ munit​ ies and in a par​ ticipato​ ry way, and will in​ clude post-resettlement follow-up and on​ go​ ing IMC or govern​ ment sup ​ p ort to the re​ settled peo​ p le. Many IMCs and lend​ ers now sub​ scribe to the IFC’s Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dard 5 on Land Ac​ q uisi​ tion and In​ v olun​ ta​ ry Re​ settle​ ment, which lays out an ex​ p licit framework for con​ sul​ ta​ tion, plann​ ing, im​ plemen​ ta​ tion and monitor​ ing of re​ settle​ ment, in​ clud​ ing in​ come re​ stora​ tion. Ad​ ditional​ ly, re​ settle​ ment of in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les is addres​ sed in IFC Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dard 7, which states that in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les can only be re​ settled with their con​ sent. Govern​ ments may also need to clar​ ify their own approach to and re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies re​ gard​ ing re​ settle​ ment, which may be de​ fined in the min​ ing contra​ ct but can also be gover​ ned by other legal rules, in​ clud​ ing under in​ ter​ nation​ al law.

In​ ward Mig​ ra​ tion
New min​ ing pro​ jects, par​ ticular​ ly in economical​ ly de​ p res​ sed re​ g​ ions or co​ unt​ ries, often lead to an in​ flux of new​ com​ ers from out​ side the area look​ ing for jobs on the pro​ ject, or to set up busines​ ses to pro​ fit from the new economic ac​ tiv ​ ity. As a high-value ac​ tiv ​ ity, min​ ing generates sup ​ p ort and ser​ v ice jobs, and if it tri​ gg​ ers bet​ t​ er in​ frastruc​ ture, that can be a furth​ er people-attractor.

117

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

At a logist​ ical level, a sudd​ en in​ crease in popula​ tion can lead to added pre​ ssures on water, land, hous​ ing and other re​ sour​ ces, as well as ex​ ist​ ing pub​ lic in​ frastruc​ ture and soci​ al ser​ v ices, in​ clud​ ing sanita​ tion, health and educa​ tion ser​ v ices. There may be other negative "boom​ town" effects. Soci​ al co​ hes​ ion with​ in the com​ mun​ ity may be threatened. Dis​ ease, sub​ stan​ ce abuse, dis​ rup ​ tions in law and order, and soci​ al con​ flict may be​ come major pro​ blems. Un​ control​ led popula​ tion in​ flux can have a pro​ found im​ p act on the origin​ al in​ habitants, and on the soci​ al and polit​ ical stabil​ ity of the area. The man​ age​ ment of in​ flux risks is now re​ cog​ nized as a major chal​ lenge for re​ spon​ sible mine de​ velop ​ ment. Here too, for​ ward think​ ing IMCs will de​ v elop and im​ p le​ ment workfor​ ce re​ cruit​ ment and hous​ ing strateg​ ies that minimize these risks, and de​ v elop other poli​ cies and pro​ cedures in col​ labora​ tion with local govern​ ment and nation​ al aut​ horit​ ies to keep in-migration under con​ trol.

Li​ velihoods
Min​ ing can af​ fect peo​ p les’ li​ v elihoods in a variety of ways - both positive and negative. If the peo​ p le in the area de​ p end on local natur​ al re​ sour​ ces for their sub​ sist​ ence (hunt​ ing, fish​ ing, farm​ ing, or peasant min​ ing), ex​ p lora​ tion ac​ tivit​ ies, site pre​ p ara​ tion, mine and plant con​ struc​ tion, in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment, and mine op ​ era​ tions may in​ ter​ rupt, in​ ter​ fere with or pre​ v ent them from ac​ cess​ ing these re​ sour​ ces and con​ tinu​ ing their ways of sup ​ p ort​ ing them​ selves and their famil​ ies. This has been re​ fer​ red to above as “economic dis​ p lace​ ment”, which can occur even when com​ munit​ ies and households do not have to be shif​ ted. The main com​ p en​ sato​ ry measures that IMC’s and govern​ ments can take are to en​ sure the crea​ tion of al​ ter​ native li​ v elihood and em​ p loy ​ ment op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies for famil​ ies and in​ dividu​ als. This has often in​ v ol​ v ed pre​ feren​ ti​ al train​ ing and hir​ ing poli​ cies, as well as in​ vest​ ment in local busi​ ness de​ v elop ​ ment and the sourc​ ing of cer​ tain goods and sup ​ p l​ ies that may be avail​ able loc​ al​ ly. Some govern​ ments have built pre​ feren​ ti​ al nation​ al hir​ ing and pro​ cure​ ment pro​ v is​ ions into their min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments, but these have not neces​ sari​ ly fil​ tered down to the local level. There are, howev ​ er, re​ newed ef​ forts in this di​ rec​ tion, as many com​ p an​ ies and govern​ ments re​ cogn​ ize the need to en​ sure secure and st​ able com​ munit​ ies in the min​ ing area, and are de​ sign​ ing and im​ p lement​ ing local em​ ploy ​ ment and pro​ cure​ ment poli​ cies and pro​ cedures.

118

What Are the Is​ sues?

Cul​ tur​ al Heritage and Sac​ red Sites
Land ac​ q uisi​ tion, earthmov ​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies, and popula​ tion in​ flux can all threat​ en ac​ cess to and the pro​ tec​ tion and pre​ ser​ v a​ tion of cul​ tur​ al sites, wheth​ er of archeolog​ ical or spiritu​ al sig​ nifican​ ce. Where cul​ tur​ al sites are pre​ sent, IMCs, often ob​ ligated by nation​ al laws, un​ der​ take sur​ v eys, and where needed, im​ p le​ ment pro​ tec​ tive measures and man​ age​ ment sys​ tems. This issue may also be addres​ sed in the min​ ing in​ v est​ ment ag​ ree​ ment.

Phys​ ical and Soci​ al In​ frastruc​ ture
One of the poten​ ti​ al be​ nefits of a mine’s pre​ s​ ence is its in​ v est​ ment in the im​ p rove​ ment of local in​ frastruc​ ture and ser​ v ices. IMCs often per​ form pub​ lic ser​ v ice func​ tions in the ab​ s​ ence of robust pub​ lic ser​ v ices in order to as​ s​ ist local com​ munit​ ies to meet basic needs and im​ p rove qual​ ity of life. Some IMCs take a strategic approach to social/com​ mun​ ity in​ v est​ ment, and pro​ mote public-private partnerships for local de​ v elop ​ ment, partner​ ing with dif​ ferent levels of govern​ ment, com​ munit​ ies and NGOs, some​ times with ad​ dition​ al fund​ ing from multi- or bi-lateral aid agen​ cies. Howev ​ er, the roles and re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies, as well as the ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions of all part​ ies to the min​ ing contra​ ct (or other re​ levant ag​ ree​ ments) in this domain should be made clear dur​ ing negotia​ tions and com​ mun​ ity con​ sul​ ta​ tion when they occur, and for​ malized with​ in the ag​ reement(s).

Fin​ an​ ci​ al Be​ nefit Shar​ ing
Since im​ p acts are un​ equ​ ally borne, there is an in​ creas​ ing ex​ p ec​ ta​ tion that the peo​ p le and com​ munit​ ies most di​ rect​ ly af​ fected will share in the be​ nefits generated by the pre​ s​ ence of a min​ ing op ​ era​ tion. These be​ nefits may not be li​ mited to em​ p loy ​ ment and busi​ ness op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies, im​ p roved in​ frastruc​ ture and ser​ v ices, but may also re​ late to fin​ an​ ci​ al be​ nefit shar​ ing, for ex​ am​ p le, a re​ turn of a por​ tion of nation​ al govern​ ment royalt​ ies to the local municip ​ al or re​ gion​ al aut​ horit​ ies. This is an issue that is also being addres​ sed in con​ tem​ p ora​ ry ag​ ree​ ments, which may man​ date fin​ an​ ci​ al con​ tribu​ tions by the IMC di​ rect​ ly or by the centr​ al govern​ ment back to the local aut​ horit​ ies.

119

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

Equ​ ity Is​ sues
A major chal​ lenge is in re​ duc​ ing the risk of creat​ ing new di​ v is​ ions bet​ ween soci​ al or economic clas​ ses of peo​ p le with​ in the af​ fected com​ munit​ ies. The mine will have dif​ feren​ ti​ al im​ p acts on dif​ ferent groups with​ in the com​ mun​ ity, and the be​ nefits of em​ ploy ​ ment or busi​ ness may not be even​ ly dis​ tributed. Con​ sul​ ta​ tion pro​ ces​ ses may not be in​ clusive and, as a re​ sult, com​ mun​ ity in​ v est​ ment de​ cis​ ions and partnerships may favor select groups. Dis​ p arit​ ies can be widened and power and soci​ al re​ lationships with​ in a com​ mun​ ity dis​ tor​ ted. IMCs, govern​ ments and other partn​ ers should be at​ tentive to these risks.

120

What Are the Is​ sues?

121

USING THE CONTRA ​ C T TO MAN ​ A GE THE IS ​ S UES
The en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p acts that min​ ing pro​ jects can have will vary over the co​ ur​ se of the pro​ jects' life cyc​ les; and dif​ ferent parts of the contra​ ct can be used to af​ fect those impacts - for better or worse.

122

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

This sec​ tion pro​ v ides ex​ am​ p les of how contra​ cts can address some of these is​ sues. While these ex​ am​ p les primari​ ly de​ scribe ob​ liga​ tions placed upon a min​ ing com​ p any, this does not mean that the govern​ ment is free from re​ spon​ sibil​ ity. Even if there are no pro​ v is​ ions in the contra​ ct plac​ ing en​ v iron​ ment​ al or soci​ al ob​ liga​ tions on the govern​ ment, the govern​ ment does have re​ levant re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies under in​ ter​ nation​ al law. These is​ sues are de​ scribed brief​ ly in the third chapt​ er of this sec​ tion.

THE HE ART OF THE M ATT​ ER: EN​ VIRON​ MENT​ AL AND S OCI​ AL IM ​ PACT AS ​ SESS​ M E NTS ( E S IA) AND E N​ VIRON​ MENT​ AL M AN​ AG E ​ M E NT PL ANS ( E M P)
The plann​ ing phase is the most im​ p or​ tant phase for in​ fluenc​ ing what a min​ ing pro​ ject will look like and what im​ p acts it will have. As plans for ex​ p lora​ tion, ex​ p loita​ tion and closure are de​ v eloped (and re​ v ised), there is a cruci​ al op ​ p or​ tun​ ity for tak​ ing stock of en​ viron​ ment​ al and soci​ al risks, figur​ ing out how to avoid or mitigate pro​ blems, and de​ sign​ ing the pro​ ject and op ​ era​ tions ac​ cording​ ly. This pro​ cess is the "en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p act as​ sess​ ment" (ESIA). ESIAs are fund​ ament​ al pre-project plann​ ing tools used to make sure a wide range of poten​ ti​ al en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p lica​ tions are con​ sidered be​ fore the pro​ ject is for​ mal​ ly approved. They pro​ v ide an op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to mold or even halt pro​ jects based on their fin​ d​ ings. Traditional​ ly, these as​ sess​ ments have an​ alyzed the en​ v iron​ ment​ al fea​ tures of a projectaffected area and the poten​ ti​ al im​ p act of that pro​ ject, sur​ v ey ​ ing the plants, an​ im​ als, air qual​ ity, water use and water availabil​ ity, and as​ sess​ ing the poten​ ti​ al ef​ fects of the pro​ ject on those re​ sour​ ces and as​ sociated com​ munit​ ies (these as​ sess​ ments are cal​ led "En​ viron​ ment​ al Im​ p act As​ sess​ ments" (EIAs)). Howev ​ er, the as​ sess​ ments in​ creasing​ ly look at broad​ er project-related is​ sues, and re​ q uire con​ sidera​ tion not only of the en​ v iron​ ment, but also de​ tailed an​ alysis of im​ p acts on com​ munit​ ies and socioeconomic is​ sues. In Australia, for ex​ am​ p le, the state of Queensland re​ cent​ ly pas​ sed re​ gula​ tions re​ q uir​ ing more ex​ ten​ sive soci​ al baseline work and soci​ al im​ p act man​ age​ ment plann​ ing in ad​ -

123

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

vance of per​ mit approv ​ als. The re​ gula​ tions call for data to be gat​ hered on cat​ ego​ ries such as com​ mun​ ity his​ to​ ry and cul​ ture, in​ come and cost of li​ v​ ing, popula​ tion, soci​ al in​ frastruc​ ture, workfor​ ce par​ ticipa​ tion, em​ p loy ​ ment and di​ v ers​ ity pro​ file, hous​ ing and ac​ commoda​ tion, educa​ tion and train​ ing, and trans​ p or​ ta​ tion. Every ​ th​ ing from the price of houses and mortgages to the na​ ture of local labor mar​ kets, to pub​ lic trans​ p ort could be re​ levant to these im​ p act as​ sess​ ments. An ESIA often de​ scribes al​ ter​ native forms of the pro​ ject (in​ clud​ ing even a "no pro​ ject" al​ ter​ native), and lists dif​ ferent opt​ ions for avoid​ ing or mitigat​ ing pos​ sible negative im​ pacts. The level of de​ tail re​ q uired in an ESIA com​ mon​ ly de​ p ends on the na​ ture of the pro​ p osed pro​ ject. Given mines' heavy footprint, ESIAs for mines are most​ ly done to the most de​ mand​ ing stan​ dards. Domes​ tic law may re​ q uire com​ p an​ ies to pre​ p are an ESIA or at least to secure re​ levant approv ​ als and per​ mits be​ fore pro​ ceed​ ing with a min​ ing pro​ ject, but when that is not the case, ESIA pro​ v is​ ions in contra​ cts can en​ sure that they are re​ q uired. Ad​ ditional​ ly, even if the re​ q uire​ ment for an ESIA is al​ ready in the law, there may be rea​ sons why a govern​ ment would also want to in​ clude the ob​ liga​ tion in the contra​ ct: By putt​ ing the re​ q uire​ ment for the ESIA in the contra​ ct, the govern​ ment can re​ in​ force the mes​ sage that a com​ pany's ob​ liga​ tions to pro​ p er​ ly pre​ p are or pro​ cure the ESIA is viewed as a fund​ ament​ al part of the deal. If there were a viola​ tion re​ gard​ ing how the ESIA was pre​ p ared, the contra​ ct could pro​ v ide for specific penalt​ ies and re​ med​ ies that might not be ot​ herw​ ise avail​ able under domes​ tic law. The ESIA pro​ cess can con​ tain vari​ ous phases, in​ clud​ ing: pre​ p ara​ tion of a draft ESIA (which may be done by the pro​ ject de​ v elop ​ er, re​ levant government​ al aut​ hor​ ity, and/or in​ depen​ dent firm); con​ sul​ ta​ tion with the com​ mun​ ity in the draft​ ing of the ESIA; a per​ iod in which the pub​ lic can re​ v iew and com​ ment on the draft; re​ v is​ ion of the ESIA based on the com​ ments by stakehold​ ers, in​ clud​ ing the pub​ lic and the com​ p any;

124

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

pre​ p ara​ tion of the final ESIA; and selec​ tion of a pro​ ject plan with a co​ ur​ se of ac​ tion and strategies for avoid​ ing or mitigat​ ing harm.

In some juris​ dic​ tions, citizens have the ab​ il​ ity to chal​ lenge the ESIA and re​ sult​ ing de​ cis​ ions in court. How ESIAs are un​ der​ tak​ en is vital for de​ ter​ min​ ing wheth​ er, to what ex​ tent, and how en​ viron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p acts are anti​ cipated and - to the ex​ tent pos​ sible - avoided. With​ out the pro​ p​ er in​ depend​ ence, over​ sight, and in​ teg​ ra​ tion into decision-making pro​ ces​ ses, the ESIA has no pract​ ical value. Some ag​ ree​ ments, like Guinea - Zogota (2009), re​ q uire the com​ p any to pre​ p are the ESIA. Oth​ ers, like the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct (Ar​ ticle 6.1), spec​ ify that the com​ pany "shall ob​ tain de​ tailed en​ viron​ ment​ al im​ pact as​ sess​ ment re​ ports ... in ac​ cordan​ ce with the Law on En​ viron​ ment​ al Im​ pact As​ sess​ ment pre​ pared by a com​ petent, in​ depen​ dent, pro​ fes​ sion​ al firm.”

125

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

Some min​ ing contra​ cts in​ dicate that the govern​ ment must approve ESIAs, al​ though most contra​ cts do not spec​ ify the re​ q uire​ ments for the scope of the ESIA or the pro​ cess for its approv ​ al.

L I​ NK​ ING AS ​ SESS​ M E NT, PL ANN​ ING AND M AN​ AG E ​ MENT: THE EN​ VIRON​ MENT​ AL M AN​ AG E ​ M E NT PL AN
As​ sess​ ment means noth​ ing if the in​ for​ ma​ tion is gat​ hered but not ac​ tual​ ly used in plann​ ing the pro​ ject, mak​ ing de​ cis​ ions, or im​ p lement​ ing strateg​ ies. This is where en​ viron​ ment​ al (and soci​ al) man​ age​ ment plans come in (re​ fer​ red to here as "EMPs"). These plans pre​ sent a full​ er pic​ ture of how the re​ lationship among the pro​ ject, the en​ v iron​ ment and sur​ round​ ing communit​ ies is being han​ dled through the life of the pro​ ject from ex​ p lora​ tion through mine closure. In com​ p arison with ESIAs, EMPs focus less on the plann​ ing or de​ sign phase and more on man​ age​ ment of en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p acts and com​ p lian​ ce with re​ levant per​ mits and approv ​ als. In some cases, EMPs re​ q uire com​ p lian​ ce with fin​ d​ ings of an ESIA. In other cases, howev ​ er, the pre​ c​ ise re​ lationship bet​ ween the ESIA and the EMP is less clear. Some im​ p or​ tant ques​ tions the contra​ ct might an​ sw​ er re​ gard​ ing the EMP are wheth​ er the EMP has to take into ac​ count all cat​ ego​ ries of is​ sues co​ v ered in the ESIA, or wheth​ er it re​ q uires the com​ p any and/or the govern​ ment to mitigate (at any cost) the risks iden​ tified in the ESIA. The Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct, for ex​ am​ p le, re​ q uires the in​ v es​ tor to im​ p le​ ment an "en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion plan ('EPP') and en​ v iron​ ment​ al monitor​ ing and an​ alysis pro​ gram," but does not link it ex​ p ress​ ly with the re​ q uired en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p act as​ sess​ ment. It states: "6.4. The In​ ves​ tor shall meet all costs for each year of im​ plement​ ing an en​ viron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion plan ("EPP") and en​ viron​ ment​ al monitor​ ing and an​ alysis pro​ gram, in con​ nec​ tion with im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of the OT Pro​ ject and shall pro​ vide to the State centr​ al ad​ ministrative aut​ hor​ ity in char​ ge of en​ viron​ ment a re​ port, pre​ pared by a cer​ tified, in​ depen​ dent, pro​ fes​ sion​ al firm, on address​ ing the In​ -

126

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

ves​ tor's im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of the measures specified in the EPP every 3 (three) years." While the Mon​ golian ag​ ree​ ment sees the as​ sess​ ment and the plan as two separate docu​ ments, other ag​ ree​ ments as​ sume that the ESIA itself sets out an ac​ tion plan that the com​ p any must com​ p​ ly with. For in​ stan​ ce, Ar​ ticle 12.2 of the Ecuador - Ecuacor​ rien​ te (2012) contra​ ct states: "El Con​ cesionario Minario tomara las pre​ cauciones necesarias, y es​ tablecidas en el EIA ap​ robado, para pre​ venir, con​ trolar, mitigar, re​ habilitar, re​ mediar y com​ pen​ sar los im​ pac​ tos negativos que sus ac​ tividades mineras puedan tener sobre el am​ bien​ te y la com​ unidad." [The Min​ ing Con​ ces​ sionaire will take the neces​ sa​ ry pre​ cau​ tions, es​ tablis​ hed in the approved EIA to pre​ vent, con​ trol, mitigate, re​ habilitate, re​ mediate and com​ pen​ sate for the negative im​ pact that its min​ ing ac​ tivit​ ies can have on the en​ viron​ ment and the com​ mun​ ity.] Similar​ ly, Ar​ ticle 1.10 of the Afghanis​ tan - Qara Zag​ han (2011) ag​ ree​ ment defines the gold min​ ing pro​ ject's En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Man​ agement Plan as a: "... plan pro​ posed by [the com​ pany], and which must be ac​ cepted by [the Minist​ ry of Mines], which de​ tails the measures to be taken to minim​ ize or al​ leviate the En​ viron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al fac​ tors applic​ able to the Qara Zag​ han Gold Pro​ ject which are iden​ tified and de​ tailed in the En​ viron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Im​ pact As​ sess​ ment." The Sier​ ra Leone - MMDA (2012) pro​ v ides yet an​ oth​ er ex​ am​ p le and, as com​ p ared to the ag​ ree​ ments quoted above, is re​ lative​ ly specific re​ gard​ ing what it must con​ tain and what the com​ p any is sup ​ p osed to do. It states: "The Com​ pany, prior to com​ menc​ ing con​ struc​ tion, shall have an En​ viron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plan pre​ pared (and up​ dated prior to any major chan​ ge to the mine plan) by an in​ depen​ dent third-party (and if pre​ pared by the Com​ pany, verified by an In​ depen​ dent Sole Ex​ pert) on the basis of sound en​ gineer​ ing and economic prin​ ci​ ples in ac​ cordan​ ce with Good In​ dust​ ry Prac​ tice. The ob​ jec​ tive of

127

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

the En​ viron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plan is to pre​ vent any un​ neces​ sa​ ry and undue de​ grada​ tion of the en​ viron​ ment by the Min​ ing Op​ era​ tions; to pro​ tect pub​ lic health and safety, par​ ticular​ ly for com​ munit​ ies in the Min​ ing Area; to pre​ ser​ ve water quant​ ity and qual​ ity; to en​ sure that im​ pacts with​ in the Min​ ing Area are con​ tained in that area; to stabil​ ize the site physical​ ly and chemical​ ly at the end of min​ ing op​ era​ tions to pre​ vent of​ fsite im​ pacts; and to en​ sure that the Min​ ing Area may be safe​ ly and be​ neficial​ ly used by fu​ ture genera​ tions. The En​ viron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plan shall upon re​ quest by GoSL, be made pub​ lic​ ly avail​ able in a lan​ guage and in a form that is ac​ cessib​ le to af​ fected com​ munit​ ies in the Min​ ing Area, and shall be placed in the docu​ ment files iden​ tified in Sec​ tion 35.1(e) of this Ag​ ree​ ment." (Ar​ ticle 2.6.1(a)). The ag​ ree​ ment also in​ cludes a list of topics that must be co​ v ered in the En​ v iron​ ment​ al Man​ age​ ment Plan, and specif​ ies what is re​ q uired in order to com​ p​ ly with "Good In​ dust​ ry Prac​ tice". This, the ag​ ree​ ment ex​ p lains, is: "… the ex​ erc​ ise of that de​ gree of skill, di​ lig​ ence, prud​ ence and foresight which would rea​ sonab​ ly and or​ dinari​ ly be ex​ pec​ ted to be applied by a skil​ led and ex​ perien​ ced per​ son en​ gaged in the in​ ter​ nation​ al min​ ing in​ dust​ ry and in​ cludes but is not li​ mited to the guidan​ ce pro​ vided by the In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ un​ cil on Min​ ing and Met​ als, the In​ ter​ nation​ al Fin​ an​ ce Cor​ poration’s Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dard 1 (Soci​ al and En​ viron​ ment​ al As​ sess​ ment and Man​ age​ ment Sys​ tems), Stan​ dard 3 (Pol​ lu​ tion Pre​ ven​ tion and Ab​ ate​ ment), and Stan​ dard 6 (Bi​ odivers​ ity Con​ ser​ va​ tion and Sus​ tain​ able Natur​ al Re​ sour​ ce Man​ age​ ment), by ISO 140001 stan​ dards." (Ar​ ticle 1.4). These tools (the ESIA pro​ cess) and plans (the EMP) are centr​ al to de​ ter​ min​ ing the ex​ tent to which a min​ ing pro​ ject will facilitate long-term sus​ tain​ able de​ v elop ​ ment, or leave the co​ unt​ ry with a lega​ cy of soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ blems.

128

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

DRIL L ​ ING DOWN ON S PE CIFIC IS ​ S UE S : AC​ CE S S TO RE ​ S OUR​ C E S , W O R K P L A C E S A F E T Y, S E C U R ​ I T Y, C U L ​ TUR​ AL HE RITAG E , M INE CL OS URE AND L I​ AB IL ​ ITY
While it is vital for the ESIA and the EMP to be as com​ p rehen​ sive as pos​ sible, there may be cer​ tain is​ sues to which the contra​ ct​ ing part​ ies want to give ad​ dition​ al speci​ al at​ ten​ tion. Ex​ p eri​ ences have shown that min​ ing pro​ jects give rise to tens​ ions over ac​ cess to and use of re​ sour​ ces, is​ sues re​ gard​ ing workplace safety, con​ flicts bet​ ween com​ munit​ ies and secur​ ity for​ ces, and con​ cerns re​ gard​ ing en​ sur​ ing that - if some​ th​ ing does go wrong the pro​ blem can be sol​ v ed at the approp ​ riate party's ex​ p en​ se. There is also in​ creased aware​ ness of the op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies that min​ ing pro​ jects can pre​ sent for com​ mun​ ity de​ velop ​ ment. Some contra​ cts con​ tain speci​ al pro​ v is​ ions on these topics in order to make clear what the part​ ies' rights and ob​ liga​ tions are; and some do this in order to en​ sure that a breach of the ob​ liga​ tion also con​ stitutes a breach of the contra​ ct with real con​ sequ​ ences for the part​ ies. This sec​ tion pro​ v ides ex​ am​ p les of some of those pro​ v is​ ions.

AC​ CE S S TO L AND, WATE R AND OTHE R RE ​ S OUR​ CE S
One crit​ ical early-project issue re​ lates to ac​ cess to re​ sour​ ces. To ac​ cess miner​ als you must have ac​ cess to land and water; the ac​ cess to and use of those re​ sour​ ces can have sig​ nificant im​ p acts on sur​ round​ ing ecosys​ tems. Some contra​ cts state ex​ p licit​ ly, or imply through their sil​ ence, that a com​ p any's ac​ cess to and use of land, water and other re​ sour​ ces will be gover​ ned by gener​ al background prin​ ci​ p les of law re​ gard​ ing miner​ al rights, water rights, land rights and en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion. Under these contra​ cts, the com​ p any will have to secure re​ levant ac​ cess and approv ​ als con​ sis​ tent with those laws - a pro​ cess that, in many juris​ dic​ tions, is often cited as being lengthy, com​ p lex and co​ st​ ly. Some contra​ cts seek to bypass those pro​ ces​ ses and con​ straints by facilitat​ ing (or even pro​ mis​ ing) min​ ing com​ p an​ ies' ab​ ilit​ ies to use or af​ fect water, land or other natur​ al re​ sour​ ces. At one ex​ treme, a govern​ ment may grant a com​ p any these rights in broad if not

129

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

ab​ solute terms. Other contra​ cts take a more re​ strained approach by im​ p os​ ing ob​ liga​ tions, such as fees and/or re​ stric​ tions on the amount or scope of use. Re​ gard​ ing water use, for ex​ am​ p le, the Li​ beria - Putu (2010) ag​ ree​ ment states in Ar​ ticle 19.5: "The Com​ pany shall have the right to ac​ cess (in​ clud​ ing by means of extra​ c​ tion) such water sup​ p l​ ies as are rea​ sonab​ ly re​ quired by it for the pur​ poses of car​ ry​ ing out its [ex​ plora​ tion, de​ velop​ ment, pro​ duc​ tion and other op​ era​ tions] sub​ ject to the pay​ ment by the Com​ pany of the char​ ges re​ quired by applic​ able Law for the use of water and pro​ vided that such ac​ cess by the Com​ pany does not af​ fect the water sup​ p l​ ies used by the sur​ round​ ing popula​ tion or, to the ex​ tent that it does so af​ fect water sup​ p l​ ies, the Com​ pany pro​ vides an al​ ter​ native sour​ ce of water sup​ p​ ly to the af​ fected popula​ tion." That pro​ v is​ ion il​ lustrates how a contra​ ct can im​ p ose cer​ tain li​ mits on the com​ p any's use of water in order to take into ac​ count other users, uses and in​ terests. But it also shows how contra​ cts leave a numb​ er of en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al is​ sues un​ resol​ v ed. It does not, for ex​ am​ p le, place any li​ mits on the use of water that may im​ p act the en​ v iron​ ment (as op ​ p osed to the popula​ tion); nor does it clear​ ly address who is the "sur​ round​ ing" popula​ tion who may be en​ tit​ led to re​ ceive "al​ ter​ native" sour​ ces of water sup ​ p​ ly. Is​ sues around land ac​ cess can be just as con​ ten​ ti​ ous. Award​ ing rights to ac​ cess land to the min​ ing com​ p any by the govern​ ment, for in​ stan​ ce, may not take ac​ count of cus​ toma​ ry land rights held by local com​ munit​ ies. As was noted above, one of the most sen​ sitive as​ p ects of min​ ing pro​ jects is when the es​ tablish​ ment of a mine re​ q uires local re​ sidents to be re​ located for op ​ era​ tions. As a re​ sult, re​ q uire​ ments as to the han​ dl​ ing of re​ settle​ ment are in​ creasing​ ly li​ ke ​ ly to be found in min​ ing contra​ cts. The Sier​ ra Leone - Sier​ ra Rutile (2001) contra​ ct (Ar​ ticle 10.b.v) has a long sec​ tion de​ al​ ing with this issue. But it does not cat​ egorical​ ly state wheth​ er re​ sidents have a right to re​ fuse to move: "If at any point a re​ settle​ ment of the local popula​ tion ap​ pears to be ab​ solute​ ly es​ senti​ al, the Com​ pany shall move with ut​ most cau​ tion, with the con​ sent of the

130

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

Govern​ ment and in con​ sul​ ta​ tion with local aut​ horit​ ies in per​ suad​ ing the local popula​ tion to re​ settle and pro​ vide a fully adequate re​ settle​ ment pro​ gram in ac​ cordan​ ce with the di​ rec​ tions of the re​ spon​ sible Minist​ er." So what happens if, de​ spite pro​ ceed​ ing with "ut​ most cau​ tion" and of​ fer​ ing a "fully adequate re​ settle​ ment pro​ gram," the local popula​ tion or in​ dividu​ als re​ fuse to move? The Sier​ ra Leone contract clear​ ly specif​ ies that the centr​ al govern​ ment has the final say in ad​ judicat​ ing bet​ ween a com​ p any and an in​ dividu​ al lan​ down​ er for use of the land. So does the Li​ beria - Putu (2010) ag​ ree​ ment, which states (Ar​ ticle 7.3.a): "If no other sur​ face rights are rea​ sonab​ ly avail​ able to the Com​ pany for such pur​ poses, the Govern​ ment will use its pow​ ers of em​ inent domain to ob​ tain such rights from an un​ will​ ing third party." In the Guinea - Koum​ bia (2010) contra​ ct, it is as​ sumed that the com​ p any will be able to move re​ sidents if it has to. The ag​ ree​ ment simp ​ ly lays down con​ di​ tions (Ar​ ticle 15.8) for how it must do so: "Si la Société juge la pre​ s​ ence d'Utilisateurs et/ou Oc​ cupants Fon​ ci​ ers in​ com​ patib​ le avec ses Op​ era​ tions Minieres sous la Con​ cess​ ion Miniere, elle est tenue d'in​ demnis​ er ces Utilisateurs et/ou Oc​ cupants Fon​ ci​ ers avant la date de sig​ na​ ture de la Con​ ven​ tion et de les aider a se re​ localis​ er. La Societe doit vers​ er une in​ dem​ nite a ces Utilisateurs et/ou Oc​ cupants Fon​ ci​ ers, pour toute re​ localisa​ tion ou pour toute perte d'usage, titre fon​ ci​ er, habita​ tion et re​ col​ tes. L'in​ demnisa​ tion sus​ men​ tionee doit cor​ res​ pondre au mon​ tant neces​ saire a la re​ localisa​ tion et a la re​ instal​ la ​ tion des dits Utilisateurs et/ou Oc​ cupants Fon​ ci​ ers... (et) doit com​ prendre la juste valeur marchan​ de de toute perte." [If the Com​ pany jud​ ges the pre​ s​ ence of Users in​ com​ patib​ le with its min​ ing op​ era​ tions under the Min​ ing Con​ cess​ ion, it must in​ demn​ ify these Users be​ fore the date of sig​ na​ ture of the ag​ ree​ ment and to help them re​ locate. The Com​ pany must dis​ bur​ se an in​ demn​ ity to the Users for every re​ settle​ ment or for every loss of use, habita​ tion and crops. The above-mentioned in​ demn​ ity must cor​ res​ pond

131

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

to the amount neces​ sa​ ry to re​ locate and re​ install the said Users and must en​ com​ pass the fair mar​ ket value of every loss.]

OC​ CUPATION​ AL HE AL TH AND S AFE TY
Contra​ ctu​ al terms de​ tail​ ing min​ ing com​ p any re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies for oc​ cupation​ al health and safety around min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are re​ lative​ ly com​ mon. Health and safety is​ sues are co​ v ered in legis​ la​ tion in most co​ unt​ ries, and many min​ ing contra​ cts will simp ​ ly note that the min​ ing com​ p any is bound to pro​ v ide adequate pro​ tec​ tions in line with the law and with in​ ter​ nation​ al stan​ dards. For ex​ am​ p le, the Li​ beria - Wes​ tern Clust​ er (2011) contra​ ct notes that the com​ p any: "...[s]hall prac​ tice such modern health and safety pro​ cedures and pre​ cau​ tions (in​ clud​ ing re​ gular safety train​ ing in​ struc​ tion for its em​ ployees) as are in ac​ cordan​ ce with applic​ able Law and In​ ter​ nation​ al Min​ ing Stan​ dards." The Sier​ ra Leone - MMDA (2012) similar​ ly re​ q uires the com​ p any to ad​ here to “good in​ dust​ ry prac​ tice” re​ gard​ ing labor, health, and safety. (Ar​ ticles 16.5 & 16.6).

S E CUR​ ITY
Secur​ ity is an im​ p or​ tant and sen​ sitive issue. The mine needs secur​ ity for its per​ son​ nel and op ​ era​ tions, but ques​ tions arise re​ gard​ ing who has re​ spon​ sibil​ ity for secur​ ity, what the mine's rights are to have its own secur​ ity for​ ces, what pro​ tec​ tions are avail​ able against ab​ uses, and other is​ sues. There are a numb​ er of dif​ ferent ways a contra​ ct might seek to re​ sol​ v e these ques​ tions. In some cases, mines may be en​ tit​ led to main​ tain secur​ ity for​ ces but must im​ mediate​ ly turn over any de​ tained in​ dividu​ als to the aut​ horit​ ies. In other cases, mines are not per​ mit​ ted to main​ tain armed secur​ ity per​ son​ nel, and the govern​ ment takes on the ob​ liga​ tions of pro​ v id​ ing in​ tern​ al secur​ ity.

132

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

The Li​ beria - Af​ rica Aura Re​ sour​ ces (2004) ag​ ree​ ment notes that the pro​ ject is not con​ sidered to have star​ ted until a joint visit by the govern​ ment and com​ p any of​ fici​ als has de​ ter​ mined that the site is safe. It even specif​ ies (Ar​ ticle 27) that the com​ p any should be “under the guidan​ ce” of the Uni​ ted Na​ tions of​ fice in Mon​ rovia and says the com​ p any shall make “all rea​ son​ able ef​ forts to ac​ cept a 'safe to op​ erate in' de​ clara​ tion.” But the Li​ beria - China Union (2009) contra​ ct goes much furth​ er in giv ​ ing the com​ p any power. It ex​ p licit​ ly al​ lows (Ar​ ticle 9.2) the com​ p any to form its own secur​ ity force to op ​ erate on the min​ ing con​ cess​ ion areas and “the im​ mediate vicin​ ity”: "Those mem​ b​ ers of the Con​ ces​ sionaire's (or such contra​ ctor's) secur​ ity force cer​ tified by name by the Con​ ces​ sionaire to the Minist​ ry of Just​ ice as being lit​ erate, as hav​ ing re​ ceived adequate full-time train​ ing in police and law en​ for​ ce​ ment pro​ cedures given by an out​ side train​ er satis​ facto​ ry to the Minist​ ry of Just​ ice and as hav​ ing been pro​ vided with op​ erat​ ing manu​ als approved by the Minist​ ry of Just​ ice, shall have en​ for​ ce​ ment pow​ ers with​ in the areas de​ scribed in the pre​ ced​ ing sen​ t​ ence, al​ ways being sub​ ject to applic​ able Law." These pow​ ers in​ clude rights to search and ar​ rest in​ dividu​ als, though the ag​ ree​ ment specif​ ies that the com​ p any's secur​ ity force must not​ ify the police with​ in 24 hours of any de​ ten​ tions. In ad​ di​ tion to grant​ ing rights, the contra​ ct can also in​ clude ob​ liga​ tions on the min​ ing com​ p any to util​ ize them sen​ sitive​ ly in re​ cog​ ni​ tion of com​ mun​ ity and basic human rights. It ap ​ p ears to still be un​ usu​ al to see this spel​ led out in a contra​ ct, but there are now some ex​ am​ p les. Sec​ tion 9.2 of the Li​ beria - Wes​ tern Clust​ er (2011) contra​ ct, for ex​ am​ p le, specif​ ies that the firm’s secur​ ity force is sub​ ject to both applic​ able law and the Volun​ ta​ ry Prin​ ci​ p les on Secur​ ity and Human Rights (see the next chapt​ er for more de​ tails on the Volun​ ta​ ry Prin​ ci​ p les).

M INE CL OS URE
What hap ​ p ens when the contra​ ct ter​ minates? Will the co​ unt​ ry be left with an un​ u s​ able and poten​ tial​ ly hazard​ ous was​ teland? In order to avoid that out​ come, co​ unt​ ries can in​ -

133

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

clude specific ob​ liga​ tions re​ lated to mine closure in their contra​ cts. The min​ ing com​ p any will be asked to pro​ v ide plans and cost es​ timates for re​ habilita​ tion of the mine site – usual​ ly built into the EMP. Some contra​ cts may re​ q uire ad​ dition​ al guaran​ tees of fin​ anc​ ing that will be avail​ able if there are major en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ blems that re​ q uire cleanup. These may be one of sever​ al “parent​ al guaran​ tees” re​ q uir​ ing the com​ p any to de​ monstrate it can mobil​ ize ad​ dition​ al fund​ ing as needed. For ex​ am​ p le, Li​ beria’s Model Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment (2008) states: "The closure man​ age​ ment plan must also set forth the means by which the Com​ pany pro​ poses to en​ sure the availabil​ ity of funds to fin​ an​ ce its en​ viron​ ment​ al re​ stora​ tion and re​ media​ tion ob​ liga​ tions under Sec​ tions 8.2 and 8.3 of the Min​ ing Law so that the cost of closure will be borne by the Com​ pany and not the pub​ lic or the Govern​ ment. If the Com​ pany does not agree in writ​ ing with the Govern​ ment to a “pay-as-you-go” fund​ ing scheme, then a fund​ ing guaran​ tee rea​ sonab​ ly satis​ facto​ ry to the Minist​ er of Fin​ an​ ce from a third party fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stitu​ tion with a long-term credit rat​ ing of at least A (or its equivalent) from at least two in​ ter​ national​ ly re​ cog​ nized credit-rating agen​ cies with pro​ vis​ ion rea​ sonab​ ly ac​ cept​ able to the Minist​ er of Fin​ an​ ce and the Minist​ er for re​ deter​ mina​ tion of es​ timated closure costs at least tri​ en​ nial​ ly and ad​ just​ ments in the amount of the fund​ ing guaran​ tee will nor​ mal​ ly be ac​ cept​ able." It is im​ p or​ tant to re​ memb​ er that some en​ v iron​ ment​ al is​ sues, such as tail​ ings ponds, will have to be man​ aged years after the mine may close so that some per​ manent fund​ ing sour​ ce may be re​ q uired. For more on mine closure, see the chapt​ er on "Mine Closure" in the sec​ tion, "Min​ ing Op ​ era​ tions".

COM ​ MUN​ ITY DE ​ VE L OP​ MENT
Contra​ cts in​ creasing​ ly re​ q uire com​ p an​ ies to pro​ v ide ser​ v ices to af​ fected com​ munit​ ies, in part due to broad​ er re​ cog​ ni​ tion of the economic and soci​ al dis​ rup ​ tion that a mine can create al​ ongside economic op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies. These pro​ v is​ ions typical​ ly take the form of terms de​ tail​ ing com​ mit​ ments to sup ​ p ort com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment, at least on the part of the min​ ing com​ p any. These may be as sim​ -

134

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

ple as stat​ ing fin​ an​ ci​ al com​ p en​ sa​ tion to be pro​ v ided. The contra​ ct for Afghanis​ tan - Qara Zag​ han (2011) is re​ lative​ ly straightfor​ ward. It states that "[d]uring the first two years of [the] contra​ ct [the com​ pany] shall spend a mini​ mum of US$50,000 for im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of soci​ al pro​ grams as per the Soci​ al De​ velop​ ment Plan.” (Ar​ ticle 31). Who de​ cides the use of such funds? Some​ times it is specified. Some​ times it is left am​ bigu​ ous. The Sier​ ra Leone - Sier​ ra Rutile (2011) contra​ ct pro​ v ides some in​ for​ ma​ tion on that issue. It notes: "The com​ pany shall with ef​ fect from the fin​ an​ ci​ al year com​ menc​ ing Janua​ ry 1, 2003 ... make pay​ ment to the Ag​ ricul​ tur​ al De​ velop​ ment Fund of the high​ er of US$75,000 and 0.1% (one tenth of one per​ cent) of gross sales free al​ ongside ship the Sier​ ra Leone port of ship​ ment in Uni​ ted States Dol​ lars or its Leone equivalent. The Fund shall be utilised for the de​ velop​ ment of ag​ ricul​ ture in the af​ fected areas and shall be con​ trol​ led by re​ presen​ tatives of the Govern​ ment, Chief​ dom re​ presen​ tatives and the Com​ pany’s re​ presen​ tatives.” But even where contra​ cts ac​ hieve some de​ gree of specific​ ity, there may be ques​ tions among af​ fected com​ munit​ ies as to who can legal​ ly and credib​ ly act as their agent negotiat​ ing and secur​ ing be​ nefits. Some contra​ cts con​ tain much broad​ er com​ mun​ ity development-related com​ mit​ ments. Often these are in​ teg​ rated with pro​ v is​ ions re​ lated to local economic de​ v elop ​ ment and cor​ p orate soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity. The Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct is broad in its co​ v erage of such is​ sues (Ar​ ticle 4). In the ag​ ree​ ment, the govern​ ment com​ mits to es​ tablish​ ing a multi-stakeholder “Sout​ hern Gobi Re​ gion​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Co​ un​ cil” to help deal with local gover​ nance, mig​ ra​ tion, in​ frastruc​ ture, train​ ing, soci​ al ser​ v ice pro​ v is​ ion and capac​ ity build​ ing. The in​ v es​ tor is re​ q uired to be a mem​ b​ er of this Co​ un​ cil’s govern​ ing board and sup ​ p ort its ac​ tivit​ ies. The ag​ ree​ ment also im​ p oses re​ q uire​ ments on how the in​ v es​ tor en​ gages with other stakehold​ ers, such as ob​ liga​ tions to con​ duct all of its “socio-economic de​ velop​ ment pro​ grams and ac​ tivit​ ies based on prin​ ci​ ples of trans​ paren​ cy, ac​ coun​ tabil​ ity and pub​ lic par​ ticipa​ tion” and to main​ tain “pro​ duc​ tive work​ ing re​ lationships … with non-governmental or​ ganiza​ tions, civic groups, civil co​ un​ cils and other stakehold​ ers.”

135

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

A contra​ ct may also re​ q uire the min​ ing com​ p any to go the extra step of negotiat​ ing a com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ment, or af​ firm that such a re​ q uire​ ment ex​ ists under the law. Such ag​ ree​ ments, which are dis​ cus​ sed in de​ tail in the next chapt​ er, usual​ ly out​ line the size and na​ ture of cor​ p orate con​ tribu​ tions to local li​ v elihoods and pro​ v ide a framework for man​ ag​ ing such con​ tribu​ tions and for on​ go​ ing di​ alogue. Again, the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct states: "The In​ ves​ tor shall es​ tablish co​ opera​ tion ag​ ree​ ments with local ad​ ministrative or​ ganiza​ tions in ac​ cordan​ ce with Ar​ ticle 42 of the Miner​ als Law and these ag​ ree​ ments may in​ clude the es​ tablish​ ment of local de​ velop​ ment and par​ ticipa​ tion funds, local par​ ticipa​ tion com​ mit​ tees and local en​ viron​ ment​ al monitor​ ing com​ mit​ tees." Man​ ag​ ing com​ mun​ ity re​ lationships con​ tinues to be one of the most dif​ ficult chal​ lenges of min​ ing pro​ jects. A numb​ er of re​ sour​ ces are avail​ able to pro​ v ide guidan​ ce to com​ p an​ ies, govern​ ments and com​ munit​ ies, in​ clud​ ing ICMM tool​ kits, IFC prin​ ci​ p les and stan​ dards, the IBA Com​ mun​ ity Tool​ kit, and guidan​ ce from the Uni​ v ers​ ity of Queensland’s Centre Soci​ al Re​ spon​ sibil​ ity in Min​ ing (CSRM), such as their re​ cent (2013) prac​ tition​ er guide on Com​ mun​ ity Re​ la​ tions.

CUL ​ TUR​ AL HE RITAG E
Min​ ing neces​ sari​ ly dis​ turbs the ground. Not only does this mean dis​ rup ​ tion of cur​ rent or poten​ ti​ al uses of the land, but ex​ p os​ ing the lega​ cy of past uses. There is the risk of dis​ cover​ ing or dis​ turb​ ing cul​ tural​ ly sig​ nificant ar​ tifacts. How will min​ ers re​ cogn​ ize what might be sig​ nificant? What do they do? These are also among the types of is​ sues now co​ v ered under in​ dust​ ry good prac​ tice guidelines, such as the IFC’s Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards and ICMM prin​ ci​ p les (see the next chapt​ er for more de​ tails). It is not com​ mon to find pro​ v is​ ions de​ al​ ing with these is​ sues in the contra​ cts them​ selves, but there are ex​ am​ p les. The Afghanis​ tan - Qara Zag​ han (2011) contra​ ct anti​ cipates this (Ar​ ticle 28), and tries to en​ sure that the govern​ ment is quick​ ly notified of any dis​ cove​ ry:

136

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

"If, dur​ ing pro​ spect​ ing, ex​ plora​ tion, and min​ ing, any his​ tor​ ical or cul​ tur​ al ar​ tifacts, monu​ ments, buried treasures and (noble met​ als and non-noble met​ als) are found, these his​ toric items and works (ac​ cord​ ing to the applic​ able laws of Afghanis​ tan) will be​ long to the govern​ ment. If AKNR, dur​ ing its op​ era​ tions be​ comes aware of the ex​ ist​ ence of this kind of treasure or monu​ ments, AKNR is bound to in​ form the Minist​ ry of Mines and Minist​ ry of Cul​ ture with​ in 24 hours." The Guinea - Simf​ er (2002) ag​ ree​ ment pro​ v ides more de​ tailed in​ struc​ tion to the com​ pany re​ gard​ ing what it can and can​ not do after it dis​ cov ​ ers an archeolog​ ical site (Ar​ ticle 37.4): "En cas de découver​ te d’un site archéologique, la phase d’exploita​ tion devra être précédé aux frais de SIMF​ ER S.A. et en ac​ cord avec l’Etat, par des études approp​ riées menées par les ser​ vices compétents a l’in​ terieur du Périmet​ re d’Exploita​ tion. S’il venait à être mis a jour des ele​ ments du pat​ rimonie cul​ turel nation​ al, meub​ les ou im​ meub​ les, au cours des ac​ tivités de re​ cherche, SIMF​ ER S.A. s’en​ gage à ne pas de​ plac​ er ces ob​ jets, et à in​ form​ er sans délais les auto​ rités ad​ ministratives. SIMF​ ER S.A. s’en​ gage à par​ ticip​ er aux frais de sauvetage raisonn​ ables." [If an archaeolog​ ical site is dis​ covered, the ex​ plora​ tion phase must be pre​ ceded, at the ex​ pen​ se of SIMF​ ER S.A. and by the ag​ ree​ ment of the State, by approp​ riate stud​ ies led by com​ petent agen​ cies with​ in the per​ imet​ er of ex​ ploita​ tion. If ele​ ments of cul​ tur​ al pat​ rimony come to light, wheth​ er fixed or mov​ able, dur​ ing the co​ ur​ se of re​ search, SIMF​ ER S.A. com​ mits to not dis​ plac​ ing ob​ jects and to in​ form​ ing the ad​ ministrative aut​ horit​ ies. SIMF​ ER S.A. com​ mits to shar​ ing in rea​ son​ able sal​ vage costs.]

137

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

WHE N TH​ ING S G O WRONG - COVE R​ ING L I​ AB IL ​ ITY FOR HARM
Th​ ings can and some​ times do go wrong in min​ ing op ​ era​ tions. En​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al ob​ liga​ tions may be knowing​ ly or neg​ ligent​ ly breac​ hed; un​ known and un​ forese​ en im​ pacts and chal​ lenges may arise; plans may chan​ ge; and ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions may be frustrated. Contra​ cts general​ ly at​ tempt to address these is​ sues in ad​ v ance by de​ ter​ min​ ing who will be re​ spon​ sible for what. In terms of en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ blems, as noted above in con​ nec​ tion with mine closure, contra​ cts typical​ ly re​ q uire fin​ an​ ci​ al guaran​ tees to cover neces​ sa​ ry cleanup. One variant of such guaran​ tees is to re​ q uire the min​ ing com​ p any to post an en​ v iron​ ment​ al bond, where they set aside funds up front that are held in escrow ex​ p licit​ ly for re​ habilita​ tion. They are only drawn upon if needed. If not, they are re​ tur​ ned to the min​ ing com​ p any upon com​ p le​ tion of the pro​ ject. In the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct, the part​ ies use this type of advancepayment sys​ tem in order to help en​ sure that there are funds avail​ able for routine en​ viron​ ment​ al man​ age​ ment and cleanup, and not just closure. It states: "The In​ ves​ tor shall de​ posit funds equivalent to 50% (fifty per​ cent) of its en​ viron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion cost for the par​ ticular year, prior to the start of that year into a bank ac​ count es​ tablis​ hed by the State centr​ al ad​ ministrative aut​ hor​ ity in char​ ge of en​ viron​ ment." (Ar​ ticle 6.6). The com​ p any will use that money if neces​ sa​ ry to com​ p​ ly with its en​ v iron​ ment​ al man​ age​ ment ob​ liga​ tions. If the money runs out and the com​ p any still has work to do, en​ viron​ ment​ al ex​ p erts can re​ q uire the com​ p any to do or pay more. (Ar​ ticle 6.12). In the event of a sig​ nificant or cat​ astrop ​ hic en​ v iron​ ment​ al mis​ hap or ac​ cident, the crit​ ical issue will be how to make sure there is money to fix the pro​ blem. How can the contra​ ct help en​ sure that costs of mitiga​ tion, re​ media​ tion and re​ stora​ tion are met? That in​ ju​ ries are com​ p en​ sated? In ad​ di​ tion to re​ q uir​ ing com​ p an​ ies to post bonds, pay de​ posits into de​ dicated funds, or secure guaran​ tees from a parent com​ p any or other in​ stitu​ tion, some contracts con​ tain pro​ v is​ ions re​ q uir​ ing com​ p an​ ies to ob​ tain in​ suran​ ce for

138

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

en​ v iron​ ment​ al or, more typical​ ly, gener​ al li​ abilit​ ies. In​ clud​ ing these ob​ liga​ tions - and en​ sur​ ing they are com​ p lied with - can be par​ ticular​ ly im​ p or​ tant to pro​ tect the govern​ ment in cases where the com​ p any that is party to the contra​ ct lacks sig​ nificant as​ sets or balan​ ce sheet strength.

WHE N TH​ ING S G O WRONG - L I​ AB IL ​ ITY FOR HARM S TO NON-PARTIE S
As noted above and in other chapt​ ers, some contra​ cts re​ q uire com​ p an​ ies to do or to not do th​ ings, in order to shape their im​ p acts on the en​ v iron​ ment, sur​ round​ ing com​ munit​ ies, and other non-parties to the contra​ ct, such as in​ dividu​ al em​ p loyees. The pro​ v is​ ion in the Li​ beria - Putu (2010) contra​ ct re​ q uir​ ing the com​ p any to limit its use or pro​ v ide al​ ter​ native water to sur​ round​ ing com​ munit​ ies is an ex​ am​ p le. Under some co​ unt​ ries’ laws, that type of re​ q uire​ ment can create “third-party” rights en​ abl​ ing non-parties to the contra​ ct to en​ for​ ce those ob​ liga​ tions: If the com​ p any fails to limit its use or pro​ v ide the com​ mun​ ity with adequate water sup ​ p l​ ies, com​ mun​ ity mem​ b​ ers may be able to take them to court and seek re​ lief for the com​ p any's breach of the contra​ ct. But some contra​ cts seek to forec​ lose that avenue. The Li​ beria - Putu (2010) ag​ ree​ ment, for ex​ am​ p le, states: "33.6 Third Party Be​ neficia​ ry Apart from the govern​ ment, the Com​ pany and the sharehold​ er… no Per​ son shall have any rights under this Ag​ ree​ ment." This pro​ v is​ ion does not neces​ sari​ ly mean that in​ dividu​ als negative​ ly im​ p ac​ ted by the min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are with​ out pro​ tec​ tion. They may have other causes of ac​ tion they can turn to based on tort, en​ v iron​ ment​ al, pro​ p er​ ty, or other law. Nevertheless, these types of claims are not al​ ways avail​ able in every juris​ dic​ tion, and may not cover or pro​ vide ef​ fective re​ med​ ies for breach of the min​ ing contra​ ct. This clause in Ar​ ticle 33.6 is therefore sig​ nificant in that it cuts off one poten​ ti​ al avenue that in​ dividu​ als or com​ -

139

Using the Contra​ ct to Man ​ age the Is​ sues

munit​ ies may have ot​ herw​ ise been able to use in order to en​ for​ ce contra​ ctu​ al com​ mit​ ments made for their be​ nefit or pro​ tec​ tion by govern​ ments and/or com​ p an​ ies. A final issue re​ lat​ ing to harm to non-parties to the contra​ ct (e.g., an em​ p loyee or near​ by farm​ er) is that when one of these non-parties is har​ med as a re​ sult of min​ ing op ​ era​ tions, and sues the govern​ ment and/or com​ p any for re​ lief, the contra​ ct often specif​ ies who will wind up ul​ timate​ ly pay ​ ing for any com​ p en​ sa​ tion. These are cal​ led "in​ dem​ nifica​ tion" clauses, and are used by contra​ ct​ ing part​ ies to de​ cide how to al​ locate li​ abil​ ity bet​ ween them​ selves.

HOW TO HAN​ DL E E VOL V​ ING E N​ VIRON​ MENT​ AL AND S OCI​ AL L AWS AND RE ​ G UL A​ TIONS
The en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p act of a mine at one point in time will not neces​ sari​ ly be the same 10, 15 or 20 years later. Laws chan​ ge over time, and those chan​ ges can apply to pro​ jects to upgrade their per​ for​ mance on any numb​ er of is​ sues. Are min​ ing com​ p an​ ies al​ ways re​ q uired to track such chan​ ges and en​ sure their com​ plian​ ce with re​ levant amend​ ments? The an​ sw​ er to that ques​ tion can de​ ter​ mine wheth​ er a co​ unt​ ry will have a mine that op ​ erates in ac​ cordan​ ce with best prac​ tices, or one that com​ p l​ ies with out​ dated stan​ dards. Some contra​ ct pro​ v is​ ions ac​ tual​ ly might hind​ er im​ p rove​ ments in soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al per​ for​ mance. These are known as "stabiliza​ tion clauses" - pro​ v isions stat​ ing that the govern​ ment will not re​ q uire com​ p an​ ies to com​ p​ ly with new en​ v iron​ ment​ al, labor or other laws as they are amen​ ded from time to time. This can freeze the en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al re​ gula​ tion of a min​ ing pro​ ject, hin​ der​ ing govern​ ments' ab​ ilit​ ies to take into ac​ count new in​ for​ ma​ tion, tech​ nolog​ ies and best prac​ tices. Other stabiliza​ tion clauses do not "freeze" the law, but re​ q uire the govern​ ment to cover the com​ p any's costs re​ lated to com​ p lian​ ce with any new re​ q uire​ ments. This al​ lows the govern​ ment to upgrade its en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al re​ gula​ tion of min​ ing pro​ jects, but can dis​ courage it from doing so in prac​ tice.

140

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

Cer​ tain stabiliza​ tion clauses give the min​ ing com​ p any the choice of wheth​ er to be gover​ ned by new laws or re​ gula​ tions. This is the case with a stabiliza​ tion pro​ v is​ ion con​ tained in the Li​ beria - Mitt​ al (2005) contra​ ct for de​ v elop ​ ment of iron ore in the co​ unt​ ry. It states in Ar​ ticle XIX: "In par​ ticular, any modifica​ tions that could be made in the fu​ ture to the Law as in ef​ fect on the Ef​ fective Date shall not apply to the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE and its As​ sociates with​ out their prior writt​ en con​ sent, but the CON​ C ES​ SIONAIRE and its As​ sociates may at any time elect to be gover​ ned by the legal and re​ gulato​ ry pro​ vis​ ions re​ sult​ ing from chan​ ges made at any time in the Law as in ef​ fect on the Ef​ fective Date. In the event of any con​ flict bet​ ween this Ag​ ree​ ment or the rights, ob​ liga​ tions and dut​ ies of a Party under this Ag​ ree​ ment, and any other Law, in​ clud​ ing ad​ ministrative rules and pro​ cedures and matt​ ers re​ lat​ ing to pro​ cedure, and applic​ able in​ ter​ nation​ al law, then this Ag​ ree​ ment shall govern the rights, ob​ liga​ tions and dut​ ies of the Part​ ies." Be​ cause stabiliza​ tion clauses can limit the government's ab​ il​ ity to pre​ v ent en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al harms, or to en​ sure ef​ fective re​ med​ ies exist for those harms, they have attrac​ ted strong critic​ ism from civil society, among oth​ ers. Some ex​ p erts argue they are bad poli​ cy and may even violate domes​ tic law and/or in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights law. The trend in prac​ tice is to limit stabiliza​ tion where it ex​ ists to iden​ tified fisc​ al and close​ ly re​ lated pro​ v is​ ions and to ex​ p licit​ ly ex​ empt soci​ al and economic poli​ cies from stabiliza​ tion.

141

FIN ​ D​ I NG GUIDAN ​ C E AND AN ​ SW​ E RS OUT ​ S IDE OF THE MIN ​ I NG CONTRA ​ CT
In the pre​ v i​ ous chapt​ er, we de​ scribed the kinds of soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ v is​ ions li​ ke ​ ly to be found in con​ tem​ p ora​ ry min​ ing contra​ cts and noted a numb​ er of specific is​ sues that may (or may not) be dealt with in a min​ ing contra​ ct. We also noted that no con​ tem​ p ora​ ry contra​ ct is li​ ke ​ ly to con​ tain all applic​ able soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ q uire​ ments. As a re​ sult, an​ y one who wants a com​ p rehen​ sive pic​ ture of the soci​ al and en​ viron​ ment​ al re​ q uire​ ments applic​ able under a pro​ p osed min​ ing contra​ ct for his her co​ unt​ ry must look at the contra​ ct togeth​ er with the co​ untry's applic​ able law and re​ gula​ tions. Most co​ unt​ ries today have com​ p rehen​ sive en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion laws and re​ gula​ tions, togeth​ er with an en​ v iron​ ment​ al pro​ tec​ tion agen​ cy ad​ minis​ ter​ ing them. The law may have de​ v eloped so much that the contra​ ct will do lit​ tle more than refer to it. Yet be​ y ond the contra​ ct and domes​ tic law, there is a com​ p lemen​ ta​ ry framework of in​ ter​ nation​ al law, an​ cil​ la​ ry contra​ cts, poli​ cy and guidan​ ce that can help pro​ v ide specifics re​ gard​ ing ex​ p ec​ ted or re​ q uired con​ duct, or help fill in gaps. This sec​ tion pro​ v ides an over​ view of that framework, and co​ v​ ers com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ments, in​ dust​ ry and other stan​ dards, and re​ levant in​ ter​ nation​ al law prin​ ci​ p les and rules.

142

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

COM ​ MUN​ ITY DE ​ VE L OP​ M E NT AG ​ REE​ M E NTS ( CDAS )
Major IMCs have begun to es​ tablish, as a matt​ er of co​ ur​ se, com​ mun​ ity li​ aison or re​ lationship build​ ing func​ tions at pro​ ject loc​ a​ tions. These op ​ era​ tions are typical​ ly re​ spon​ sible for such matt​ ers as gener​ al com​ mun​ ity con​ sul​ ta​ tion and en​ gage​ ment, over​ sight of soci​ al baseline and im​ p act as​ sess​ ment work, de​ v elop ​ ment of soci​ al im​ p act man​ age​ ment plans, plann​ ing and im​ p lement​ ing com​ mun​ ity in​ v est​ ment strateg​ ies, the de​ sign of com​ mun​ ity capac​ ity build​ ing pro​ jects, and de​ al​ ing with in​ dividu​ al and com​ mun​ ity re​ q uests for as​ sis​ tance, com​ p laints and grievan​ ces. These de​ v elop ​ ments have be​ come more for​ malized as com​ munit​ ies have begun to ex​ press their needs in a more or​ ganized fash​ ion, and min​ ing com​ p an​ ies have rea​ lized that a wide range of sup ​ p ort ac​ tivit​ ies can​ not con​ tinue to be ad​ minis​ tered with​ out some kind of a plan to set priorit​ ies and make clear the li​ mits of the com​ p any un​ der​ tak​ ings. This pro​ cess ap ​ p ears to be most ad​ v anced in Australia and Canada, where be​ nchmark ag​ ree​ ments were sig​ ned in the 1990s di​ rect​ ly bet​ ween IMCs and ab​ origin​ al groups, and con​ tinue to be negotiated today. While cer​ tain pro​ v is​ ions have re​ q uired ad​ just​ ment over time and in light of ac​ cumulated ex​ p eri​ ence, they have general​ ly with​ stood the pas​ sage of time. There is now seri​ ous dis​ cuss​ ion about ex​ p and​ ing and for​ maliz​ ing company-community un​ derstand​ ings in other co​ unt​ ry en​ v iron​ ments that are un​ related to in​ digen​ ous status. A numb​ er of co​ unt​ ries are en​ courag​ ing or re​ q uir​ ing com​ p an​ ies to negotiate such ag​ ree​ ments, cur​ rent​ ly known as com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ments (CDAs) in ad​ v ance of or as part of pro​ ject de​ v elop ​ ment. Papua New Guinea, Mon​ golia and Nigeria each has a pro​ v is​ ion in its min​ ing law re​ q uir​ ing the min​ ing li​ cen​ se or contra​ ct hold​ ers to negotiate and enter into CDAs to facilitate the trans​ f​ er of soci​ al and economic be​ nefits to local com​ munit​ ies. CDAs can help de​ fine the re​ lationship bet​ ween min​ ing com​ p an​ ies and im​ p ac​ ted com​ munit​ ies, in​ clud​ ing the roles of local and nation​ al govern​ ments and non​ government​ al or​ ganiza​ tions. They are often an ex​ p ress​ ion of a min​ ing com​ p any’s com​ mit​ ment to cor​ porate soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity.

143

Fin ​ d​ ing Guidan ​ ce and An ​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min ​ ing Contra​ ct

The crea​ tion of a CDA may also flow from cor​ p orate re​ spon​ se to sig​ nificant con​ flict with local com​ munit​ ies. When BHP Bi​ lliton ac​ q uired the Tin​ taya Co​ pp​ er Mine in 1996 in Peru, it ran into widespread com​ mun​ ity dis​ con​ tent re​ lated to the land ac​ q uisi​ tion pro​ cess and un​ favor​ able treat​ ment of the local com​ mun​ ity when the mine was under state ow​ nership. The Tin​ taya Di​ alogue Table was created to pro​ v ide a forum for address​ ing these grievan​ ces and an ag​ ree​ ment was fin​ al​ ly rea​ ched with the five com​ munit​ ies in 2004, co​ ver​ ing is​ sues of com​ p en​ sa​ tion and monitor​ ing and es​ tablish​ ing a com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment fund.

WHAT IS IN A CDA?
CDAs vary in co​ v erage but primari​ ly focus on those is​ sues most per​ tinent to im​ p ac​ ted com​ munit​ ies, in​ clud​ ing em​ p loy ​ ment and economic de​ v elop ​ ment, land use, ser​ v ices, in​ frastruc​ ture and pro​ ces​ ses for bring​ ing grievan​ ces. They may in​ clude com​ p any em​ p loy ​ ment com​ mit​ ments, specific local in​ frastruc​ ture com​ mit​ ments, or specific soci​ al ser​ v ices. A care​ ful CDA will pro​ bab​ ly spec​ ify the tim​ ing of con​ tribu​ tions, the use to which each con​ tribu​ tion is to be put (or the pro​ cess for al​ locat​ ing funds to specific uses) and a vehic​ le for the man​ age​ ment of the con​ tributed funds. They also pro​ v ide a framework for com​ mun​ ity in​ terac​ tions with the min​ ing com​ p any (and poten​ tial​ ly local govern​ ment en​ tit​ ies) ac​ ross the whole range of matt​ ers that may con​ cern the local com​ mun​ ity. By bring​ ing the play ​ ers togeth​ er on a re​ gular basis, they can build re​ lationships bet​ ween the play ​ ers and thus es​ tablish an at​ mosphere of mutu​ al trust and re​ spect. In many cases this pro​ cess may be as im​ p or​ tant as the de​ tails of the ag​ ree​ ment it​ self.

144

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

A com​ p rehen​ sive CDA would cover most of the matt​ ers set forth below. Ac​ tu​ al ag​ ree​ ments may dif​ f​ er from this in re​ spon​ se to local cir​ cumstan​ ces and the dynamics of negotia​ tion: the ob​ jec​ tives of the ag​ ree​ ment,

145

Fin ​ d​ ing Guidan ​ ce and An ​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min ​ ing Contra​ ct

who re​ p resents the com​ p any, who re​ p resents the com​ mun​ ity, how the ag​ ree​ ment is ad​ minis​ tered (meet​ ings, meet​ ing pro​ cedures, etc.), how com​ mun​ ity mem​ b​ ers par​ ticipate in decision-making and CDA ad​ ministra​ tion, re​ p resen​ ta​ tion of in​ terests of women and sub​ com​ munit​ ies, un​ der​ tak​ ings with re​ spect to the soci​ al and economic con​ tribu​ tions of the pro​ ject to the com​ mun​ ity, re​ levant timelines, as​ sis​ tance in creat​ ing self-sustaining, income-generating ac​ tivit​ ies, con​ sul​ ta​ tion on mine closure measures, par​ ticipa​ tion in en​ v iron​ ment​ al monitor​ ing pro​ grams, fund​ ing re​ q uire​ ments and qualify ​ ing ex​ p en​ ses, dis​ bur​ s e​ ment re​ q uire​ ments, man​ age​ ment, ac​ coun​ tabil​ ity, and trans​ p aren​ cy of funds, mech​ an​ isms for monitor​ ing the ac​ hieve​ ment of stated goals or miles​ tones, and re​ lated pro​ gress and ac​ hieve​ ment re​ p ort​ ing re​ q uire​ ments, and grievan​ ce and dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion mech​ an​ isms. CDAs are not with​ out risks. Re​ q uir​ ing com​ munit​ ies to enter such form​ al ag​ ree​ ments can be co​ un​ terproduc​ tive. At the out​ set, there are iden​ tifica​ tion issues (e.g., who is in​ cluded in the com​ mun​ ity? who is em​ p owered to re​ p resent it?) highlight​ ing the ex​ ist​ ence of com​ p et​ ing in​ terests with​ in the com​ mun​ ity. Form​ al ag​ ree​ ments can also give rise to per​ cep ​ tions that a com​ mun​ ity has been mis​ led or co​ er​ ced, or that a “backroom deal” has been struck with selec​ ted in​ terests. They may also en​ courage de​ p end​ ence on com​ p any pro​ v is​ ion of ser​ v ices that ought to be pro​ v ided by the local or nation​ al govern​ ment. Care​ ful com​ mun​ ity lead​ ers will want to know the de​ tails of the min​ ing com​ p any's com​ -

146

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

mun​ ity ob​ liga​ tions (if any) under the nation​ al in​ v est​ ment contra​ ct with the govern​ ment be​ fore negotia​ tions begin. This will bet​ t​ er en​ able them to en​ sure that the com​ mit​ ments re​ in​ force each other, and that the CDA re​ q uires ad​ dition​ al steps be​ y ond what the com​ pany had al​ ready com​ mit​ ted to under the min​ ing contra​ ct.

IN​ DUS T​ RY AND OTHE R S TAN​ DARDS
In ad​ di​ tion to re​ ferenc​ ing applic​ able laws, a contra​ ct may re​ q uire the com​ p any to fol​ low "good in​ dust​ ry prac​ tice", "ac​ cepted in​ dust​ ry prac​ tice", or "best prac​ tices". As contra​ ct lan​ guage quoted in the chapt​ er above showed, some ag​ ree​ ments specifical​ ly refer to a par​ ticular set of stan​ dards (e.g., the IFC Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards), and/or a standardsetting body (e.g., the ICMM), in order to bet​ t​ er clar​ ify in ad​ v ance what type of con​ duct is re​ q uired. Ab​ sent a specific re​ fer​ ence, such pro​ v is​ ions (or ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions) seek​ ing "good", "ac​ cepted", or "best" prac​ tices can lead to dis​ p utes dur​ ing the contra​ ct im​ p lemen​ ta​ tion phase. It is also worth keep ​ ing in mind that dif​ fer​ ences of op ​ in​ ion are li​ ke ​ ly to be​ come more acute with the pro​ lifera​ tion of new in​ dust​ ry play ​ ers op ​ erat​ ing around the world from co​ unt​ ries like China, Rus​ sia and India, with​ out ex​ p eri​ ence in the in​ ter​ nation​ al in​ dust​ ry. Their as​ sump ​ tions as to "stan​ dard prac​ tice" may be born from their ex​ p eri​ ence op ​ erat​ ing in their domes​ tic con​ texts. There has, howev ​ er, been a re​ cent pro​ lifera​ tion of volun​ ta​ ry and semi-voluntary stan​ dards aris​ ing from in​ ter​ government​ al, multi-stakeholder, and in​ dust​ ry sour​ ces, which can help clar​ ify what types of prac​ tices are stan​ dard, ac​ cepted, or even the "best". These new stan​ dards have in​ troduced new ways of un​ derstand​ ing and address​ ing en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al is​ sues, of re​ p ort​ ing com​ p any and govern​ ment con​ duct and per​ for​ mance, and of han​ dl​ ing and address​ ing com​ mun​ ity con​ cerns and grievan​ ces. While most are volun​ ta​ ry in​ itiatives, they are in​ creasing​ ly shap ​ ing what is con​ sidered re​ spon​ sible soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al stan​ dard prac​ tice and serv ​ ing as a basis for guid​ ing and evaluat​ ing IMC and govern​ ment per​ for​ mance in these areas. Some of the more in​ fluen​ ti​ al in​ itiatives and or​ ganiza​ tions that have es​ tablis​ hed volun​ ta​ ry stan​ dards are de​ tailed here, but the list is far from com​ p lete.

147

Fin ​ d​ ing Guidan ​ ce and An ​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min ​ ing Contra​ ct

The In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ un​ cil on Min​ ing and Met​ als (ICMM) was set up in 2001 in Lon​ don by a numb​ er of major play ​ ers in the in​ ter​ nation​ al min​ ing and met​ als in​ dust​ ry to sup ​ p ort sus​ tain​ able de​ v elop ​ ment in con​ nec​ tion with min​ ing pro​ jects. Mem​ b​ er com​ p an​ ies com​ mit to im​ p le​ ment and measure their per​ for​ mance against 10 sus​ tain​ able de​ v elop ​ ment prin​ ci​ p les co​ v er​ ing soci​ al, en​ v iron​ ment​ al, economic and eth​ ical di​ mens​ ions of op ​ era​ tion. These are re​ in​ forced by clarify ​ ing posi​ tion state​ ments and guidan​ ce. A numb​ er of nation​ al and pro​ duc​ er as​ socia​ tions have de​ v eloped their own codes of con​ duct and sus​ tainabil​ ity frameworks, like the Miner​ al Co​ un​ cil of Australia's End​ ur​ ing Value, and the Min​ ing As​ socia​ tion of Canada's Towards Sus​ tain​ able Min​ ing, which also address soci​ al, en​ v iron​ ment​ al and health and safety is​ sues. These main​ ly apply to Australian- and Canadian-based op ​ era​ tions, but the con​ duct of Australia's and Canada's more junior ex​ p lora​ tion and min​ ing com​ p an​ ies op ​ erat​ ing ab​ road have be​ come nation​ al is​ sues. Both co​ unt​ ries are look​ ing at ways of pro​ mot​ ing more re​ spon​ sible soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al prac​ tice by their nation​ al com​ p an​ ies op ​ erat​ ing ab​ road. Out​ side of the min​ ing sec​ tor, the In​ ter​ nation​ al Or​ ganiza​ tion for Stan​ dardiza​ tion (ISO) has de​ v eloped stan​ dards for man​ ag​ ing en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p acts and im​ p rov ​ ing en​ v iron​ ment​ al per​ for​ mance (ISO 14000). Min​ ing com​ p an​ ies com​ mon​ ly seek such cer​ tifica​ tion and are sub​ ject to re​ gular third-party audits of com​ p lian​ ce at their min​ ing sites. ISO has also de​ v eloped guidan​ ce on soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity (ISO 26000), which at this point is set up as a volun​ ta​ ry un​ der​ tak​ ing with​ out any cer​ tifica​ tion mech​ an​ ism. Dur​ ing the past de​ cade a numb​ er of In​ ter​ nation​ al Fin​ an​ ci​ al In​ stitu​ tions like the World Bank, Inter-American De​ v elop ​ ment Bank, Asian De​ v elop ​ ment Bank, Af​ rican De​ v elop ​ ment Bank, the European Bank for Re​ construc​ tion and De​ v elop ​ ment and the In​ ter​ nation​ al Moneta​ ry Fund have strengthened their en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al safeguard poli​ cies. These poli​ cies nor​ mal​ ly apply only to pro​ jects sup ​ p or​ ted by them, but are some​ times in​ cor​ p orated into other pro​ jects, and can more broad​ ly serve as volun​ ta​ ry stan​ dards and guidan​ ce where they aren't for​ mal​ ly re​ q uired. The IFC Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards were first for​ malized in 2006 and up ​ dated and approved in 2012. These Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards were de​ v eloped for and apply to IFCsupported pro​ jects, and are also used with​ in the broad​ er World Bank Group for cer​ tain Bank-supported pro​ jects. Many other in​ stitu​ tions, in​ clud​ ing the rough​ ly 80 fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ -

148

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

stitu​ tions that have sig​ ned onto the "Equator Prin​ ci​ p les", have also adop ​ ted the IFC stan​ dards, mean​ ing that the pro​ jects they fund are similar​ ly ex​ p ec​ ted to com​ p​ ly with the IFC re​ q uire​ ments. The IFC Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dards cover soci​ al and en​ v iron​ ment​ al baseline and im​ p act as​ sess​ ments, en​ v iron​ ment​ al man​ age​ ment plans, safeguards for in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les and their cul​ tur​ al heritage, con​ trol of en​ v iron​ ment​ al con​ taminants and pol​ lu​ tion, land ac​ quisi​ tion and re​ settle​ ment, and pro​ tec​ tions for the health, safety and secur​ ity of com​ munit​ ies. Many IMCs, es​ p ecial​ ly the larg​ er ones, have sub​ scribed to specific in​ dividu​ al stan​ dards, most com​ mon​ ly Per​ for​ mance Stan​ dard 5 on Land Ac​ q uisi​ tion and In​ v olun​ ta​ ry Re​ settle​ ment. For is​ sues of cor​ p orate re​ spon​ sibil​ ity more general​ ly, the OECD Guidelines for Multi​ nation​ al En​ terprises are also re​ levant. OECD co​ unt​ ries are ex​ p ec​ ted to en​ courage busines​ ses based in their co​ unt​ ries to op ​ erate in ac​ cordan​ ce with these Guidelines. Each of the co​ unt​ ries main​ tains a "Nation​ al Con​ tact Point", which may receive and re​ v iew any com​ p laints brought against busines​ ses based in the co​ unt​ ry but op ​ erat​ ing over​ seas. The Guidelines are per​ iodical​ ly up ​ dated to take into ac​ count new or em​ erg​ ing think​ ing and ex​ p ec​ ta​ tions. The Extra​ ctive In​ dust​ ries Trans​ p aren​ cy In​ itiative (EITI) is an in​ ter​ nation​ al in​ itiative foun​ ded on the no​ tion that in​ creased trans​ p aren​ cy of the re​ v enues flow​ ing from min​ ing and pet​ roleum com​ p an​ ies to host govern​ ments is a key chan​ nel for en​ sur​ ing im​ p roved gover​ nance in the sec​ tors. In ad​ di​ tion to the pub​ lica​ tion of de​ tailed re​ p orts co​ v er​ ing pay ​ ments and re​ v enues, among other as​ p ects of the extrac​ tive sec​ tor in a given co​ unt​ ry, the EITI pro​ cess re​ q uires the es​ tablish​ ment of a multi-stakeholder group con​ sist​ ing of govern​ ment, com​ p any and civil society re​ p resen​ tatives, which is in​ ten​ ded to serve as a plat​ form for di​ alogue around all as​ p ects of the extra​ ctive in​ dust​ ries in a co​ unt​ ry. At the time of pub​ lica​ tion of the first edi​ tion of this book, 41 co​ unt​ ries were de​ emed eith​ er "com​ p liant" or "can​ didates" under the EITI stan​ dard. In 2000, a numb​ er of govern​ ments (the UK, US, the Net​ herlands, and Nor​ way), com​ pan​ ies in the extra​ ctive in​ dust​ ries, and non-governmental or​ ganiza​ tions is​ sued a set of Volun​ ta​ ry Prin​ ci​ p les on Secur​ ity and Human Rights (some​ times re​ fer​ red to as the "VPs").

149

Fin ​ d​ ing Guidan ​ ce and An ​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min ​ ing Contra​ ct

The VPs aim to guide oil, gas, and min​ ing com​ p an​ ies on pro​ v id​ ing secur​ ity for their op ​ era​ tions in a man​ n​ er that re​ spects human rights. More re​ cent​ ly, in 2007, the Uni​ ted Na​ tions Gener​ al As​ semb​ ly end​ or​ sed the UN De​ clara​ tion on the Rights of In​ digen​ ous Peo​ p les, which was over 25 years in the mak​ ing. It was end​ or​ sed by 143 co​ unt​ ries with 45 ab​ sent or ab​ stain​ ing and 4 ob​ ject​ ing. A numb​ er of the hold-out co​ unt​ ries have since end​ or​ sed the De​ clara​ tion. Of par​ ticular in​ terest to local com​ munit​ ies and min​ ing com​ p an​ ies is Ar​ ticle 32(2), which states that: “States shall con​ sult and co​ operate in good faith with the in​ digen​ ous peo​ ples con​ cer​ ned through their own re​ presen​ tative in​ stitu​ tions in order to ob​ tain their free and in​ for​ med con​ sent prior to the approv​ al of any pro​ ject af​ fect​ ing their lands or ter​ rito​ ries and other re​ sour​ ces, par​ ticular​ ly in con​ nec​ tion with the de​ velop​ ment, utiliza​ tion or ex​ ploita​ tion of miner​ al, water or other re​ sour​ ces.”

IS THE RE A L INK TO IN​ TER​ NATION​ AL L AW?
In ad​ di​ tion to the in​ ter​ government​ al, in​ dust​ ry and other stan​ dards out​ lined above, there is also a body of in​ ter​ nation​ al law that is re​ levant for min​ ing contra​ cts. In​ ter​ nation​ al law governs the ac​ tivit​ ies of states – and not the ac​ tivit​ ies or con​ duct of private ac​ tors such as com​ p an​ ies. But im​ p or​ tant​ ly, ob​ liga​ tions on states under in​ ter​ nation​ al law also af​ fect what they can pro​ m​ ise to com​ p an​ ies in in​ v est​ ment contra​ cts or ag​ ree​ ments, and what dut​ ies they owe to their popula​ tions even when a contra​ ct is silent or contra​ v enes these dut​ ies. To list all re​ levant in​ ter​ nation​ al law sour​ ces is im​ p ract​ ical, but ex​ am​ p les can be given for specific is​ sues. As noted in sam​ p le in​ stan​ ces below, this body of in​ ter​ nation​ al law may pro​ v ide op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies to bring suit against contra​ ct​ ing part​ ies for grievan​ ces re​ lated to en​ v iron​ ment​ al and soci​ al im​ p acts of min​ ing op ​ era​ tions. Human rights law – which is made up of a numb​ er of in​ ter​ nation​ al and re​ gion​ al treat​ ies and rules – is es​ p ecial​ ly im​ p or​ tant. States have the legal ob​ liga​ tion to re​ spect, pro​ tect and ful​ fill the human rights set out in the in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights treat​ ies they rat​ ify.

150

En ​ viron ​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues

This in​ cludes a duty to pro​ tect those rights against in​ frin​ ge​ ment by third part​ ies such as cor​ p ora​ tions. Major in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights in​ stru​ ments are the 1948 Uni​ v ers​ al De​ clara​ tion of Human Rights, the 1966 In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ v enant on Civil and Polit​ ical Rights (167 state part​ ies) and the 1966 In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ v enant on Economic, Soci​ al and Cul​ tur​ al Rights (161 state part​ ies). Co​ p​ ies of these docu​ ments are rea​ di​ ly ac​ cessib​ le on​ line by Googl​ ing their re​ spec​ tive tit​ les. Re​ gard​ ing human rights for work​ ers, the In​ ter​ nation​ al Labor Or​ ganization’s (ILO) De​ clara​ tion on Fund​ ament​ al Prin​ ci​ p les and Rights at Work com​ mits all its mem​ b​ er states to four cat​ ego​ ries of prin​ ci​ p les and rights: freedom of as​ socia​ tion and the right to col​ lec​ tive bar​ gain​ ing; the elimina​ tion of com​ p ul​ so​ ry labor; the ab​ oli​ tion of child labor; and the elimina​ tion of dis​ crimina​ tion in re​ spect of em​ p loy ​ ment and oc​ cupa​ tion. There are eight treat​ ies that states worldwide have negotiated and ratified re​ gard​ ing pro​ tec​ tion of these core rights. There is also ILO Con​ v en​ tion 169, de​ al​ ing with In​ digen​ ous and Tri​ b​ al Peo​ p les, which re​ cog​ nizes the right of in​ digen​ ous peo​ p les to par​ ticipate through their tradition​ al or​ ganiza​ tions in all govern​ ment de​ cis​ ions af​ fect​ ing them. A numb​ er of re​ gion​ al human rights treat​ ies also exist that govern state con​ duct when contra​ ct​ ing with private in​ v es​ tors. These in​ clude the 1981 Af​ rican Chart​ er on Human and Peo​ p les Rights; the 2003 Pro​ tocol to the Af​ rican Chart​ er on Human and Peo​ p les’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Af​ rica; the 1969 American Con​ v en​ tion on Human Rights; the 1988 Ad​ dition​ al Pro​ tocol to the American Con​ v en​ tion on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Soci​ al and Cul​ tur​ al Rights; the 1950 European Con​ v en​ tion on Human Rights; and the 1961 European Soci​ al Chart​ er. Im​ p or​ tant​ ly, in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights law has some teeth, as cer​ tain treat​ ies pro​ v ide in​ dividu​ als, com​ munit​ ies and other en​ tit​ ies judici​ al or quasi-judicial mech​ an​ isms to bring claims against states be​ fore co​ urts, tri​ bun​ als and other bod​ ies. In the 2001 Awas Tingni case, for ex​ am​ p le, an in​ digen​ ous com​ mun​ ity suc​ cessful​ ly sued the Nicaraguan govern​ ment for fail​ ing to en​ sure an ef​ fective con​ sul​ ta​ tion pro​ cess be​ fore grant​ ing a logg​ ing con​ cess​ ion on its land. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights de​ ter​ mined that Nicaragua violated the American Con​ v en​ tion on Human Rights by fail​ ing to pro​ tect the com​ munity’s cus​ toma​ ry tenure and col​ lec​ tive land and re​ sour​ ce rights.

151

Fin ​ d​ ing Guidan ​ ce and An ​ sw​ ers Out​ side of the Min ​ ing Contra​ ct

Since that de​ cis​ ion, much work has been done by vari​ ous or​ ganiza​ tions to furth​ er de​ scribe what in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights law re​ q uires of govern​ ments when contra​ ct​ ing with private com​ p an​ ies for min​ ing and other pro​ jects. Among those ef​ forts, in 2011, the Uni​ ted Na​ tions Human Rights Co​ un​ cil adop ​ ted a re​ p ort con​ tain​ ing prin​ ci​ p les on re​ spon​ sible contra​ ct​ ing that aim to as​ s​ ist govern​ ment and private negotiators seek​ ing to en​ sure their deals are con​ sis​ tent with human rights.

152

ECONOMIC LI ​ N KAGES
IN​ TRODUC​ TION M IN​ ING AND L OCAL CON​ TENT M IN​ ING AND IN​ FRAS TRUC​ TURE

IN ​ T RODUC ​ T ION
With the wave of li​ beraliza​ tion of the 1990s and the so-called "Was​ hington Con​ sen​ sus," many min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments lost the de​ v elop ​ ment orien​ ta​ tion they had in the 1970s and 1980s. For host govern​ ments, what was pre​ v ious​ ly cal​ led a "min​ ing de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ment" be​ came an in​ v est​ ment pro​ mo​ tion ag​ ree​ ment, bring​ ing li​ mited tax re​ v enues to the govern​ ment, and not much else. Those ag​ ree​ ments al​ lowed the de​ v elop ​ ment of an "en​ clave" model of min​ ing, whereby mines op ​ erate and pay taxes, but re​ main lar​ ge​ ly dis​ con​ nected from the rest of the economy. Twen​ ty years later, there is in​ creas​ ing aware​ ness among host co​ unt​ ries that the mines which could have been a springboard for de​ v elop ​ ment have failed to pro​ duce incountry be​ nefits. The aim now, therefore, is to in​ teg​ rate the mines into the heart of, and leverage them for, economic growth. Re​ flect​ ing this trend, the Heads of Af​ rican States have draf​ ted the Af​ rican Min​ ing Vis​ ion, which re​ cog​ nizes the role that miner​ als can play in spurr​ ing real economic growth and driv ​ ing economic di​ v er​ sifica​ tion. Rath​ er than using miner​ al wealth sol​ e​ ly as a way of generat​ ing re​ v enue, this strategy seeks to bet​ t​ er embed min​ ing op ​ era​ tions into the economy of the co​ unt​ ry. The chal​ lenge is how to put this into prac​ tice. This sec​ tion de​ scribes dif​ ferent opt​ ions that a host govern​ ment can negotiate with a min​ ing com​ p any to help en​ sure that the min​ ing pro​ ject generates li​ nkages with and in​ teg​ ra​ tion into the economy. The first chapt​ er deals with what is com​ mon​ ly cal​ led "local con​ tent" and the second dis​ cus​ ses in​ frastruc​ ture li​ nkages.

154

MIN ​ I NG AND LOCAL CON ​ TENT
Local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments in contra​ cts are in​ ten​ ded to en​ sure that host co​ unt​ ries' citizens get jobs and train​ ing, and local firms get sup ​ p​ ly contra​ cts. Mech​ an​ isms such as ob​ jec​ tives for local em​ p loy ​ ment or sup ​ p li​ ers, pre​ fer​ ence schemes for local busines​ ses, in​ dust​ ry or human capit​ al de​ v elop ​ ment sup ​ p ort from the govern​ ment, or giv ​ ing local busines​ ses great​ er ac​ cess to fin​ an​ ce, are all met​ hods of ac​ hiev ​ ing local con​ tent goals. A variety of de​ fini​ tions are used to de​ ter​ mine what is "local". De​ p end​ ing on the con​ text, for ex​ am​ p le, a com​ p any may be de​ emed "local" based on its re​ gistra​ tion, ow​ nership, workfor​ ce, or value-added in terms of local pro​ duc​ tion. A major​ ity foreign-owned com​ pany can even qual​ ify as “local” in some cases, as long as a local firm has a mini​ mum per​ cen​ tage stake.

M IN​ ING AND L OCAL CON​ TENT
Many min​ ing contra​ cts have local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions aim​ ing to maxim​ ize the economic op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies from min​ ing in​ v est​ ment and bet​ t​ er en​ sure that be​ nefits re​ main in the co​ unt​ ry. The aim of these pro​ v is​ ions is to har​ ness min​ ing ac​ tiv ​ ity for sus​ tain​ able growth and de​ v elop ​ ment. These add to what might also be found out​ side the contra​ ct in co​ unt​ ries' laws, prac​ tices and poli​ cies, as well as in com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ments (CDAs). (For more on CDAs, see the sec​ tion, "En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues").

155

Economic Li​ n kages

When used pro​ p er​ ly, these poli​ cies and in​ stru​ ments boost skills and economic op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies. They can also serve the min​ ing com​ p any well, as loc​ al​ ly sour​ ced work​ ers and pro​ duc​ tion can be less ex​ p en​ sive, more pre​ dict​ able, and help embed the com​ p any in the host co​ unt​ ry, strengthen​ ing con​ nec​ tions bet​ ween the firm and a broad range of stakehold​ ers. Ac​ hiev ​ ing the ob​ jec​ tives that local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions aim at, howev ​ er, can be dif​ ficult as it in​ v ol​ v es co​ or​ dinat​ ing poli​ cy and contra​ ctu​ al in​ stru​ ments in light of nation​ al, re​ gion​ al, local, and cross-border con​ sidera​ tions. Too often, local con​ tent suf​ f​ ers two re​ lated ills – poor​ ly craf​ ted local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions, and weak en​ for​ ce​ ment.

WHAT ROL E DOE S THE CONTRA​ C T P L A Y? Sett​ ing Out the Re​ quire​ ments
As noted above, min​ ing contra​ cts in​ creasing​ ly in​ clude local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments co​ v er​ ing such is​ sues as em​ p loy ​ ment, sup ​ p​ ly chain pro​ cure​ ment, train​ ing, skills build​ ing and know​ ledge trans​ f​ er. The Guinea - Simf​ er (2002) contra​ ct is a fair​ ly typ ​ ical ex​ am​ p le, de​ mand​ ing that the firm: sour​ ce Guinean pro​ ducts and ser​ v ices to the ex​ tent pos​ sible, priorit​ ize hir​ ing of Guinean nation​ als for manu​ al labor as well as for skil​ led labor (sub​ ject to ex​ p eri​ ence and qualifica​ tions), and create a train​ ing pro​ gram for Guinean per​ son​ nel. The Li​ beria - Mano River (2005) contra​ ct (Ar​ ticle 10.1) is more blunt, simp ​ ly stat​ ing, “The Op​ erator shall not em​ ploy foreign un​ skil​ led labor. To the maxi​ mum ex​ tent feasib​ le, the Op​ erator shall em​ ploy Li​ berian citizens at all levels.” The Australia - McArthur River Pro​ ject (2007) ag​ ree​ ment pro​ v ides an​ oth​ er ex​ am​ p le. It re​ q uires the com​ p any to use local labor and ser​ v ices with​ in Northern Ter​ rito​ ry of Australia, but states that the com​ p any can look el​ sewhere for labor and ser​ v ices pro​ v id​ -

156

Min ​ ing and Local Con ​ tent

ers if it can de​ monstrate that com​ p ly ​ ing with those re​ q uire​ ments "is im​ pract​ ical for com​ mer​ ci​ al, tech​ n​ ical or other rea​ sons." (Ar​ ticle 13(1)).

De​ velop​ ing and Strengthen​ ing Upstream and Downstream Di​ ver​ sifica​ tion
Local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions are often used to de​ v elop and strength​ en "upstream" li​ nkages con​ nec​ tions in​ teg​ rat​ ing local in​ dividu​ als and en​ tit​ ies into the min​ ing com​ p any's sup ​ p​ ly chain. But pro​ v is​ ions can also be used to generate "downstream" li​ nkages that en​ courage in​ creased value-added ac​ tivit​ ies. While it is rare for the contra​ ct to in​ clude re​ fer​ ences to downstream re​ q uire​ ments, some contra​ ct terms do highlight such di​ v er​ sifica​ tion strateg​ ies. The Australia - McArthur River Pro​ ject (2007) contra​ ct, for ex​ am​ p le, states in its ar​ ticle on "Downstream Pro​ cess​ ing" (Ar​ ticle 12): "(1) Hav​ ing re​ gard to the Ter​ ritory's in​ ten​ tion to have es​ tablis​ hed downstream pro​ cess​ ing with​ in the Northern Ter​ rito​ ry, the Com​ pany shall in ac​ cordan​ ce with this clause, un​ less ot​ herw​ ise ag​ reed in writ​ ing by the Minist​ er, in​ ves​ tigate downstream pro​ cess​ ing of zinc, lead and silv​ er with​ in the Northern Ter​ rito​ ry. (2) The Com​ pany shall with​ in 7 years of the date of this Ag​ ree​ ment and every 5 years thereaft​ er pro​ vide to the Minist​ er, un​ less ot​ herw​ ise ag​ reed in writ​ ing, a writt​ en re​ port sett​ ing out the tech​ n​ ical and economic feasibil​ ity of downstream pro​ cess​ ing of zinc, lead and silv​ er. (3) The Com​ pany shall use its best end​ eavours to en​ courage and sup​ port downstream pro​ cess​ ing of zinc, lead and silv​ er with​ in the Northern Ter​ rito​ ry if it is tech​ nical​ ly feasib​ le and com​ mer​ cial​ ly sound..." Similar​ ly, the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) ag​ ree​ ment states: "3.19 With​ in 3 (three) years after the Com​ men​ ce​ ment of Pro​ duc​ tion, the In​ ves​ tor will, if re​ ques​ ted in writ​ ing by the Govern​ ment, pre​ pare a re​ search re​ port on the economic viabil​ ity of con​ struct​ ing and op​ erat​ ing a co​ pp​ er smelt​ er in Mon​ -

157

Economic Li​ n kages

golia to pro​ cess miner​ al con​ centrate Pro​ ducts de​ rived from Core Op​ era​ tions into metal (the Smelt​ er)... 3.20. If the Govern​ ment eith​ er alone or in con​ junc​ tion with oth​ ers or a third party plans for the con​ struc​ tion of a Smelt​ er in Mon​ golia, the In​ ves​ tor will, if re​ ques​ ted in writ​ ing by the Govern​ ment, pro​ vide on ag​ reed terms, with pre​ feren​ ti​ al ac​ cess, Rio Tinto's (or its Af​ filiates) Pro​ prieta​ ry Tech​ nolog​ ies held in joint ven​ ture with Outokum​ pu, for the op​ era​ tion of the Smelt​ er. 3.23. If the In​ ves​ tor con​ structs a Smelt​ er in con​ nec​ tion with im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of the OT Pro​ ject that Smelt​ er will be loc​ ated in Mon​ golia." Both of these pro​ v is​ ions aim to en​ courage de​ v elop ​ ment of downstream ac​ tivit​ ies but, it is im​ p or​ tant to note, also re​ cogn​ ize that it might not be economical​ ly vi​ able. This highlights the point that poli​ cies for en​ courag​ ing local con​ tent must be careful​ ly de​ sig​ ned. In​ sist​ ing on downstream pro​ cess​ ing, for in​ stan​ ce, can be an il​ lusive re​ q uire​ ment for many rea​ sons. Downstream pro​ cess​ ing can be a very capital-intensive and a lowmargin busi​ ness. If the co​ unt​ ry doesn't pre​ sent the right com​ p arative ad​ v antage (e.g., it doesn't have in​ ex ​ p ensive en​ er​ gy, pro​ xim​ ity to the mar​ ket for the fin​ is​ hed pro​ duct, skil​ led labor, or st​ able cur​ ren​ cy), it might not be suf​ ficient​ ly com​ p etitive for downstream in​ vest​ ment. The co​ unt​ ry is often bet​ t​ er off spend​ ing its negotiat​ ing capit​ al and re​ sour​ ces creat​ ing an in​ dustri​ al strategy that will facilitate the de​ v elop ​ ment of "upstream" (sup ​ p​ ly chain) li​ nkages for the mine.

Flexib​ le or Fixed Re​ quire​ ments?
Local con​ tent clauses tend to fall into two camps: those that re​ q uire specific mini​ mum tar​ gets or those that set more flexib​ le ob​ jec​ tives. The Afghanis​ tan - Qara Zag​ han (2011) contra​ ct is an ex​ am​ p le of a more flexib​ le approach, stat​ ing that the in​ v es​ tor, Afghan Kryst​ al Natur​ al Re​ sour​ ces Com​ p any, “shall em​ ploy Afghan per​ son​ nel, to the ex​ tent prac​ tic​ able in all clas​ sifica​ tions of em​ ploy​ ment, for its Gold Pro​ duc​ tion Facilit​ ies con​ struc​ tion and op​ era​ tions in Afghanis​ tan.” (Ar​ ticle 14.1).

158

Min ​ ing and Local Con ​ tent

In contra​ st, Ar​ ticle 11.1 (a) of the Li​ beria - China Union (2009) contra​ ct pro​ v ides more fixed tar​ gets, stat​ ing: "[...] part​ ies shall agree on pro​ gres​ sive im​ plemen​ ta​ tion of an em​ ploy​ ment schedule so as to cause citizens of Li​ beria to hold at least 30% of all man​ age​ ment posi​ tions, in​ clud​ ing 30% of its ten most sen​ ior posi​ tions, with​ in five years of the Ef​ fective Date, and at least 70% of all man​ age​ ment posi​ tions, in​ clud​ ing 70% of its ten most sen​ ior posi​ tions, with​ in ten years of such date." Similar​ ly, the Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) ag​ ree​ ment lays out fixed tar​ gets for em​ ployees hired by the min​ ing com​ p any, mak​ ing clear that, "[i]n ac​ cordan​ ce with Ar​ ticle 43.1 of the Miner​ als Law, not less than 90% (ninety per​ cent) of the In​ ves​ tor’s em​ ployees will be citizens of Mon​ golia.” With re​ spect to sub​ contract​ ing, howev ​ er, the contra​ ct is more flexib​ le, stat​ ing that the com​ p any is to use its "best ef​ forts" when sub​ contract​ ing in order to en​ sure that at least 60% of con​ struc​ tion em​ p loyees and 75% of mining-related em​ p loyees are Mon​ golian citizens. (Ar​ ticles 8.4 and 8.5).

En​ forc​ ing the Re​ quire​ ments
It is one thing to have local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments in the contra​ ct. It is an​ oth​ er to en​ for​ ce them. There are three fac​ tors that can make en​ for​ ce​ ment par​ ticular​ ly dif​ ficult: one is vague contra​ ct lan​ guage; a second is the chal​ lenge of monitor​ ing com​ p lian​ ce; and a third is re​ lated to the con​ sequ​ ences of breach. The issue of vague contra​ ct lan​ guage can be seen in the Guinea - Simf​ er (2011) , Li​ beria Mano River - Ex​ p lora​ tion (2005), and Australia - McArthur River Pro​ ject (2007) ag​ ree​ ments quoted above. Com​ p an​ ies may want more flexib​ le stan​ dards as they can be eas​ i​ er to in​ cor​ p orate with​ in their busi​ ness op ​ era​ tions and strateg​ ies. But with flexibil​ ity come ques​ tions of in​ terpreta​ tion. When com​ p an​ ies are re​ q uired to com​ p​ ly with local con​ tent rules only "to the ex​ tent pos​ sible" to the "ex​ tent feasib​ le", or "if pract​ ical", who de​ ter​ mines what is pos​ sible, feasib​ le, or pract​ ical, and how is that done? When contra​ cts spec​ ify that domes​ tic citizens are to make up a cer​ tain numb​ er of posi​ tions of sen​ ior posi​ tions, who de​ ter​ mines what is a "sen​ ior" posi​ tion? And when com​ p an​ ies are to use their "best ef​ forts," what ex​ act​ ly does that mean?

159

Economic Li​ n kages

These types of ques​ tions com​ mon​ ly arise, and can make it dif​ ficult for govern​ ments to en​ for​ ce local con​ tent ob​ liga​ tions. The second en​ for​ ce​ ment chal​ lenge is monitor​ ing. After negotiat​ ing for local con​ tent com​ mit​ ments, how can govern​ ments make sure that they are fol​ lowed? Some contra​ cts help address this issue. The Australia - McArthur River Pro​ ject (2007) contra​ ct, for ex​ am​ p le, states that the Minist​ er for En​ er​ gy and Mines may an​ nual​ ly re​ q uest, and the com​ p any must then pro​ vide, "a writt​ en re​ p ort con​ cern​ ing [its] com​ p lian​ ce with and im​ p lemen​ ta​ tion of the" contra​ ct's local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments. (Ar​ ticle 13.2). But then there is the ques​ tion of con​ sequ​ ences. Sup ​ p ose the Australian govern​ ment has a re​ p ort from the com​ p any that shows non​ complian​ ce. If there is no penal​ ty for breach, why would the com​ p any com​ p​ ly? Some contra​ cts in​ clude fines. The Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009) contra​ ct re​ q uires the com​ p any to pay a penal​ ty if it hires too many foreign em​ p loyees (Ar​ ticle 8.7): "If the In​ ves​ tor em​ ploys more foreign nation​ als than the specified per​ cen​ tage set forth in Clause 8.4, the In​ ves​ tor shall pay a month​ ly fee of 10 (ten) times the mini​ mum month​ ly sala​ ry for each foreign nation​ al in ex​ cess of the specified per​ cen​ tage." But contra​ cts may also ef​ fective​ ly minim​ ize the sanc​ tions as​ sociated with noncompliance. That same Mon​ golian ag​ ree​ ment il​ lustrates this when it says a breach of local hir​ ing re​ q uire​ ments will not con​ stitute a breach of the over​ all ag​ ree​ ment and may not be used by the govern​ ment as a ground for ter​ minat​ ing the contra​ ct. (Ar​ ticle 8.9).

LOOK​ ING B E ​ YON D T H E CON T R A​ CT
It can be a mis​ take to con​ sid​ er the contra​ ct as the sole sour​ ce of ob​ liga​ tions. Legis​ la​ tion, poli​ cies, re​ q uire​ ments built into com​ mun​ ity ag​ ree​ ments, and com​ p rehen​ sive in​ dust​ ry poli​ cies and in​ itiatives, are all tools that can also sup ​ p ort local con​ tent.

160

Min ​ ing and Local Con ​ tent

Legal and Re​ gulato​ ry Framework
A contra​ ct, rath​ er than creat​ ing project-specific local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments, could in​ stead re​ q uire the in​ v es​ tor to fol​ low the applic​ able law and re​ gula​ tions. The numb​ er of govern​ ments that have broad local con​ tent legis​ la​ tion, howev ​ er, is li​ mited. In​ donesia, South Af​ rica and Zim​ babwe are amongst those co​ unt​ ries that have miningrelated nation​ al legis​ la​ tion. In​ donesia’s 2009 min​ ing law states that com​ p an​ ies must give prior​ ity to local em​ p loyees and domes​ tic goods and ser​ v ices in ac​ cordan​ ce with the applic​ able laws and re​ gula​ tions. It also has a pro​ v is​ ion re​ lat​ ing to a di​ v est​ ment ob​ liga​ tion for foreign sharehold​ ings to local com​ p an​ ies. Ac​ cord​ ing to that law, after five years of pro​ duc​ tion: "Com​ pan​ ies must di​ vest part of [their] s foreign sharehold​ ing (if any) to the Govern​ ment, Re​ gion​ al Govern​ ment, State Owned Busi​ ness En​ t​ ity (Badan Usaha Milik Negara or BUMN), Re​ gion​ al Owned Busi​ ness En​ t​ ity (Badan Usaha Milik Daerah or BUMD) or (iii) Private Owned Busi​ ness En​ t​ ity (Badan Usaha Milik Swas​ ta or BUMS)." In 2013, the govern​ ment is​ sued re​ gula​ tions clarify ​ ing what com​ p an​ ies need to do in order to com​ p​ ly with that law. The 2009 law also in​ cludes pro​ v is​ ions to en​ courage local de​ v elop ​ ment "downstream", ob​ lig​ ing com​ p an​ ies “to pro​ cess and re​ fine min​ ing pro​ ducts in In​ donesia," and stat​ ing that "the ex​ tent of the re​ q uired local pro​ cess​ ing and re​ fin​ ing are to be specified in the im​ p lement​ ing re​ gula​ tions.” (Ar​ ticles 95-112 and 128-133). More co​ unt​ ries, in​ clud​ ing South Af​ rica, the Philip ​ p ines and Australia, have tightened their project-approval and re​ gulato​ ry pro​ ces​ ses in order to pro​ mote li​ nkages. Min​ ing com​ p an​ ies can be re​ q uired to pro​ duce local con​ tent plans that in​ clude en​ terpr​ ise and workfor​ ce par​ ticipa​ tion in the min​ ing area and that are in​ teg​ rated into re​ gion​ al economic de​ v elop ​ ment plans in order to move for​ ward with their op ​ era​ tions. Some of these ef​ forts are a pro​ duct of uni​ q ue co​ unt​ ry dynamics. For ex​ am​ p le the Soci​ al and Labor Plan re​ fer​ red to in South Af​ rica’s Miner​ al and Pet​ roleum Re​ sour​ ces De​ v elop ​ -

161

Economic Li​ n kages

ment Re​ gula​ tion (2002, Ch. 2, Part 2) re​ flects the broad​ er push in that co​ unt​ ry for black economic em​ p ower​ ment. A soci​ al and labor plan, which is a re​ q uire​ ment for miner​ al or pro​ duc​ tion rights, must in​ clude em​ p loy ​ ment statis​ tics and the mine’s strategy for en​ sur​ ing with​ in a specified time frame that 10 per​ cent of the em​ p loyees are women and 40 per​ cent of man​ age​ ment are his​ torical​ ly dis​ ad​ v antaged South Af​ ricans (HDSAs). The plan must also set out a local economic de​ v elop ​ ment pro​ gram that aims to in​ crease pro​ cure​ ment from HDSA com​ p an​ ies.

Local De​ velop​ ment Ag​ ree​ ments
In ad​ di​ tion to en​ ter​ ing into ag​ ree​ ments with the nation​ al govern​ ment, min​ ing com​ p an​ ies may also negotiate ag​ ree​ ments di​ rect​ ly with local com​ munit​ ies. These can be eith​ er com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment ag​ ree​ ments (also re​ fer​ red to in the sec​ tion on En​ v iron​ ment​ al and Soci​ al Is​ sues) or local ag​ ree​ ments as in Canada and Australia. Ag​ ree​ ments negotiated with the In​ digen​ ous Peo​ p les of Canada pro​ v ide par​ ticular​ ly good ex​ am​ p les. One is the Benefits-Impact Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween Di​ avik Di​ amond Mines Inc., Rio Tinto and five neighbor​ ing ab​ origin​ al groups in Northwest Ter​ rito​ ries. The ag​ ree​ ment re​ q uires that contra​ cts bet​ ween the min​ ing com​ p any and local groups with​ in the op ​ era​ tion area re​ main in force for the life of the mine. In legal terms, they are “ever​ greened,” which means that, sub​ ject to satis​ facto​ ry per​ for​ mance, the ab​ origin​ al contra​ ctor will have the work as long as the mine is in pro​ duc​ tion. The Rag​ lan ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Inuit in Canada and the min​ ing com​ p any is an​ oth​ er ex​ am​ p le. It sets forth those goods and ser​ v ices which must be the sub​ ject of "di​ rect contra​ ct negotia​ tions sol​ e​ ly with an Inuit En​ terpr​ ise". The contra​ ct iden​ tif​ ies such work and ser​ v ices as air trans​ p ort, cat​ er​ ing and hotels, road main​ tenan​ ce, di​ amond drill​ ing, ground trans​ p or​ ta​ tion of sup ​ p l​ ies, truck​ ing of con​ centrate, fuel trans​ p or​ ta​ tion, han​ dl​ ing, dis​ tribu​ tion, en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ search monitor​ ing, and baseline stud​ ies and on-site pre​ p ara​ tion of ex​ p losives.

Com​ pany Poli​ cy, In​ dust​ ry In​ itiatives, and other Col​ laborative Ef​ forts
Even where there are no legal re​ q uire​ ments to priorit​ ize the re​ cruit​ ment of local work​ ers or the use of local busines​ ses, many firms have im​ p lemen​ ted their own local con​ tent

162

Min ​ ing and Local Con ​ tent

poli​ cies. Com​ p an​ ies are in​ teres​ ted in strengthen​ ing the skills base of the co​ unt​ ries where they in​ v est. The World Busi​ ness Co​ un​ cil for Sus​ tain​ able De​ v elop ​ ment (WBCSD) Nation​ al Mar​ ket Par​ ticipa​ tion In​ itiative en​ gages local in​ v es​ tors and govern​ ments in a di​ alogue to ident​ ify shared in​ terests, and to in​ crease the com​ p etitive​ ness of local com​ p an​ ies rath​ er than focus on ob​ liga​ tions. Im​ p rov ​ ing skills and en​ trep ​ reneuri​ al capac​ ity is also an in​ creas​ ing prior​ ity for de​ v elop ​ ment agen​ cies and in​ ter​ government​ al or​ ganiza​ tions. Joint in​ itiatives are em​ erg​ ing, such as the Af​ rican Miner​ al Skills In​ itiative, a private-public partnership in​ clud​ ing the Uni​ ted Na​ tions Economic Com​ miss​ ion for Af​ rica (UNECA), An​ gloGold As​ han​ ti and AusAID. This in​ itiative seeks to create and sup ​ p ort new sol​ u​ tions to fill iden​ tified miner​ als skills gaps. In​ deed, in im​ p lement​ ing local con​ tent, the most suc​ cess​ ful co​ unt​ ries may be those which create a col​ laborative en​ v iron​ ment with in​ v es​ tors. Just lay ​ ing down the law may not align with the in​ terests of eith​ er busi​ ness of the local capabilit​ ies. In contra​ st, through col​ laborative approac​ hes, govern​ ments and com​ p an​ ies sit togeth​ er to es​ tablish a rea​ lis​ tic timeline for em​ p loy ​ ment, pro​ cure​ ment and train​ ing. This hap ​ p ened in Chile. An NGO there con​ v in​ ced the 12 lar​ gest min​ ing com​ p an​ ies to or​ gan​ ize a train​ ing pro​ gram to train fu​ ture min​ ers. The govern​ ment then com​ p lemen​ ted the in​ v est​ ment with $30 mill​ ion in pub​ lic funds. Co​ pp​ er com​ p an​ ies in Chile have since de​ sig​ ned a sup ​ p li​ er de​ v elop ​ ment pro​ gram which has generated a net​ work of in​ ter​ national​ ly com​ p etitive small and medium en​ terpr​ ise sup ​ p li​ ers for the min​ ing sec​ tor.

A VIOL A​ TION OF IN​ TER​ NATION​ AL L AW?
One caveat here is that local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions also need to be re​ con​ ciled with in​ ter​ nation​ al trade and in​ v est​ ment law. Mem​ b​ ers of the World Trade Or​ ganiza​ tion (WTO) are bound by the Ag​ ree​ ment on Trade Re​ lated In​ v est​ ment Measures (TRIMs Ag​ ree​ ment) that li​ mits cer​ tain "per​ for​ mance re​ quire​ ments" re​ lat​ ing to trade in goods, such as:

163

Economic Li​ n kages

Re​ q uire​ ments to use or purchase local goods; Trade-balancing re​ q uire​ ments; Foreign ex​ chan​ ge re​ stric​ tions re​ lated to the foreign-exchange in​ flows attribut​ able to an en​ terpr​ ise; and Ex​ p ort con​ trols. Yet the TRIMs Ag​ ree​ ment left many types of per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments un​ touc​ hed. These in​ clude: measures re​ lat​ ing to trade in ser​ v ices, not goods; re​ q uire​ ments to es​ tablish a joint ven​ ture with domes​ tic par​ ticipa​ tion; re​ q uire​ ments for a mini​ mum level of domes​ tic equ​ ity par​ ticipa​ tion by domes​ tic in​ dividu​ als or en​ tit​ ies; re​ q uire​ ments to loc​ ate head​ q uart​ ers in a specific re​ g​ ion; local em​ p loy ​ ment re​ q uire​ ments; ex​ p ort re​ q uire​ ments; tech​ nology trans​ f​ er re​ q uire​ ments; and re​ search and de​ v elop ​ ment re​ q uire​ ments. Some "in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies", howev ​ er, go farth​ er than the TRIMs Ag​ ree​ ment and pro​ hibit some of these types of measures, in​ clud​ ing re​ q uire​ ments to form joint ven​ tures, pro​ cure local ser​ v ices, in​ v est in re​ search and de​ v elop ​ ment, and trans​ f​ er tech​ nology. While the lan​ guage may vary from treaty to treaty, an in​ creasing​ ly com​ mon pat​ tern among the in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies is to ban cer​ tain per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments out​ right, while al​ low​ ing govern​ ments to im​ p ose oth​ ers as long as they pro​ v ide some type of ad​ vantage or be​ nefit in ex​ chan​ ge.

164

Min ​ ing and Local Con ​ tent

Govern​ ments seek​ ing to main​ tain their ab​ ilit​ ies to use those per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments not al​ ready bar​ red under the TRIMs Ag​ ree​ ment or under the in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies they have sig​ ned have vari​ ous opt​ ions. These in​ clude not en​ ter​ ing into in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies; ex​ clud​ ing from new in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies any pro​ v is​ ions that re​ strict per​ for​ mance re​ quire​ ments; in​ clud​ ing ex​ cep ​ tions in their treat​ ies de​ sig​ ned to allow or ex​ clude only cer​ tain types of per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments (e.g., main​ tain​ ing the ab​ il​ ity to im​ p ose join ven​ ture re​ q uire​ ments but in​ clud​ ing re​ stric​ tions on pro​ cure​ ment of local goods); and in​ clud​ ing ex​ cep ​ tions de​ sig​ ned to allow or ex​ clude per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments only in specific sec​ tors (e.g., carv ​ ing out min​ ing from the co​ v ered sec​ tors). Re​ stric​ tions on per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments can be found in in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies con​ cluded by the Uni​ ted States, Canada, Japan, Col​ om​ bia, and other co​ unt​ ries. (In​ v est​ ment treat​ ies are also dis​ cus​ sed in the chapt​ er, "Dis​ p ute Avoidan​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion").

UNI​ NTEN​ DE D AND UN​ WAN​ TE D CON​ S EQU​ E NCE S
Local con​ tent pro​ v is​ ions are typical​ ly well in​ ten​ ded, but can pro​ duce un​ wan​ ted out​ comes. These in​ clude: in​ fla​ tion of the price of the goods and ser​ v ices sud​ den​ ly pro​ cured loc​ al​ ly and be​ nefit​ ing from the min​ ing de​ mand; dis​ p utes and tens​ ions aris​ ing from per​ cep ​ tions that cer​ tain in​ terests are being favored; en​ han​ ced cor​ rup ​ tion risks as​ sociated, for ex​ am​ p le, with hav ​ ing local con​ tent de​ cis​ ions al​ ig​ ned with in​ v es​ tor or govern​ ment in​ terests, or local contra​ ctors fal​ sify ​ ing capabilit​ ies so as to be able to meet qualifica​ tion tar​ gets to bid, or even brib​ ing of​ fici​ als to gain cer​ tifica​ tion; and crea​ tion of de​ p en​ den​ cy on min​ ing de​ mand that can be​ come pro​ blematic when the mine closes.

165

Economic Li​ n kages

166

MIN ​ I NG AND IN ​ F RASTRUC ​ TURE
Mine de​ v elop ​ ment re​ q uires good in​ frastruc​ ture. Heavy equip ​ ment, sup ​ p l​ ies and peo​ ple need to be brought in. Power and water are needed. Ore needs to be trans​ p or​ ted for pro​ cess​ ing and/or ex​ p ort. De​ v elop ​ ment of such in​ frastruc​ ture is capit​ al in​ ten​ sive. It forms an ever more sig​ nificant out​ lay for min​ ing com​ p an​ ies. Mining-related in​ frastruc​ ture cost as a share of min​ ing de​ v elop ​ ment cost has gone from 40% to 80% in the last 12 years. Min​ ing con​ ces​ sionaires have his​ torical​ ly re​ sor​ ted to an “en​ clave approach” to in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment, pro​ v id​ ing their own power, water, in​ for​ ma​ tion and com​ munica​ tion tech​ nolog​ ies (ICT), and trans​ p or​ ta​ tion ser​ v ices to en​ sure re​ li​ able in​ frastruc​ ture for their op ​ era​ tions. Contra​ cts typical​ ly as​ sured min​ ing com​ p an​ ies of rights of ac​ cess and to con​ struct neces​ sa​ ry in​ frastruc​ ture. Given min​ ing com​ p any con​ trol of those de​ v elop ​ ments, large in​ v est​ ments in phys​ ical in​ frastruc​ ture are often un​ coor​ dinated with any nation​ al in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment plans. A co​ unt​ ry can therefore miss the op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to use min​ ing in​ frastruc​ ture to sup ​ port more broad-based economic de​ v elop ​ ment. Poten​ tial​ ly, port, road and rail in​ v est​ ments for min​ ing can cat​ alyze sup ​ p ort​ ing and an​ cil​ la​ ry economic ac​ tiv ​ ity. Hence the con​ cept of "re​ sour​ ce cor​ ridors" de​ v elop ​ ing al​ ongside mining-related in​ frastruc​ ture. As out​ lined below, some contra​ cts bet​ ween govern​ ments

167

Economic Li​ n kages

and in​ v es​ tors now in​ clude opt​ ions and re​ q uire​ ments that sup ​ p ort poten​ ti​ al third-party uses of such in​ frastruc​ ture.

A CAS E FOR S HARE D IN​ FRAS TRUC​ TURE
If done well, min​ ing in​ v est​ ment can con​ tribute to de​ v elopment of shared in​ frastruc​ ture with both miner​ al and non-mineral users that will be be​ nefici​ al for sus​ tain​ able economic growth.

168

Min ​ ing and In ​ frastruc​ ture

"Shared use" can en​ tail two dif​ ferent opt​ ions. First is multi-user, mean​ ing sever​ al min​ ing com​ p an​ ies in a re​ g​ ion de​ v elop ​ /use com​ mon in​ frastruc​ ture. Second is multi-purpose, where non-mining users share the in​ frastruc​ ture with the min​ ing com​ p any (for ex​ am​ p le a forest​ ry con​ cess​ ion ac​ cess​ ing the mining-related power in​ frastruc​ ture, or pas​ seng​ ers being trans​ p or​ ted along a min​ ing com​ p any rail​ road). Both can offer be​ nefits. The form​ er may lead to econom​ ies of scale among the min​ ers, thereby in​ creas​ ing tax re​ v enues to the govern​ ment. The latt​ er may lead to eas​ i​ er and more cost-efficient ac​ cess to water, en​ er​ gy, trans​ p or​ ta​ tion, and telecom​ munica​ tions ser​ vices – all build​ ing blocks for economic de​ v elop ​ ment in a re​ g​ ion. Op ​ en ​ ing up mining-related rails and ports can mean im​ p roved and often cheap ​ er ac​ cess to mar​ kets, both local and in​ ter​ nation​ al. The de​ v elop ​ ment of hy ​ dropow​ er, where feasib​ le, can be a cost-effective sour​ ce of en​ er​ gy to sup ​ p ort the heavy en​ er​ gy de​ mand for min​ ing op ​ era​ tions while en​ sur​ ing that ex​ cess power can be made avail​ able via im​ p roved and af​ ford​ able ac​ cess to electric​ ity for com​ munit​ ies and na​ tions. Water treat​ ment facilit​ ies de​ v eloped to serve the water needs of the mine can be de​ sig​ ned with sur​ p lus capac​ ity to serve sur​ round​ ing com​ munit​ ies with no pre​ v i​ ous re​ li​ able ac​ cess to pot​ able water. Govern​ ments and the private sec​ tor can also capital​ ize on civil works for road and rail​ ways to in​ stall fiber optic cabl​ ing to offer telecom​ munica​ tion ser​ v ices. Of co​ ur​ se, these con​ sidera​ tions are more re​ levant in the con​ text of de​ v elop ​ ing co​ unt​ ries where basic in​ frastruc​ ture is often eith​ er mis​ s​ ing, of li​ mited capac​ ity, or in poor con​ di​ tion.

OW​ NE RS HIP AND AC​ CE S S
The op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies for "shared use" of the mining-related in​ frastruc​ ture will de​ p end on the ow​ nership model of this in​ frastruc​ ture. If mines in​ herit ex​ ist​ ing in​ frastruc​ ture on the con​ cess​ ion, or are aut​ horized to build and own re​ levant in​ frastruc​ ture, they will general​ ly pre​ f​ er not to share it. This is es​ p ecial​ ly true for in​ frastruc​ ture, such as rail and ports, that are strategic to the min​ ing op ​ era​ tion and for which im​ p lement​ ing shared use can con​ strain capac​ ity or bring a high cost of co​ or​ dina​ tion.

169

Economic Li​ n kages

In​ v es​ tors tend to be more flexib​ le in con​ sider​ ing shared use of non- or less-strategic in​ frastruc​ ture (power, water, roads, and ICT). In fact the busi​ ness case for shared use can be more straightfor​ ward due to ob​ v i​ ous econom​ ies of scale and scope or a need to re​ in​ force their soci​ al li​ cen​ se to op ​ erate. Just im​ agine being a mine with ac​ cess to electric​ ity and pot​ able water sur​ roun​ ded by a com​ mun​ ity li​ v​ ing in the dark and drink​ ing pol​ luted water. This situa​ tion will not be sus​ tain​ able and will li​ ke ​ ly re​ sult in soci​ al un​ rest soon​ er or later. In the al​ ter​ native ow​ nership model, where the in​ frastruc​ ture is owned by a third party or a state-owned com​ p any, the govern​ ment will li​ ke ​ ly find it eas​ i​ er to limit ex​ clusive ac​ cess for the min​ ing com​ p any. Howev ​ er, al​ low​ ing other uses in​ v ol​ v es trade-offs as well. Typical​ ly, min​ ing in​ v es​ tors will leverage their ex​ p ert​ ise and ac​ cess to capit​ al to build key in​ frastruc​ ture fast​ er and more cheap ​ ly than if de​ v eloped by oth​ ers. So li​ mit​ ing their con​ trol of in​ frastruc​ ture de​ v elop ​ ment can delay a pro​ ject or un​ der​ mine its poten​ ti​ al ef​ ficien​ cy. Plus, ac​ commodat​ ing govern​ ment de​ mands for open ac​ cess to in​ frastruc​ ture will often come at the ex​ p en​ se of negotia​ tions around fisc​ al terms. Foregone re​ v enues need to be just​ ified as a price worth pay ​ ing.

THE NE E D FOR IN​ TEG​ RATE D PL ANN​ ING
Ideal​ ly, de​ cis​ ions on in​ frastruc​ ture usage, in​ clud​ ing negotiated com​ mit​ ments in contra​ cts, should be made in the con​ text of a com​ p rehen​ sive plann​ ing framework that con​ sid​ ers a range of key fac​ tors. Each min​ ing pro​ ject pre​ sents dif​ ferent op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies to build in​ frastruc​ ture li​ nkages to com​ munit​ ies, the re​ g​ ion and the co​ unt​ ry, de​ p end​ ing on the size of the pro​ ject, the type of com​ mod​ ity, pre​ sent and fu​ ture min​ ing de​ mand for in​ frastruc​ ture, pre​ sent and fu​ ture non-mining de​ mand for in​ frastruc​ ture, and the pre​ sent and fu​ ture re​ gulato​ ry capac​ ity avail​ able to en​ sure open ac​ cess of the mining-related in​ frastruc​ ture. Some ex​ am​ p les: bulk com​ modit​ ies such as iron-ore and coal will re​ q uire de​ v elop ​ ment of rail​ ways, whereas gold extra​ c​ tion only needs roads or some​ times just helicopt​ ers. Con​ ver​ s e​ ly, gold extra​ c​ tion will re​ q uire large ac​ cess to water sour​ ces, whereas iron-ore and coal mines could rely on re​ cyc​ led water. In terms of en​ er​ gy de​ mand, in ad​ di​ tion to the

170

Min ​ ing and In ​ frastruc​ ture

com​ mod​ ity type, what will make a dif​ fer​ ence is the de​ gree of pro​ cess​ ing: a crus​ hed coal op ​ era​ tion will re​ q uire 500 times less power than a smel​ ted al​ uminum op ​ era​ tion (measured by kwh/ ton​ nes of pro​ duct). Only when this pic​ ture is clear​ ly de​ fined can co​ unt​ ries negotiate the best contra​ ctu​ al in​ frastruc​ ture pro​ v is​ ions with com​ p an​ ies. What if third party ac​ cess on rails is re​ q uired, but there is not suf​ ficient pro​ jec​ ted de​ mand for rail ac​ cess? Similar​ ly, what if the con​ struc​ tion of a mini-grid for the com​ mun​ ity is negotiated, but the com​ mun​ ity has no wil​ ling​ ness to pay, and no com​ p etent in​ stitu​ tion is in place to en​ sure op ​ era​ tions and main​ tenan​ ce? Once the govern​ ment is con​ v in​ ced that shared use will be be​ nefici​ al to the co​ unt​ ry, and is ready to incur the re​ lated plann​ ing and re​ gulato​ ry costs, contra​ ctu​ al terms need to be negotiated with close care.

CO​ VE RAG E IN THE CONTRA​ CT
Min​ ing contra​ cts typical​ ly spec​ ify rights to ac​ cess and con​ struct re​ lated in​ frastruc​ ture. Where there is re​ fer​ ence to third party ac​ cess, it typical​ ly comes with many caveats, for ex​ am​ p le that ac​ cess only be pro​ v ided when "the com​ p any con​ firms that ex​ cess capac​ ity ex​ ists and third party use of such ex​ cess capac​ ity does not in​ ter​ fere with op ​ era​ tions". This leaves room for in​ terpreta​ tion, op ​ p or​ tun​ ism and as​ y m​ met​ ry of in​ for​ ma​ tion - mak​ ing it re​ lative​ ly easy for an op ​ erator to just​ ify de​ ny ​ ing such ac​ cess. It is still rare for a contra​ ct to make strong de​ mands of in​ v es​ tors in terms of third party usage (cur​ rent or fu​ ture). Mis​ sed op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies for govern​ ments, may therefore in​ clude: - al​ low​ ing min​ ing com​ p an​ ies to de​ v elop power plants with​ out re​ q uir​ ing the genera​ tion of extra electric​ ity to be sold back to the grid. This is a mis​ sed op ​ p or​ tun​ ity for the co​ unt​ ry, given that for com​ p an​ ies the mar​ gin​ al cost of extra electric​ ity is very low. - fail​ ing to re​ tain govern​ ment ow​ nership of the right of way of any lon​ gitudin​ al in​ frastruc​ ture such as power lines, slur​ ry pipelines, rails, or roads. This is a mis​ sed op ​ p or​ tun​ ity for the govern​ ment to "monet​ ize" the right of way for multi-purpose use.

171

Economic Li​ n kages

- fail​ ing to in​ clude a Build Op ​ erat​ ing and Trans​ f​ er model or opt​ ion that en​ ables the in​ frastruc​ ture to re​ v ert back to the govern​ ment after a set per​ iod, by which time other in​ dustri​ al and non-industrial de​ mands may have in​ creased and when there may be a vi​ able opt​ ion to bid out to third-party in​ frastruc​ ture con​ ces​ sionaires. Few co​ unt​ ries have man​ aged so far to avoid such pit​ falls, but the Li​ beria - Putu (2010) contra​ ct has in​ terest​ ing clauses that could serve as models in similar situa​ tions. They are un​ usu​ al in the level of de​ tail they pro​ v ide and scope of the pac​ kage of clauses co​ v er​ ing ac​ cess to electric​ ity, to water, to build utilit​ ies and facilit​ ies in​ teg​ rated with com​ p any in​ frastruc​ ture (such as to build telep ​ hone lines with​ in the con​ cess​ ion area), and to the port and rail​ road. For ex​ am​ p le, the contra​ ct re​ q uires the power plant for the mine to "be de​ sig​ ned to generate a quant​ ity of electric en​ er​ gy in ex​ cess of the electric en​ er​ gy re​ quired by the Com​ pany for Op​ era​ tions to sup​ p​ ly third party users loc​ ated with​ in a 10 km radius thereof on a 7 days per week, 24 hours per days basis in ac​ cordan​ ce with third party user de​ mand from time to time" and "be de​ sig​ ned and con​ struc​ ted so that it can be ex​ pan​ ded on a com​ mer​ cial​ ly feasib​ le basis to have twice the electric​ ity generat​ ing capac​ ity neces​ sa​ ry to ser​ vice Op​ era​ tions." (Ar​ ticle 19.3) The contra​ ct ad​ ditional​ ly pro​ v ides the com​ p any ac​ cess to water on con​ di​ tion that it "does not af​ fect the water sup​ p l​ ies used by the sur​ round​ ing popula​ tion or, to the ex​ tent it does so af​ fect water sup​ p l​ ies, the Com​ pany pro​ vides an al​ ter​ native sour​ ce of water sup​ p​ ly to the af​ fected popula​ tion." (Ar​ ticle 19.5) The contra​ ct also states that port and rail in​ frastruc​ ture must be de​ v eloped in line with the ag​ reed De​ v elop ​ ment Plan. In the case of rail this means: "The Rail​ road shall be de​ sig​ ned so that it can be ex​ pan​ ded on a com​ mer​ cial​ ly feasib​ le basis to carry on a con​ tinu​ ing basis twice as much traf​ fic as is con​ templated by the pre​ ced​ ing sen​ t​ ence but the Com​ pany shall not be under any ob​ liga​ tion to build such ad​ dition​ al capac​ ity ex​ cept as it may elect pur​ suant to Sec​ tion 6.7(k). Sub​ ject to Sec​ tion 6.7(k), the Govern​ ment or any third-party may elect to have the capac​ ity of the Rail​ road ex​ pan​ ded to ser​ vice the re​ quire​ ments of the Govern​ ment or such third-party, the costs of such ex​ pans​ ion to be borne by the Govern​ ment or such third party, as applic​ able." (Ar​ ticle 6.7.a)

172

Min ​ ing and In ​ frastruc​ ture

In terms of the port, the contra​ ct states: "The De​ velop​ ment Plan also shall pro​ vide for the con​ struc​ tion by the Com​ pany of the Port, with the capac​ ity to allow for li​ mited gener​ al petroleum-handling and gener​ al cargo and con​ tain​ er be​ rth​ ing spac​ ing, as well as specialized bulk facilit​ ies re​ quired by the Com​ pany’s busi​ ness. The Port shall be de​ sig​ ned and con​ struc​ ted such that it can be ex​ pan​ ded on a com​ mer​ cial​ ly feasib​ le basis to han​ dle twice as much capac​ ity as is con​ templated by the pre​ ced​ ing sen​ t​ ence. Such ex​ pans​ ion capac​ ity shall in​ clude the pos​ sible con​ struc​ tion of an ad​ dition​ al 50 met​ ers on the Iron Ore jetty and the driv​ ing of iron ore jetty piles at least 5 met​ ers de​ ep ​ er. The Port basin shall be de​ sig​ ned to facilitate furth​ er large scale de​ velop​ ment con​ sis​ tent with any ex​ pans​ ion of the rail​ road (e.g., lengthen​ ing of prima​ ry wharf, room for ad​ d i​ tion of ad​ dition​ al wharf, or adequate pro​ tec​ ted an​ chorage)." (Ar​ ticle 6.7.d)

RE S OURCE -FOR-INFRAS TRUCTURE S WAPS
The is​ sues dis​ cus​ sed above have focused on balanc​ ing de​ mands for ac​ cess to in​ frastruc​ ture with​ in the broad​ er negotiated pac​ kage of fisc​ al de​ mands. Howev ​ er, there is an al​ ter​ native model out there, where govern​ ments give ac​ cess to natur​ al re​ sour​ ces in re​ turn for con​ struc​ tion of key in​ frastruc​ ture (non-mining re​ lated). Such "resource-forinfrastructure" deals have gained a lot of at​ ten​ tion re​ cent​ ly. A numb​ er of such contra​ cts have been con​ cluded in dif​ ferent parts of the world, though far fewer have rea​ ched im​ plemen​ ta​ tion stage. Resource-for-infrastructure swaps are most com​ mon​ ly as​ sociated with deals done by Chinese com​ p an​ ies op ​ erat​ ing in Af​ rica. China’s de​ mand for re​ sour​ ces has been grow​ ing fast – it is the world’s lar​ gest con​ sum​ er of key miner​ als, in​ clud​ ing iron ore, lead and zinc. Af​ rica, in turn, has both a large end​ ow​ ment of under-exploited miner​ al re​ sour​ ces and very im​ mediate in​ frastruc​ ture needs. In such case, both sides could be​ nefit. China gains ac​ cess to much needed re​ sour​ ces to sus​ tain its economy, while Af​ rican na​ tions get much needed major in​ frastruc​ ture in a com​ p arative​ ly short per​ iod of time.

173

Economic Li​ n kages

Yet these deals also give rise to not​ able risks. Above all, it is dif​ ficult to adequate​ ly de​ ter​ mine the value of the ex​ chan​ ge. Es​ timates for both the in​ frastruc​ ture and the miner​ als can vary sig​ nificant​ ly. In one in​ stan​ ce in Li​ beria, re​ sour​ ce es​ timates have gone up 10-fold in 5 years from the start of negotia​ tions. Even more chal​ leng​ ing is de​ ter​ min​ ing the economic value of the pro​ p osed in​ frastruc​ ture, es​ p ecial​ ly be​ cause it is not sub​ ject to any open com​ p etitive pro​ cess. The bot​ tom line is that it is even hard​ er to as​ sess fair​ ness of a resource-for-infrastructure deal than for a con​ v en​ tion​ al resource-for-revenue ag​ ree​ ment. In ad​ di​ tion, the contra​ ctu​ al ar​ range​ ments for resource-for-infrastructure swaps are high​ ly com​ p lex – in​ v olv ​ ing min​ ing as well as con​ struc​ tion com​ p an​ ies. Where there is com​ p lex​ ity, there is room for con​ fus​ ion and poten​ tial​ ly more avenues for cor​ rup ​ tion. There is no clear contra​ ctu​ al model as yet to guide part​ ies. Local con​ tent re​ q uire​ ments are typical​ ly not at​ tached to these deals – in fact the in​ v est​ ing com​ p any’s guaran​ tee to pro​ v ide the in​ frastruc​ ture is often de​ p en​ dent on its as​ sump ​ tion of bring​ ing in foreign ex​ p ert​ ise, equip ​ ment, ser​ v ices and even labor. In such in​ stan​ ces, the co​ unt​ ry may not have ac​ hieved opt​ im​ al value for its re​ sour​ ces.

174

LEGAL AND NEGOTIA ​ T ION CON ​ S IDERA ​ T IONS
S O YO U T H I N K YO U N E E D H E L P A F T E R A L L ? 1 7 0 YE A R S A T T H E T A B L E : C O N ​ FESS​ IONS OF A NE G OTIATOR DIS ​ PUTE AVOIDAN​ CE AND RE ​ S OLU​ TION PL ANN​ ING FOR TROUB ​ LE TO PUB ​ L IS H OR NOT TO PUB ​ L IS H

SO YOU THINK YOU NEED HELP AFTER ALL?
Both part​ ies to a poten​ ti​ al pro​ ject - govern​ ments and com​ p an​ ies - will need a range of tech​ n​ ical ex​ p ert​ ise. When you are negotiat​ ing over as​ sets which could trans​ form the fu​ ture of your com​ p any - or co​ unt​ ry - you want to have as much in​ for​ ma​ tion as pos​ sible. You want to know the best es​ timate for the size and qual​ ity of the asset, the li​ ke ​ ly costs in​ v ol​ v ed, what vari​ ous fisc​ al struc​ tures pre​ dict about the size and tim​ ing of re​ v enue flows. All part​ ies can be​ nefit from guidan​ ce on the dozens of is​ sues raised in this book: de​ al​ ing with mar​ ket volatil​ ity, local buy-in, en​ v iron​ ment​ al im​ p act man​ age​ ment, hir​ ing local firms, and more. A large IMC will have its own geolog​ ists, numb​ er crunch​ ers, man​ ag​ ers and mar​ ket an​ alysts. It will li​ ke ​ ly have a mix of in-house and ex​ tern​ al lawy ​ ers, with a range of legal ex​ pert​ ise and ex​ p eri​ ence from all over the world. A govern​ ment, on the other hand, (and es​ p ecial​ ly a less de​ v eloped govern​ ment) typical​ ly has less of every ​ th​ ing. It has less in-house sup ​ p ort and its bud​ get will be li​ mited. Moreov ​ er, it is bound by civil ser​ v ice codes and pub​ lic ser​ v ice ethos, which means it has a hard time pay ​ ing high fees for in​ ter​ nation​ al help even if the money is there. The choice of what ex​ tern​ al as​ sis​ tance you mobil​ ize can make or break the deal.

176

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

DOING DUE DI​ L IG ​ E NCE
The first area in which ex​ tern​ al sup ​ p ort may be use​ ful is in doing due di​ lig​ ence on your negotiat​ ing partner(s). The term "due di​ lig​ ence" general​ ly re​ f​ ers to an in​ v es​ tiga​ tion car​ ried out by a party to learn and ver​ ify the full background, his​ to​ ry and cur​ rent situa​ tion of the other party(ies) with which it may contra​ ct. Due di​ lig​ ence takes time and is ex​ p en​ sive, but thorough due di​ lig​ ence will pre​ v ent and/or mitigate un​ wel​ come sur​ p rises down the road. It is an es​ senti​ al tool in the de​ cis​ ion mak​ ing pro​ cess of any in​ v es​ tor, fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stitu​ tion or govern​ ment. Poten​ ti​ al miner​ al in​ v es​ tors will do due di​ lig​ ence on govern​ ments, to as​ cer​ tain the stabil​ ity of the govern​ ment, and its polit​ ical in​ stitu​ tions to de​ ter​ mine the polit​ ical and economic risk of doing busi​ ness in the co​ unt​ ry. In​ v es​ tors will also look at the stabil​ ity and in​ depend​ ence of the judici​ al sys​ tem, the economic (debt) situa​ tion, the elec​ tor​ al situa​ tion, the human rights situa​ tion, and any other is​ sues that could af​ fect the pro​ fitabil​ ity of an in​ v est​ ment and the re​ p uta​ tion of the in​ v es​ tor. Govern​ ments should do similar due di​ lig​ ence of poten​ ti​ al in​ v es​ tors to as​ cer​ tain fin​ an​ ci​ al stabil​ ity, ex​ p ert​ ise, ex​ p eri​ ence, track re​ cord on en​ v iron​ ment​ al and human rights prac​ tices, his​ to​ ry of dis​ p utes and the like. Not all in​ v es​ tors are equal. One would ex​ p ect a govern​ ment to do much less due di​ lig​ ence on a well-known in​ ter​ nation​ al com​ p any with pub​ lic fin​ an​ ci​ al state​ ments and a long track re​ cord than it would on a lit​ tle known, private​ ly held com​ p any. Some due di​ lig​ ence of poten​ ti​ al miner​ al in​ v es​ tors can be done by govern​ ments inhouse, but there are many specialized firms that will help govern​ ments ver​ ify the "health" and "charact​ er" of a poten​ ti​ al miner​ al in​ v es​ tor. Com​ p rehen​ sive due di​ lig​ ence can in​ v ol​ v e en​ tire in​ v es​ tigative teams com​ p ris​ ing lawy ​ ers, ac​ coun​ tants, fisc​ al and tax ex​ p erts, human rights special​ ists, human re​ la​ tions ex​ p erts, en​ v iron​ ment​ al special​ ists, ex​ p erts in cor​ p orate soci​ al re​ spon​ sibil​ ity and more. Their job is to ver​ ify com​ p lian​ ce with applic​ able laws, poli​ cies, treat​ ies and re​ gula​ tions, as well to find any "red flag" items that could cause pro​ blems, im​ mediate​ ly or later dur​ ing the dif​ ferent stages of the min​ ing pro​ ject.

177

So You Think You Need Help After All?

More specifical​ ly, the in​ v es​ tigators will look for poten​ ti​ al risks which could af​ fect the com​ p any’s ab​ il​ ity to per​ form its ob​ liga​ tions, such as the com​ p any’s fin​ an​ ci​ al capac​ ity to fund the min​ ing pro​ ject, its level of ex​ p ert​ ise and ex​ p eri​ ence and its capac​ ity to re​ im​ burse fin​ anc​ ing. Red flag items could be large un​ fun​ ded re​ ser​ v es for poten​ ti​ al los​ ses, outstand​ ing mass lit​ iga​ tion such as as​ bes​ tos or other pro​ duct li​ abil​ ity is​ sues, on​ go​ ing crimin​ al in​ v es​ tiga​ tions con​ cern​ ing cor​ rup ​ tion, money laun​ der​ ing or other al​ leged crimes, al​ lega​ tions of human rights ab​ uses or en​ v iron​ ment​ al neg​ lect, and other re​ putation​ al, fin​ an​ ci​ al or legal is​ sues. If a red flag issue is iden​ tified, per​ miss​ ion will often be re​ q ues​ ted to in​ ter​ v iew the com​ p any man​ age​ ment, auditors and lawy ​ ers. The in​ v es​ tigators will draft a due di​ lig​ ence re​ p ort de​ scrib​ ing the scope of the in​ v es​ tiga​ tion and the fin​ d​ ings. The final due di​ lig​ ence re​ p ort should be an im​ p or​ tant ele​ ment in de​ cid​ ing wheth​ er to en​ trust a por​ tion of the co​ untry's miner​ al re​ sour​ ces to that in​ v es​ tor. Due di​ lig​ ence re​ p orts are con​ sidered high​ ly con​ fiden​ ti​ al and are sel​ dom shared.

CHOOS ​ IN G T H E R IG H T L AWY​ ER
For ac​ tu​ al contra​ ct negotia​ tions, one ob​ v ious​ ly needs lawy ​ ers. Most IMCs and govern​ ments who work with out​ side co​ un​ sel will choose in​ ter​ nation​ al law firms be​ cause they have a good re​ p uta​ tion and seem ex​ p erien​ ced. But even big firms are only as good as the peo​ p le as​ sig​ ned to the team. Small​ er firms with good ex​ peri​ ence in in​ ter​ nation​ al in​ v est​ ment contra​ cts could be just as cap ​ able; some may even be more specialized, cheap ​ er and more avail​ able. They are not balanc​ ing a di​ v er​ se client base and are less li​ ke ​ ly to have con​ flict of in​ terest is​ sues. When en​ ter​ ing into the pro​ cess of choos​ ing lawy ​ ers, it is use​ ful to draft a nar​ row mis​ s​ ion state​ ment with a break​ down of tasks (three negotia​ tion meet​ ings, com​ ments on first draft of the Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment or Con​ cess​ ion Ag​ ree​ ment, etc.) and as​ sign bud​ get numb​ ers to each task in light of what the client thinks the work is worth and their over​ all bud​ get en​ v elope. Giv ​ ing the law firm a broad man​ date such as, “to negotiate the min​ ing pro​ ject with staff​ ing as neces​ sa​ ry,” is a blank check best avoided.

178

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

Be​ fore meet​ ing with any law firm, the mis​ s​ ion state​ ment should be sent to all of the can​ didates. In​ ter​ v iews should be set up with not only the partn​ er who will man​ age the deal but with as many mem​ b​ ers of the pro​ p osed team as pos​ sible, in​ clud​ ing the junior mem​ b​ ers who may be doing most of the work. The client is en​ tit​ led to not like cer​ tain lawy ​ ers and to evaluate in​ depen​ dent​ ly the skill level of each mem​ b​ er of the team. Lan​ guage skills should also be verified. If the partn​ er speaks French or Spanish, but none of the mid-level as​ sociates do, that lan​ guage skill will be​ come very ex​ p en​ sive. Govern​ ments can also re​ q uest foreign firms to partn​ er with local or nation​ al firms to train local lawy ​ ers. Big firms are general​ ly ex​ p en​ sive firms. Small firms can be just as co​ st​ ly per hour (or, in fact, per six minutes, the basic unit of legal bi​ ll​ ing) but will general​ ly put fewer lawy ​ ers on the team, so the client may still get bet​ t​ er value for its money. In eith​ er case, it is im​ por​ tant for govern​ ments to un​ derstand how their work will be staf​ fed. They should not be af​ raid to in​ s​ ist on know​ ing the skill level of and the char​ ges for each mem​ b​ er of the law firm's pro​ p osed team, and to know why each per​ son is in​ cluded on the team. Some​ times law firms offer to work for a fixed fee. This may seem de​ sir​ able to a govern​ ment, but in those cases, the work in​ v ol​ v ed is nor​ mal​ ly fair​ ly careful​ ly de​ scribed in the lawyer's fee lett​ er, which can lead to bud​ get over​ runs when the deal moves in un​ an​ ticipated ways. And of co​ ur​ se, the lawy ​ er needs to un​ derstand the client's con​ straints. It is no good hav ​ ing a bril​ liant brain in the room that can't re​ late. And of co​ ur​ se, no client should keep a law firm on a job if it is not happy with the work.

AR E L AWY​ ERS EN​ OUG H?
It is im​ p or​ tant also to un​ derstand that legal skills are not the only skills needed in a negotia​ tion. Some govern​ ment negotiators be​ lieve they may have ended up with ad​ verse re​ sults in past negotia​ tions be​ cause there was too much con​ centra​ tion on lawy ​ ers at the ex​ p en​ se of other ex​ p ert​ ise. For ex​ am​ p le, many govern​ ments have only re​ cent​ ly star​ ted to look for help in creat​ ing fin​ an​ ci​ al models that will en​ able them to evaluate pro​ p osed terms and al​ ter​ native pro​ p os​ als. It can be dif​ ficult to find the neces​ sa​ ry as​ sis​ -

179

So You Think You Need Help After All?

tance for fin​ an​ ci​ al model​ ing, as these skills tend to con​ gregate in con​ sult​ ing or in​ v est​ ment bank​ ing firms that are nor​ mal​ ly as ex​ p en​ sive as law firms. Some govern​ ment teams may also feel they lack suf​ ficient know​ ledge of mine op ​ era​ tion and man​ age​ ment, and the op ​ era​ tion of world miner​ al mar​ kets. For ex​ am​ p le, a govern​ ment negotiator may know that the contra​ ct should re​ q uire pric​ ing for royal​ ty and in​ come tax pur​ p oses to be done on the basis of arm’s length deals, but have no idea what pric​ ing met​ hods to use if the in​ v es​ tor is pro​ duc​ ing primari​ ly for its own use el​ sewhere. Which of the many trans​ f​ er pric​ ing mech​ an​ isms is most approp ​ riate? How can the govern​ ment avoid being blind-sided by cus​ toma​ ry pric​ ing prac​ tices that, for ex​ am​ p le, lead to the ap ​ p earan​ ce of un​ ex ​ p ected "dis​ counts“ in royal​ ty com​ p uta​ tions? Fin​ al​ ly, govern​ ments may want ac​ cess to peo​ p le who re​ gular​ ly track in​ dust​ ry de​ v elop ​ ments. Some​ times negotia​ tions can be af​ fected by some​ th​ ing as sim​ p le as failure to keep up with the in​ dust​ ry press. One negotiator re​ memb​ ers how he suc​ ceeded in gett​ ing his govern​ ment to with​ draw an offer to one com​ p any after fin​ d​ ing out some​ th​ ing they had done in an​ oth​ er co​ unt​ ry in the re​ g​ ion.

IS THE RIG HT S UP​ PORT AVAIL ​ AB L E ?
Some govern​ ment pro​ ces​ ses have a dis​ tinct im​ p act on how help is hired. Most size​ able pieces of work will natural​ ly pass through pub​ lic pro​ cure​ ment pro​ cedures, which will most li​ ke ​ ly re​ strict bi​ dd​ ers to com​ p an​ ies of a cer​ tain size. And then there is al​ ways the ques​ tion of cost; pro​ fes​ sion​ al fees may be seen as pro​ hibitive, even if they would help a govern​ ment raise sub​ stan​ tial​ ly more re​ v enues in the deal. There has been a surge of in​ terest among in​ ter​ nation​ al in​ stitu​ tions in re​ cent years in pro​ v id​ ing sup ​ p ort on the govern​ ment side, in re​ cog​ ni​ tion of the fact that there are high stakes for economic de​ v elop ​ ment and even polit​ ical gover​ nance. The Vale Col​ um​ bia Cent​ er on Sus​ tain​ able In​ ter​ nation​ al In​ v est​ ment (VCC) and the Humboldt-Viadrina School of Gover​ nance (HVSG) have com​ p iled the de​ tails of many such in​ itiatives, which are avail​ able on the VCC's web​ site. Many govern​ ments have wel​ comed these in​ itiatives, but there are li​ mita​ tions to the na​ ture of their sup ​ p ort, and ac​ cess​ ing their sup ​ p ort can

180

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

take time. It may take up to two years or more for a re​ gion​ al de​ v elop ​ ment bank or in​ ter​ nation​ al fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stitu​ tion to fin​ an​ ce and de​ liv ​ er such sup ​ p ort. For some low-income co​ unt​ ries, sup ​ p ort for negotia​ tions may be avail​ able on a re​ duced fee or pro bono (free) basis. For in​ stan​ ce, the In​ ter​ nation​ al Sen​ ior Lawy ​ ers Pro​ ject (ISLP) has pro​ v ided high qual​ ity legal as​ sis​ tance on a pro bono basis to a numb​ er of eligib​ le govern​ ments negotiat​ ing min​ ing contra​ cts.

181

170 YEARS AT THE TAB LE: CON ​ F ESS ​ I ONS OF A NEGOTIATOR
Some of the aut​ hors of this book have spent more time negotiat​ ing than they often care to admit. About 170 years in fact. This chapt​ er runs through some tips that have been hard won out of hundreds of hours fac​ ing off, di​ gg​ ing in, in​ sist​ ing, li​ sten​ ing, and co​ ax​ ing.

THE DIF​ FER​ E NCE B E T​ WE E N POS I​ TIONS AND IN​ TERESTS
Negotiators too often state their posi​ tions as op ​ p osed to their un​ der​ ly ​ ing in​ terests. For ex​ am​ p le, an IMC will state that it will not pay in​ come tax above a cer​ tain rate and it will not agree to a cap of de​ duc​ tible costs. Meanwhile the govern​ ment will state that a large front-end pay ​ ment is man​ dato​ ry and that taxes are pay ​ able on the date of a com​ mer​ ci​ al dis​ cove​ ry. If they were talk​ ing about their re​ spec​ tive in​ terests, the IMC would ex​ p lain that it needs a mini​ mum In​ tern​ al Rate of Re​ turn (IRR) on its capit​ al to get approv ​ al from its Board of Di​ rec​ tors, fail​ ing which its in​ v est​ ment com​ mit​ tee will not approve the pro​ ject. The govern​ ment would state that it needs in​ come as fast as pos​ sible, or it could face mount​ -

182

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

ing polit​ ical pre​ ssures. When in​ terests are clear​ ly ex​ p res​ sed, it is eas​ i​ er to see where the part​ ies can com​ p rom​ ise.

WHE RE IT HAP​ PE NS CO​ UNTS
At some stage "negotia​ tions" need to happ ​ en face to face, and here too there is a variety of prac​ tice. Some​ times govern​ ments have com​ p an​ ies come to them. Oth​ ers choose a neutr​ al (al​ beit en​ joy ​ able) city, though this can be both a fin​ an​ ci​ al and psyc​ holog​ ical burd​ en for the govern​ ment negotiators. They might be in a great city, but they are not on familiar ground and are in the of​ fices of a foreign law firm. There are even times when sub​ stan​ tive is​ sues are af​ fected by the need to catch a plane. On the other hand, govern​ ment negotiators may be able to give the negotia​ tions their full at​ ten​ tion if they are taken out of their home co​ unt​ ry and norm​ al work flow. At home, the lead negotiator might get a phone call from the Pre​ sident's of​ fice, for in​ stan​ ce, and just need to step out for "15 minutes." Then you don't see her again for the rest of the day. To avoid the ap ​ p earan​ ce of favor​ ing one party or an​ oth​ er, the part​ ies may agree in ad​ vance to rotate the negotia​ tions among dif​ ferent loc​ a​ tions.

TIM ​ ING AND PACE
Tim​ ing and pace are al​ ways im​ p or​ tant but never more so than at the face-to-face stage, when one or both part​ ies might have travel​ led half way around the planet. The part​ ies should set up a schedule ahead of time which al​ lows for any in​ tern​ al con​ sul​ ta​ tions. There is a natur​ al ten​ den​ cy to treat and de​ scribe every ​ th​ ing as ur​ gent. But if you give in to that urge, it be​ comes hard​ er to know which de​ cis​ ion in the negotia​ tion is im​ p or​ tant for what rea​ son. Part​ ies will often say they do not have the aut​ hor​ ity to make a cer​ tain de​ cis​ ion. Some​ times that's true, some​ times it is only a ploy to gain time to con​ sult. If the way each side's de​ cis​ ions need to be made is not dis​ cus​ sed up front, it can lead to frustra​ tion. IMCs often feel govern​ ment decision-making is too slow. On the other hand they may not fully un​ derstand how many stages of con​ sen​ sus build​ ing govern​ ment re​ -

183

170 Years at the Table: Con ​ fess​ ions of a Negotiator

presen​ tatives have to go through. If it is ex​ p lained, at least the com​ p any re​ p resen​ tatives un​ derstand the rea​ sons for the delay and can some​ times help, by of​ fer​ ing to move to other ques​ tions while wait​ ing for a re​ spon​ se on a par​ ticular issue. Li​ kew​ ise, when the govern​ ment negotiators don't un​ derstand IMC pro​ ces​ ses, such as re​ quire​ ments for Board of Di​ rec​ tors or in​ v est​ ment com​ mit​ tee de​ cis​ ions, they can start to mis​ trust the IMC's in​ ten​ tions. Maybe the IMC has de​ v eloped cold feet but just isn't say ​ ing so? Maybe it has de​ cided to look for a bet​ t​ er asset down the road?

B AL ANC​ ING COS T AND B E ​ NE FITS / TRADE OFFS AND COM ​ PROM IS E S
When should you com​ p rom​ ise? When should you hold firm? These are im​ p os​ sible ques​ tions to an​ sw​ er in the ab​ stract. But if you are clear about your time schedule and priorit​ ies, it be​ comes a lot eas​ i​ er to find places to offer com​ p rom​ ise with​ out yield​ ing on the is​ sues that are im​ p or​ tant to you. Be​ fore a negotia​ tion sess​ ion, it is valu​ able to have a list of the is​ sues ex​ p ec​ ted to come up, and to make sure that the mem​ b​ ers of the negotiat​ ing team are ag​ reed on the posi​ tions to be taken and on the al​ ter​ natives, if any, that might be of​ fered to reach ag​ ree​ ment. Creat​ ing a chart of is​ sues and al​ ter​ natives will keep the team focused on the negotia​ tions and on point. It may also avoid in​ dividu​ al mem​ b​ ers of the negotiat​ ing team going off on an un​ desired frolic and de​ tour. Some​ times, though, con​ sen​ sus it​ self can be a pro​ blem. When the seven peo​ p le on the team all need to agree on every ​ th​ ing, th​ ings can take a while, par​ ticular​ ly when a new point, not on the chart, drops on the table. Peo​ p le em​ p loy all dif​ ferent kinds of tech​ niques. Al​ though a popular image is of tough stand-offs bet​ ween the part​ ies, all great negotiators li​ st​ en careful​ ly and usual​ ly re​ spectful​ ly to what their co​ un​ terparts are say ​ ing even if there are sharp dis​ ag​ ree​ ments. In terms of tim​ ing and tech​ nique, some pre​ f​ er not to move on from any given area until every point in it has been ag​ reed. Oth​ ers will try to pick off the easy ones, and leave more time to focus on the dif​ ficult ones. Oth​ ers seek out some non-essential points to con​ cede early in order to gain the trust and con​ fid​ ence of the other party. Negotia​ tions can also

184

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

be isolated by groups of re​ lated sub​ ject matt​ ers, such as fisc​ al is​ sues, per​ mit tim​ ing, local de​ v elop ​ ment re​ q uire​ ments, or re​ p ort​ ing re​ q uire​ ments. Whatev ​ er the met​ hod, the negotiat​ ing tech​ nique should be dis​ cus​ sed and un​ derstood among the negotiat​ ing team.

GETT​ ING PAS T ROADB L OCK S
Negotiat​ ing part​ ies are li​ ke ​ ly to find them​ selves at an im​ p as​ se at some point in the negotia​ tion. There are a numb​ er of ways to get out of it. At the be​ ginn​ ing, it is crit​ ical not to spend too long ar​ gu​ ing about the point once the na​ ture and mag​ nitude of the dis​ ag​ ree​ ment is clear. Peo​ p le can be​ come so em​ otional​ ly com​ mit​ ted to one point that they can not bring them​ selves to back down. If at all pos​ sible, leave the issue for a while and con​ tinue negotiat​ ing other points. Most block​ ing points are re​ sol​ v ed by trad​ ing off com​ p romises on dif​ ferent parts of the min​ ing ag​ ree​ ment. If the part​ ies are bloc​ ked on, say, the royal​ ty, they might con​ sid​ er trad​ ing a com​ mun​ ity de​ v elop ​ ment un​ der​ tak​ ing. Or, if they are bloc​ ked on the tim​ ing of per​ mits, and dura​ tion, they could trade off on fisc​ al measures. An​ oth​ er approach is to leave block​ ing points until the end so as not to get stuck and lose con​ fid​ ence dur​ ing the pro​ cess. If no com​ p rom​ ise can be found, each party can pass the issue up the chain. Some​ times there are even pre​ exist​ ing separate negotia​ tion teams com​ p rised of high-level of​ fic​ ers in the Govern​ ment and in the IMC man​ dated to find com​ p romises to block​ ing points.

185

170 Years at the Table: Con ​ fess​ ions of a Negotiator

WHO IS AT THE TAB L E
The make-up of the negotiat​ ing team is dis​ cus​ sed in some depth in the chapt​ er, "The Negotiat​ ing Table". The best out​ comes usual​ ly in​ v ol​ v e a mat​ rix of ac​ tors which in​ clude both local and nation​ al of​ fici​ als, local popula​ tions, NGOs and the IMC con​ cer​ ned. But this doesn't mean every ​ one can be at the table. Govern​ ments have the de​ licate task of negotiat​ ing in an ef​ fective man​ n​ er while pro​ v id​ ing suf​ ficient in​ for​ ma​ tion to domes​ tic ac​ tors to as​ sure them that their in​ terests are not being ig​ nored. At times, govern​ ments have con​ sidered bring​ ing civil society di​ rect​ ly to the table, but as far as we are aware, it has not hap ​ p ened yet. Sec​ re​ cy of negotia​ tions of co​ ur​ se is a sen​ sitive issue in terms of trans​ p aren​ cy. The aut​ hors of this book sup ​ p ort the con​ cept of contra​ ct trans​ p aren​ cy. In fact, we have out​ lined how govern​ ments can ac​ tual​ ly avoid negotia​ tions al​ togeth​ er by using a strict li​ cens​ ing sys​ tem and de​ fin​ ing all terms in non-negotiable law. Or, the legal framework could leave li​ mited as​ p ects of the deal to negotia​ tion or to com​ p etitive bids. Nevertheless, when negotia​ tions do take place, it is hard to see how, from a strict​ ly logist​ ical point of view, they could pro​ ceed with total, real-time trans​ p aren​ cy. Every seasoned negotiator has an ex​ am​ p le of how leaks at cruci​ al stages im​ p ac​ ted a negotiat​ ing posi​ tion, usual​ ly for the worse. In one case, a govern​ ment har​ dened its fisc​ al de​ mands after one of its team pic​ ked up a home co​ unt​ ry com​ p any press re​ lease, pre​ sumab​ ly di​ rec​ ted at poten​ ti​ al in​ v es​ tors, de​ tail​ ing just how pro​ mis​ ing the asset was. On the govern​ ment side, polit​ ical lead​ ers some​ times grandstand around single is​ sues, which pus​ hes their negotiat​ ing teams into a cor​ n​ er. It seems as though a cer​ tain amount of con​ fiden​ tial​ ity, for a cer​ tain time, is what al​ lows negotiators to negotiate. Last​ ly, there is no such thing as too much in​ for​ ma​ tion and know​ ledge. Big IMCs are wellfinanced know​ ledge mac​ hines with rigor​ ous stan​ dards of ex​ cell​ ence ac​ ross a wide range of dis​ cip ​ lines. Govern​ ments are often at a re​ sour​ ce - and therefore a know​ ledge - dis​ ad​ vantage, even when they have statuto​ ry ac​ cess to much of the same in​ for​ ma​ tion. For ex​ am​ p le, even though a government's geolog​ ical sur​ v ey might have the right to ob​ tain and ac​ cess sur​ v eys car​ ried out by the IMC, they may have less capac​ ity to in​ terpret the data they see, or to con​ nect it to the latest trends in world mar​ kets.

186

DIS ​ P UTE AVOIDAN ​ C E AND RE ​ S OLU ​ T ION
Min​ ing contra​ cts - like any other legal bond - can fall apart. The part​ ies, the pro​ ject, the economy, and other for​ ces and fac​ tors can turn a once-happy mar​ riage into a strained re​ lationship and even wind up in di​ v or​ ce. Dis​ p utes can arise over many is​ sues, in​ clud​ ing com​ p lian​ ce with per​ for​ mance ob​ liga​ tions, failures to meet soci​ al or en​ v iron​ ment​ al ob​ liga​ tions dur​ ing the de​ v elop ​ ment phase, and in​ terpreta​ tion of is​ sues re​ lat​ ing to mine closure. How do the govern​ ment and min​ ing com​ p any han​ dle dis​ p utes? There are a variety of contra​ ct tools avail​ able to help keep th​ ings runn​ ing smooth​ ly.

TAL K IT OUT – AL ​ L OW​ ING FOR RE ​ VIE WS AND CON​ SUL​ TA​ TION
One opt​ ion is to in​ s​ ist on "ob​ ligato​ ry" per​ iodic contra​ ct re​ v iews that force the part​ ies togeth​ er to deal with chan​ ged cir​ cumstan​ ces. If there is dis​ satis​ fac​ tion, the part​ ies can negotiate to mod​ ify the fin​ an​ ci​ al and other terms of the deal in order to main​ tain the balan​ ce the part​ ies had in​ ten​ ded. Hav ​ ing scheduled con​ sul​ ta​ tions can minim​ ize frustra​ tion and ease tens​ ions if one of the part​ ies feels that the deal is no long​ er fair, pre​ vent​ ing rash judg​ ments that might lead a com​ p any to pull out of a co​ unt​ ry or a govern​ ment to national​ ize a mine.

187

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

As an ex​ am​ p le, Ar​ ticle 31 of the Liberia-Putu (2010) ag​ ree​ ment states that the Govern​ ment and com​ p any "shall meet once every five (5) years after the date hereof or ear​ li​ er, if one party rea​ sonab​ ly con​ sid​ ers a Pro​ found Chan​ ge in Cir​ cumstan​ ces to have oc​ cur​ red, to es​ tablish wheth​ er or not a Pro​ found Chan​ ge in Cir​ cumstan​ ces has occurred." Some contra​ cts con​ tain other forms of negotia​ tion and media​ tion ob​ liga​ tions that bring the part​ ies to the table when dis​ ag​ ree​ ments arise. They en​ courage the part​ ies to address their is​ sues - eith​ er alone or with the as​ sis​ tance of a neutr​ al mediator – and so avoid the need to es​ calate the dis​ p ute. Ar​ ticle 32 of the Afghanistan-Qara Zag​ han (2011) contra​ ct states: "Eith​ er party to the contra​ ct should try to man​ age and re​ sol​ ve con​ flicts aris​ ing from dis​ ag​ ree​ ment in the in​ terpreta​ tion of the contra​ ct, via negotia​ tions, mutu​ al ag​ ree​ ment and other non-confrontational means. Both sides should re​ sol​ ve their con​ flict with​ in sixty (60) days after re​ ceiv​ ing writt​ en notice of an issue re​ lated to the contra​ ct."

WHE N TAL K ​ ING FAIL S - FORM ​ AL M E AS URE S FOR RE ​ S OLV​ ING CONTRA​ CT DIS ​ PUTE S
When re​ gular re​ negotia​ tions or media​ tions do not work, contra​ cts pro​ v ide for other form​ al met​ hods of dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion. Dis​ p ute re​ solu​ tion pro​ v is​ ions typical​ ly have at least two im​ p or​ tant com​ p onents: the law that will govern the dis​ p ute and the met​ hod of re​ solv ​ ing the dis​ p utes. The law govern​ ing the min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments can be total​ ly in​ depen​ dent from the met​ hod used to re​ sol​ v e dis​ p utes. There are two major ways to for​ mal​ ly re​ sol​ v e a dis​ p ute: eith​ er through domes​ tic co​ urts or in​ ter​ nation​ al ar​ bitra​ tion.

Which Law Appl​ ies?
The issue of applic​ able or govern​ ing law can be huge​ ly im​ p or​ tant. The fol​ low​ ing scenarios help il​ lustrate why:

188

Dis​ pute Avoidan ​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion

Scenario One - a contra​ ct re​ q uires the govern​ ment to en​ sure that the con​ ces​ sionaire has ac​ cess to land neces​ sa​ ry for its op ​ era​ tions. After the govern​ ment starts tak​ ing ac​ tion to re​ move in​ digen​ ous peo​ p le from the land, those af​ fected com​ munit​ ies pur​ sue legal ac​ tion in domes​ tic court, which rules that the government's contra​ ctu​ al pro​ m​ ise violates domes​ tic and in​ ter​ nation​ al human rights law, and bars the govern​ ment from tak​ ing furth​ er steps to make way for the min​ ing pro​ ject. The com​ p any sues the govern​ ment for breach​ ing its ob​ liga​ tion to secure ac​ cess to the land. Under applic​ able law, is the govern​ ment ex​ cused from hav ​ ing to com​ p​ ly with its contra​ ct pro​ m​ ise? Scenario Two - a contra​ ct in​ cludes an en​ v iron​ ment​ al "freez​ ing" pro​ v is​ ion. The govern​ ment has amen​ ded its en​ v iron​ ment​ al law, pro​ v id​ ing private citizens with new rights to sue com​ p an​ ies, and strengthen​ ing pol​ lu​ tion stan​ dards. As a re​ sult of the new law, the com​ p any has been or​ dered to pay sig​ nificant sums to local com​ munit​ ies. The com​ p any ar​ gues that by en​ act​ ing the new law, the govern​ ment has breac​ hed the contra​ ct, and now owes the com​ p any damages amount​ ing to its lit​ iga​ tion fees and the sums owed to the private part​ ies. The govern​ ment de​ fends it​ self by ar​ gu​ ing that the broad stabiliza​ tion pro​ v is​ ion in the contra​ ct is void and un​ en ​ force​ able under domes​ tic contra​ ct law be​ cause it is in​ con​ sistent with pub​ lic poli​ cy and un​ constitution​ al. Under applic​ able law, will the govern​ ment be bound by its pro​ m​ ise? These ex​ am​ p les show why govern​ ments general​ ly want their own law to be the one that governs all as​ p ects of a min​ ing pro​ ject, as it will give them the greatest con​ trol over the shape the pro​ ject, the contra​ ct, and the part​ ies' rights and ob​ liga​ tions under it. For min​ ing contra​ cts, which can pose major op ​ p or​ tunit​ ies and chal​ lenges for the govern​ ment, co​ unt​ ries natural​ ly want to leave as lit​ tle to chan​ ce as pos​ sible. Re​ flect​ ing this con​ cern, many contra​ cts state that the law of the co​ unt​ ry host​ ing the mine will govern op ​ era​ tion of the pro​ ject, in​ terpreta​ tion and applica​ tion of the contra​ ct, and the part​ ies' rights and ob​ liga​ tions. For ex​ am​ p le, Ar​ ticle 39 of the AKNR-Afghanistan contra​ ct states: "This contra​ ct is sub​ ject and gover​ ned by all applic​ able Laws and Re​ gula​ tions of the Govern​ ment of Afghanis​ tan." Similar​ ly, but more com​ p rehen​ sive​ ly, Ar​ ticle 20.2 of the Liberia-Putu contra​ ct states:

189

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

"This Ag​ ree​ ment and the rights, ob​ liga​ tions and dut​ ies of the part​ ies hereund​ er shall be con​ strued and in​ terpreted in ac​ cordan​ ce with Li​ berian Law." While states gain cer​ tain​ ty by using these types of pro​ v is​ ions, they may cause an equal measure of un​ cer​ tain​ ty among in​ v es​ tors nerv ​ ous about being at the mercy of the host state's law - par​ ticular​ ly if re​ la​ tions bet​ ween the part​ ies even​ tual​ ly sour. Con​ cerns about cor​ rup ​ tion or a lack of judici​ al in​ depend​ ence can in​ tens​ ify an in​ v es​ tor's de​ sire to find a de​ cis​ ion maker that is in​ sulated from domes​ tic pre​ ssures. In order to ease those con​ cerns, in​ v es​ tors some​ times get the govern​ ment to agree to re​ sol​ v e dis​ p utes in the co​ urts of the in​ v es​ tor's home co​ unt​ ry, or they push for ar​ bitra​ tion. But if the co​ unt​ ry has an ef​ ficient and in​ depen​ dent judicia​ ry, it may be dif​ ficult to in​ s​ ist on ar​ bitra​ tion and/or shift​ ing the lit​ iga​ tion over​ seas. Even when it is ag​ reed that nation​ al law does apply, in​ v es​ tors have cer​ tain legal tools at their dis​ p os​ al to pro​ tect them​ selves against govern​ ment ac​ tion. While fall​ ing out​ side the contra​ ct, bi​ later​ al or multi​ later​ al in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies can be used to furth​ er de​ fine the part​ ies' rights and ob​ liga​ tions under the deal. These are dis​ cus​ sed at the end of this chapt​ er.

Ar​ bitra​ tion ver​ sus Lit​ iga​ tion
Once it is clear what law appl​ ies, there is then the ques​ tion of wheth​ er to pur​ sue the path of ar​ bitra​ tion or lit​ iga​ tion in the co​ urts. This choice of pro​ cedure is im​ p or​ tant. There are a numb​ er of major dif​ fer​ ences bet​ ween ar​ bitra​ tion and lit​ iga​ tion. These re​ late to the ident​ ity of the de​ cision​ mak​ er, the pow​ ers of the de​ cision​ mak​ er, the loc​ a​ tion of the pro​ ceed​ ings, the pro​ cedures and rules of evi​ d​ ence that apply, the eth​ ical rules that will apply to the at​ torneys and the de​ cision​ mak​ er, the op ​ en ​ ness of the pro​ ceed​ ings and the ab​ il​ ity of non-parties to ac​ cess and par​ ticipate in them, the speed and cost of the pro​ ceed​ ings, and the fin​ al​ ity and en​ for​ ceabil​ ity of awards or judg​ ments. Ar​ bitra​ tion pro​ ceed​ ings have many fea​ tures that part​ ies may see as ad​ v antage​ ous. Such pro​ ceed​ ings are typical​ ly con​ fiden​ ti​ al. There are many good in​ ter​ nation​ al ar​ bitrators to choose from, as op ​ p osed to tak​ ing chan​ ces be​ fore a judge who may or may not be know​ ledge​ able, in​ depen​ dent or honest. And there are speci​ al rules of fin​ al​ ity and en​ for​ ceabil​ ity of ar​ bitr​ al awards in ar​ bitra​ tion rules, domes​ tic laws, and in​ ter​ nation​ -

190

Dis​ pute Avoidan ​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion

al treat​ ies (dis​ cus​ sed furth​ er below) that are de​ sig​ ned to both speed the pro​ cess of gett​ ing a final award and en​ sure that, once that award is is​ sued, the vic​ tori​ ous party can en​ for​ ce it. But there are some dis​ ad​ v antages. They are ex​ p en​ sive, are slow​ er than some would think, and their fin​ al​ ity can be a dis​ ad​ v antage given that the part​ ies only have one chan​ ce to make their case be​ fore the ar​ bitr​ al tri​ bun​ al. The grounds for ap ​ p e​ al or to re​ quest a state not to ex​ ecute an ar​ bitr​ al award are par​ ticular​ ly nar​ row. Moreov ​ er, the closed na​ ture of the pro​ ceed​ ings - and some​ times their out​ comes - are often criticized as being in​ con​ sistent with prin​ ci​ p les of good gover​ nance, ac​ coun​ tabil​ ity, and trans​ p aren​ cy. If co​ urts are used, the rules and pro​ cedures re​ gard​ ing which par​ ticular court will take the case and how it will han​ dle it are general​ ly spel​ led out in the law. In contra​ st, in ar​ bitra​ tion, the part​ ies and the ar​ bitrator(s) have much more freedom to de​ cide just how they want to do th​ ings. Contra​ cts - in​ ten​ tional​ ly or in​ ad​ v ertent​ ly - some​ times leave those is​ sues open. This means that the part​ ies will have to re​ sol​ v e them when they are al​ ready em​ broiled in their dis​ p ute. Some contra​ cts do at least try to settle as many ques​ tions in ad​ v ance as pos​ sible by specify ​ ing the pro​ cedur​ al rules that will apply and the "seat" of the ar​ bitra​ tion.

The Path of Ar​ bitra​ tion
There are vari​ ous sets of pre​ es ​ tablis​ hed pro​ cedur​ al rules for ar​ bitra​ tion, in​ clud​ ing those of the Lon​ don Court of In​ ter​ nation​ al Ar​ bitra​ tion (LCIA), the Uni​ ted Na​ tions Com​ miss​ ion on In​ ter​ nation​ al Trade Law (UN​ CITR​ A L), the World Bank's In​ ter​ nation​ al Centre for Settle​ ment of In​ v est​ ment Dis​ p utes (ICSID), the In​ ter​ nation​ al Chamb​ er of Com​ mer​ ce (ICC), and Stockholm Chamb​ er of Com​ mer​ ce (SCC). These con​ tain pro​ v is​ ions on a host of is​ sues in​ clud​ ing the qualifica​ tions of the ar​ bitrators, the numb​ er of ar​ bitrators that will re​ sol​ v e dis​ p utes, the met​ hods of ap ​ p oint​ ing ar​ bitrators, the pow​ ers of ar​ bitrators, the con​ duct of the pro​ ceed​ ings, the con​ fiden​ tial​ ity or trans​ p aren​ cy of the dis​ p ute and its out​ come, the type of re​ lief or com​ p en​ sa​ tion that can be awar​ ded, the force of awards, and the fees and costs of the ar​ bitra​ tions. If a contra​ ct specif​ ies one of these sets of rules, the part​ ies will get that pac​ kage. A de​ fin​ ing fea​ ture of ar​ bitra​ tion, howev ​ er, is that the

191

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

part​ ies to the dis​ p ute general​ ly re​ tain a lot of freedom be​ fore and dur​ ing the dis​ p ute to agree to mod​ ify the rules and shape the pro​ ceed​ ings as they see fit. As an ex​ am​ p le of an ar​ bitra​ tion clause, the AKNR-Afghanistan ag​ ree​ ment states: "If un​ able to reach a sol​ u​ tion, as per the Miner​ al Laws, then both sides hereby agree to refer their dis​ ag​ ree​ ment to ar​ bitra​ tion which shall be the In​ ter​ nation​ al Court of Ar​ bitra​ tion as the in​ depen​ dent ar​ bitrator." In this case, the re​ fer​ ence to the In​ ter​ nation​ al Court of Ar​ bitra​ tion is not very clear as there are sever​ al In​ ter​ nation​ al Co​ urts of Ar​ bitra​ tion (Lon​ don, Paris, etc.), each of which has its own rules of pro​ cedure. It seems to imply that the part​ ies only want one ar​ bitrator (as op ​ p osed to three, which is more typ ​ ical under many rules), but this too is not very clear. The Liberia-Putu ag​ ree​ ment (Art. 27) is more specific on these is​ sues, stat​ ing: "Where the mediator’s re​ com​ mendation(s) are re​ jec​ ted by eith​ er of the part​ ies and it is evi​ dent that furth​ er di​ rect negotia​ tions will not re​ sol​ ve or settle the dis​ pute, con​ trover​ sy or claim, the matt​ er shall be sub​ mit​ ted to ar​ bitra​ tion pur​ suant to Sec​ tion 27.2.... Any Dis​ pute bet​ ween the Govern​ ment and the Com​ pany not settled pur​ suant to Sec​ tion 27.1 shall be re​ fer​ red to and fin​ a l​ ly re​ sol​ ved by ar​ bitra​ tion con​ duc​ ted in ac​ cordan​ ce with the UN​ C ITR​ AL Rules. Any such ar​ bitra​ tion shall be ad​ minis​ tered by the LCIA." Some contra​ cts then add even more de​ tail about the exact pro​ cedures and pow​ ers of the ar​ bitrators, wheth​ er doing so in order to bet​ t​ er set the applic​ able rules in stone, or to mod​ ify those rules so as to best suit their needs.

192

Dis​ pute Avoidan ​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion

The "Seat" of the Ar​ bitra​ tion
Ar​ bitra​ tion is often de​ scribed as being "de-localized" mean​ ing that it is a pro​ ceed​ ing that can be lar​ ge​ ly di​ v or​ ced from and in​ depen​ dent of background prin​ ci​ p les of law that might ot​ herw​ ise apply to the pro​ ceed​ ings. If, for ex​ am​ p le, the contra​ ct states that UN​ CITR​ A L rules of ar​ bitra​ tion will apply in a dis​ p ute, those rules will govern ir​ res​ p ective of wheth​ er the ar​ bitra​ tion hear​ ing hap ​ p ens in San​ tiago, Nairobi, Lon​ don, Paris, or New York. That said, the govern​ ing law of the "seat" of ar​ bitra​ tion is im​ p or​ tant. The "seat" has a speci​ al mean​ ing. While the term "seat" im​ p l​ ies that it is the place of the ar​ bitra​ tion, as noted above, it is not neces​ sari​ ly the ac​ tu​ al place where the ar​ bitra​ tion is con​ duc​ ted. It is en​ tire​ ly pos​ sible for ar​ bitrators to hold hear​ ings in Sin​ gapore but for the ar​ bitra​ tion to have its "seat" in the Net​ herlands. The "seat" is im​ p or​ tant be​ cause the law of the seat will fill in gaps left by ar​ bitr​ al rules, im​ p act the role of co​ urts with re​ gard to the role of ar​ bitrators, and might even over​ ride cer​ tain ar​ bitra​ tion rules. The law of the seat can even in​ flu​ ence the ul​ timate en​ for​ ceabil​ ity of any re​ sult​ ing award. Be​ cause of the im​ p or​ tance of the seat, many contra​ cts spec​ ify what it will be. While the govern​ ment will often want its juris​ dic​ tion to play that role, a foreign in​ v es​ tor will frequent​ ly have other ideas. The Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi ag​ ree​ ment il​ lustrates the levels of specific​ ity now frequent​ ly pro​ v ided. In Ar​ ticle 14.2 it clarif​ ies that UN​ CITR​ A L Rules will apply in case of ar​ bitra​ tion, that there shall be 3 ar​ bitrators, the lan​ guage of ar​ bitra​ tion shall be En​ glish, the ar​ bitrators will apply the laws and re​ gula​ tions of Mon​ golia to in​ terpreta​ tion of the ag​ ree​ ment, but the place of ar​ bitra​ tion shall be Lon​ don, and the ar​ bitr​ al pro​ ceed​ ings ad​ minis​ tered under UN​ CITR​ A L Rules by the Lon​ don Court of In​ ter​ nation​ al Ar​ bitra​ tion.

En​ for​ ce​ ment
Once ar​ bitrators issue an award, the winn​ ing party can take it to court to col​ lect its winn​ ings. Two treat​ ies make this re​ lative​ ly easy for vic​ tors by nar​ row​ ing the grounds for chal​ leng​ ing or re​ sist​ ing en​ for​ ce​ ment of any award. These treat​ ies are the 1958 Con​ v en​ tion on the Re​ cog​ ni​ tion and En​ for​ ce​ ment of Foreign Ar​ bitr​ al Awards (the "New York Con​ v en​ tion") and the 1965 Con​ v en​ tion on the Settle​ ment of In​ v est​ ment Dis​ p utes bet​ ween

193

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

States and Nation​ als of Other States (the "ICSID Con​ v en​ tion"). Each has rough​ ly 150 mem​ b​ er states. One key dif​ fer​ ence bet​ ween the two treat​ ies is that the New York Con​ ven​ tion per​ mits awards to be chal​ lenged if they are in​ con​ sistent with pub​ lic poli​ cy. The ICSID Con​ v en​ tion does not. There is cur​ rent​ ly no similar​ ly broad multi​ later​ al treaty that makes for easy en​ for​ ce​ ment of judici​ al awards. The Hague Con​ v en​ tion on the En​ for​ ce​ ment of Judg​ ments in Civil and Com​ mer​ ci​ al Matt​ ers pro​ v ides mech​ an​ isms to en​ for​ ce judici​ al judg​ ments be​ fore domes​ tic co​ urts, but has not yet en​ tered into force due to a lack of ratify ​ ing states. The Brus​ sels Con​ v en​ tion on the En​ for​ ce​ ment of Civil and Com​ mer​ ci​ al Judg​ ments is a similar treaty and is in force, but has a li​ mited scope: It helps winn​ ing part​ ies domiciled in European Union (EU) mem​ b​ er states en​ for​ ce judg​ ments in other EU states. It does not have the broad reach that the New York Con​ v en​ tion and the ICSID Con​ v en​ tion do.

Extra-Contractual Pro​ tec​ tions for In​ ves​ tors and Re​ stric​ tions on State Power: The Role of In​ vest​ ment Treat​ ies
Per​ haps the most im​ p or​ tant extra-contractual legal pro​ tec​ tion for foreign min​ ing com​ pan​ ies is what is known as an "in​ v est​ ment treaty". In​ v est​ ment treat​ ies are ag​ ree​ ments bet​ ween states in which each state party pro​ mises to pro​ v ide cer​ tain types of treat​ ment to in​ v es​ tors from the other state party. States com​ mit to treat foreign com​ p an​ ies "fair​ ly and equitab​ ly"; to pay com​ p en​ sa​ tion if the govern​ ment ex​ p rop ​ riates any foreign com​ pany's pro​ p er​ ty; to treat foreign com​ p an​ ies as well as domes​ tic com​ p an​ ies and com​ p an​ ies from other co​ unt​ ries; to pro​ v ide com​ p an​ ies' in​ v est​ ments "full pro​ tec​ tion and secur​ ity"; and to permit foreign com​ p an​ ies to free​ ly trans​ f​ er money in and out of the co​ unt​ ry. Some in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies also con​ tain pro​ v is​ ions re​ strict​ ing govern​ ments' ab​ ilit​ ies to im​ pose con​ di​ tions and re​ q uire​ ments on foreign com​ p an​ ies, such as joint ven​ ture re​ q uire​ ments, re​ q uire​ ments to pro​ cure goods or ser​ v ices loc​ al​ ly, and re​ q uire​ ments to trans​ f​ er technology. Im​ p or​ tant​ ly, in ad​ di​ tion to pro​ v id​ ing these pro​ tec​ tions for foreign com​ p an​ ies, in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies give foreign com​ p an​ ies a strong pro​ cedur​ al tool: the ab​ il​ ity to en​ for​ ce those pro​ tec​ tions. With few ex​ cep ​ tions (e.g., in cer​ tain human rights treat​ ies), most types of treat​ ies only allow states to in​ itiate dis​ p utes and seek re​ med​ ies for breach of the treaty. But in a not​ able de​ p ar​ ture from that pat​ tern, in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies allow foreign

194

Dis​ pute Avoidan ​ ce and Re​ solu​ tion

com​ p an​ ies to sue their host govern​ ments di​ rect​ ly and seek com​ p en​ sa​ tion for harms they have suf​ fered as a re​ sult of the treaty breach. The cases are de​ cided in ar​ bitra​ tion. If a foreign in​ v es​ tor is co​ v ered by one of these treat​ ies - of which there are now over 3000 worldwide - it thus gets an extra layer of pro​ tec​ tion. To show what this means: If a govern​ ment pas​ ses a law ex​ p rop ​ riat​ ing the mine, and a local court de​ ter​ mines that the govern​ ment does not need to pay the com​ p any any com​ pen​ sa​ tion for that "tak​ ing", the com​ p any could poten​ tial​ ly use the in​ v est​ ment treaty to sue the state and seek com​ p en​ sa​ tion from the govern​ ment for an ex​ p rop ​ ria​ tion. To date, com​ p an​ ies have used in​ v est​ ment treat​ ies to chal​ lenge a numb​ er of govern​ ment ac​ tions and in​ ac​ tions, many of which re​ late to dis​ p utes aris​ ing in min​ ing and other extra​ ctives pro​ jects. These in​ clude cases ar​ gu​ ing that: the govern​ ment ex​ p rop ​ riated a com​ p any's pro​ p er​ ty when it re​ v oked the com​ p any's op ​ erat​ ing per​ mit; the govern​ ment ex​ p rop ​ riated a com​ p any's pro​ p er​ ty and failed to treat it "fair​ ly and equitab​ ly" when it sought to re​ q uire backfill​ ing of the mine; the govern​ ment im​ p osed im​ p er​ missib​ le "per​ for​ mance re​ q uire​ ments" on a com​ p any when it re​ q uired it to in​ v est in re​ search and de​ v elop ​ ment; the govern​ ment dis​ criminated against a com​ p any when it took en​ for​ ce​ ment ac​ tion against it for viola​ tion of en​ v iron​ ment​ al re​ q uire​ ments but did not take similar ac​ tion against other com​ p an​ ies; the govern​ ment violated the "full pro​ tec​ tion and secur​ ity" ob​ liga​ tion because it failed to pro​ tect the in​ v est​ ment from los​ ses and dis​ rup ​ tions caused by local citizens; and the govern​ ment ex​ p rop ​ riated a com​ p any through a law re​ q uir​ ing min​ ing com​ p an​ ies to sell equ​ ity in​ terests to his​ torical​ ly dis​ ad​ v antaged groups. Com​ p lian​ ce with domes​ tic law is not a de​ fen​ se to a breach of an in​ v est​ ment treaty (or in​ ter​ nation​ al law more general​ ly). Even if the government's ac​ tion is en​ tire​ ly con​ sis​ tent

195

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

with its own law, it may still be in​ con​ sistent with the in​ v est​ ment treaty.

196

PLANN ​ I NG FOR TROUB ​ LE
A host of tri​ cky legal is​ sues can arise dur​ ing li​ fetime of a pro​ ject. Contra​ cts try to ac​ count for such even​ tualit​ ies through a variety of re​ lative​ ly stan​ dard clauses. This chapt​ er brief​ ly ex​ p lains some of these clauses and what to look for.

TRANS ​ FER​ / AS S IG N​ M E NT OF RIG HTS AND OB ​ L IG A​ TIONS , AND CHAN​ G E OF CON​ TROL
The contra​ ct needs to address which party can trans​ f​ er its rights and ob​ liga​ tions to whom, when and under what con​ di​ tions. Do you need the other part​ ies’ prior approv ​ al? Prior notice only? Veto right? First of right re​ fus​ al? Part​ ies that do not in​ clude a pro​ v is​ ion that co​ v​ ers these is​ sues could find them​ selves stuck with a partn​ er they do not know and do not like. Moreov ​ er, such a pro​ v is​ ion is a neces​ sa​ ry pre​ con​ di​ tion to allow the govern​ ment to tax the pro​ fits of a sale of as​ sets; with​ out rules on trans​ f​ ers, and cor​ res​ p ond​ ing fisc​ al tools, in​ v es​ tors have been able to sell their min​ ing rights for mill​ ions or bi​ ll​ ions of dol​ lars with​ out pay ​ ing any taxes on the sale to the state. More re​ cent​ ly, some govern​ ments are also re​ q uir​ ing in​ for​ ma​ tion about be​ nefici​ al ow​ nership up the chain. This is both an anti-corruption measure and an aid in de​ tect​ ing and as​ sert​ ing tax ob​ liga​ tions when off-shore gains are taxed. Trans​ f​ er fees or capit​ al gains taxes are dis​ cus​ sed in the chapt​ er, "Fisc​ al Re​ gimes".

197

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

AC​ COUNT​ ING , AUDIT AND RE ​ PORT​ ING OB ​ L IG A​ TIONS
A min​ ing contra​ ct pro​ v ides for many dif​ ferent types of pay ​ ments to be made over a long per​ iod of time. And in co​ unt​ ries that have yet to de​ v elop com​ p rehen​ sive min​ ing re​ gulato​ ry re​ gimes that in​ clude re​ p ort​ ing re​ q uire​ ments, the min​ ing contra​ ct may in​ clude such re​ p ort​ ing re​ q uire​ ments. It is im​ p or​ tant that the contra​ ct is clear about pay ​ ments to be made (as​ sum​ ing such in​ for​ ma​ tion is in​ cluded in the contra​ ct rath​ er than legis​ la​ tion), in​ clud​ ing when, where, how and how much, and the contra​ ct should be clear about the con​ tent and tim​ ing of re​ q uired re​ p orts. A care​ ful govern​ ment will nor​ mal​ ly seek re​ gular op ​ erat​ ing re​ p orts giv ​ ing quan​ titative in​ for​ ma​ tion as to the pro​ gress of a com​ p any's op ​ era​ tions, plus quar​ ter​ ly financial state​ ments and audited an​ nu​ al fin​ an​ ci​ al state​ ments. If the parent IMC is not a pub​ lic com​ pany with rea​ di​ ly avail​ able fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ for​ ma​ tion, the govern​ ment may want to re​ q uire its fin​ an​ ci​ al state​ ments as well, par​ ticular​ ly if it is a guaran​ tor of the ob​ liga​ tions of its local sub​ sidia​ ry. The contra​ ct should also have pro​ v is​ ions that give the govern​ ment the right to re​ v iew data un​ der​ ly ​ ing pay ​ ment com​ p uta​ tions or op ​ erat​ ing re​ p orts.

TER​ M INA​ TION
When part​ ies sign a min​ ing ag​ ree​ ment, they are in a sense gett​ ing mar​ ried. Those that marry may need to di​ v or​ ce. Thus, min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments should spec​ ify which part​ ies can ter​ minate the min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments and under which cir​ cumstan​ ces. There is al​ ways a pro​ v is​ ion that per​ mits ter​ mina​ tion by one party if the other party is in de​ fault in the per​ for​ mance of its ob​ liga​ tions under the contra​ ct, al​ though that is often heavi​ ly qualified by vari​ ous pro​ v is​ ions re​ q uir​ ing the de​ fault​ ing party to be given notice of the de​ fault and an op ​ p or​ tun​ ity to cure the de​ fault. But some​ times the part​ ies fail to con​ sid​ er the con​ sequ​ ences of a de​ fault ter​ mina​ tion: who owes what to whom, and what hap ​ p ens to the mine as​ sets, if any, al​ ready in place. The part​ ies may also agree on the situa​ tions in which a party may it​ self ter​ minate the contra​ ct and walk away -- in a sense, a no-fault di​ v or​ ce. In this case, they still need to

198

Plann ​ ing for Troub​ le

spec​ ify what hap ​ p ens to the mine as​ sets and wheth​ er (and when, if at all) the de​ cis​ ion to walk away should tri​ gg​ er any pay ​ ment ob​ liga​ tion. Ter​ mina​ tion clauses are es​ senti​ al and rare​ ly dis​ cus​ sed until the very end of negotia​ tions and yet, they will de​ ter​ mine the end of the mar​ riage. All part​ ies should think careful​ ly and dis​ cuss how they can “get out” of the mar​ riage, and make sure that the min​ ing contra​ ct clear​ ly sets forth all of the pos​ sibilit​ ies and the con​ sequ​ ences of ter​ mina​ tion for each type of ter​ mina​ tion.

S OL​ VEN​ CY OF THE M IN​ ING COM ​ PANY
Most IMCs con​ duct their min​ ing op ​ era​ tions through com​ p an​ ies that have no as​ sets other than the re​ levant min​ ing li​ cen​ se or contra​ ct, the mine op ​ erat​ ing as​ sets, and, per​ haps, the contra​ cts for sale of the mine out​ p ut. The parent IMC is not a party to the min​ ing contra​ ct, and the com​ p any's cash needs are co​ v ered by funds from the parent com​ pany, nor​ mal​ ly pro​ v ided on an as-needed basis. This means that if the op ​ erat​ ing com​ p any gets in troub​ le, or falls be​ hind on pay ​ ments to the state, the state has no ac​ cess to funds un​ less the IMC chooses to con​ tinue fund​ ing its op ​ erat​ ing sub​ sidia​ ry. Govern​ ments deal with this risk by re​ q uir​ ing the parent com​ p any to guaran​ tee the li​ abilit​ ies of its sub​ sidia​ ry. The amount of such guaran​ tees, and the con​ di​ tions under which they can be cal​ led upon, in​ v ol​ v e fair​ ly com​ p lex legal is​ sues re​ lat​ ing to ac​ tions that must be taken in order to call upon a guaran​ tee. Govern​ ments should not at​ tempt to negotiate such terms with​ out lawy ​ ers ex​ p erien​ ced in such matt​ ers. Often, par​ ticular​ ly with small​ er IMCs which may have weak​ er fin​ an​ ci​ al struc​ tures, govern​ ments in​ s​ ist on re​ ceiv ​ ing guaran​ tees (often in the form of lett​ ers of credit) from sol​ v ent fin​ an​ ci​ al in​ stitu​ tions. The amounts of such guaran​ tees are negoti​ able but usual​ ly re​ p resent a per​ cen​ tage of the over​ all es​ timated value of the contra​ ct. Again, such in​ stru​ ments in​ v ol​ v e a high​ ly tech​ n​ ical cor​ n​ er of the law and ex​ p ert legal skills are es​ senti​ al.

199

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

A govern​ ment may also con​ sid​ er what would be the con​ sequ​ ences for the mine as​ sets under local law should a min​ ing com​ p any de​ clare bankrupt​ cy. In many cases, the min​ ing com​ p any will have given its lend​ ers a mortgage on the mine as​ sets in order to fin​ an​ ce mine con​ struc​ tion. It may be neces​ sa​ ry for the govern​ ment to con​ sent to such a mortgage in order to en​ able the con​ struc​ tion of the mine, but if it does so, it should re​ quire, in the min​ ing contra​ ct, that the lend​ ers can​ not dis​ mantle the mine and sell off the as​ sets pieceme​ al with​ out the con​ sent of the state. A good lawy ​ er and a wise bank​ er can help the govern​ ment negotiators think through these is​ sues.

COR​ RUP​ TION
De​ spite in​ creas​ ing at​ ten​ tion to the issue, cor​ rup ​ tion re​ mains a chal​ lenge in many juris​ dic​ tions. In the last few years, many co​ unt​ ries have fol​ lowed the lead of the Uni​ ted States Foreign Cor​ rupt Prac​ tices Act, and have pas​ sed and have begun to en​ for​ ce laws that levy heavy penalt​ ies on com​ p an​ ies that par​ ticipate, di​ rect​ ly or in​ direct​ ly, in bribe​ ry of govern​ ment of​ fici​ als. For this rea​ son and busi​ ness rea​ sons, the large min​ ing com​ p an​ ies sub​ ject to such laws have be​ come much more care​ ful about the peo​ p le with whom they do busi​ ness and the way they con​ duct busi​ ness. As a re​ sult, if a li​ cen​ se is is​ sued to a small​ er com​ p any and the sur​ round​ ing cir​ cumstan​ ces sug​ gest cor​ rup ​ tion, the li​ cen​ see may find it im​ p os​ sible, after it makes a dis​ cove​ ry, to bring in a partn​ er with the fin​ an​ ci​ al capac​ ity needed to de​ v elop the mine even if cor​ rup ​ tion can​ not be pro​ v​ en. This may mean that the state has a valu​ able miner​ al asset held by a com​ p any that is not tech​ nical​ ly in de​ fault under its li​ cen​ se, but which is also un​ able to go for​ ward with mine de​ v elop ​ ment. The moral, of co​ ur​ se, is that govern​ ments may need to con​ sid​ er more careful​ ly than they some​ times do the na​ ture of the per​ sons to whom they are is​ su ​ ing min​ ing li​ cen​ ses and award​ ing min​ ing contra​ cts - not al​ ways easy to do in a min​ ing re​ gime in which prior​ ity is de​ ter​ mined by time of fil​ ing a claim.

200

Plann ​ ing for Troub​ le

In re​ gimes which re​ q uire ex​ p lora​ tion or min​ ing contra​ cts, this is some​ what eas​ i​ er to deal with if the contra​ ct form re​ q uires re​ p resen​ ta​ tion that the contra​ ct re​ cipient has not car​ ried out any cor​ rupt ac​ tivit​ ies (which can be de​ scribed in some de​ tail) in con​ nec​ tion with ob​ tain​ ing the contra​ ct. Breach of this re​ p resen​ ta​ tion can give the govern​ ment the right to ter​ minate the contra​ ct.

201

TO PUB ​ L ISH OR NOT TO PUB ​ L ISH?
Traditional​ ly, min​ ing contra​ cts have been shrouded in sec​ re​ cy. In some cases, they are not even shared with​ in govern​ ment. Even agen​ cies with re​ spon​ sibilit​ ies re​ lat​ ing to min​ ing op ​ era​ tions are some​ times not able to see the un​ der​ ly ​ ing contra​ ct. Cer​ tain​ ly those not party to the ag​ ree​ ment can only guess at the terms. This is in line with tradition​ al stan​ dard prac​ tice going be​ y ond the extra​ ctive in​ dust​ ries sec​ tor. Yet the merits of keep ​ ing deals con​ fiden​ ti​ al are in​ creasing​ ly ques​ tioned by govern​ ments and civil society, and even by some com​ p an​ ies. Govern​ ments are be​ com​ ing more and more open about their pro​ cure​ ment and contra​ cts with private part​ ies. This trend is ex​ tend​ ing to min​ ing, where trans​ p aren​ cy is in​ creasing​ ly the norm.

EVOLV​ ING B AS E S FOR DIS ​ CL OS URE
A grow​ ing numb​ er of govern​ ments now pub​ lish min​ ing contra​ cts, in​ clud​ ing Li​ beria, Peru, DRC, Guinea and Afghanis​ tan. Some have legis​ lated to re​ q uire dis​ closure. For ex​ am​ p le, Li​ beria’s Extra​ ctive In​ dust​ ries Trans​ p aren​ cy In​ itiative (LEITI) law man​ dates LEITI to “serve as one of the nation​ al de​ posito​ ries of all con​ cess​ ions, contra​ cts, and li​ cen​ ses and similar ag​ ree​ ments and rights gran​ ted by the Govern​ ment of Li​ beria to in​ dividu​ als and com​ pan​ ies in re​ spect of the logg​ ing, min​ ing, oil, forest​ ry, ag​ ricul​ ture and other de​ sig​ nated sec​ tors; and to grant mem​ b​ ers of the pub​ lic ac​ cess to such con​ cess​ ions and ag​ ree​ ments in keep​ ing with their status as pub​ lic docu​ ments.”

202

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

The law goes on to state that: "For the pur​ pose of this Act, contra​ ct trans​ paren​ cy shall mean (1) pub​ lic ac​ cessibil​ ity of materi​ al con​ ces​ sions/licen​ ses and ag​ ree​ ments re​ lated to the sec​ tors with​ in the scope of the LEITI as per Sec​ tion 5.4 hereof; and (2) the post-award re​ view and/or audit of the pro​ cess by and through which con​ cess​ ions, contra​ cts, and li​ cen​ ses are awar​ ded for ex​ plora​ tion and/or ex​ ploita​ tion of miner​ als, forests and other re​ sour​ ces in order to as​ cer​ tain that each award was made in com​ plian​ ce with applic​ able laws." A few govern​ ments dis​ close in ac​ cordan​ ce with broad​ er con​ stitution​ al or freedom of in​ for​ ma​ tion com​ mit​ ments. For ex​ am​ p le, Ar​ ticle 150 of the con​ stitu​ tion of Niger states: "Les contra​ ts de pro​ spec​ tion et d'exploita​ tion des re​ sour​ ces naturel​ les et du soussol ainsi que les re​ venus versés à l'État, désagrégés, société par société, sont in​ tég​ rale​ ment publiés au Journ​ al Of​ ficiel de la Répub​ lique du Niger." [Contra​ cts for ex​ plora​ tion and ex​ ploita​ tion of natur​ al re​ sour​ ces and the sub-soil as well as in​ come paid to the State, dis​ aggregated, com​ pany by com​ pany, are pub​ lished in full in the Of​ fici​ al Journ​ al of the Re​ pub​ lic of Niger.] Some, such as Guinea and DRC, simp ​ ly pub​ lish pur​ suant to volun​ ta​ ry com​ mit​ ments, not bac​ ked by any law. In some co​ unt​ ries, min​ ing ag​ ree​ ments are ratified by Par​ lia​ ment and therefore should auto​ matical​ ly be in the pub​ lic domain. Some contra​ cts also be​ come pub​ lic​ ly avail​ able via the in​ v es​ tor. Most com​ mon​ ly, these are re​ v ealed through fil​ ings with re​ gulators, such as those in Canada and the Uni​ ted States, by firms li​ sted on Toron​ to and New York stock ex​ chan​ ges. These will in​ clude contra​ cts that may not have been made pub​ lic by the govern​ ment. For ex​ am​ p le, the min​ ing com​ p any SEMAFO has three separate contra​ cts filed under the Canadian securit​ ies database SEDAR (Sys​ tem for Electronic Docu​ ment An​ alysis and Re​ triev ​ al), in​ clud​ ing their contra​ ct with the govern​ ment of Bur​ kina Faso. It re​ mains rare for the contra​ ct it​ self to spec​ ify that it will be dis​ closed. Howev ​ er, in co​ unt​ ries that have adop ​ ted contra​ ct trans​ p aren​ cy, you will find an ab​ s​ ence of con​ fiden​ tial​ ity clauses or even lan​ guage specify ​ ing pub​ lica​ tion in newer ag​ ree​ ments. For ex​ am​ -

203

To Pub​ lish or Not to Pub​ lish?

ple, the Liberia- Wes​ tern Clust​ er ag​ ree​ ment states in Ar​ ticle 33:10 that "The Govern​ ment shall make pub​ lic this Ag​ ree​ ment and any amend​ ments or writt​ en in​ terpreta​ tions of this Ag​ ree​ ment." Such clauses align with the re​ com​ mended lan​ guage in the MMDA states at sec​ tion 30.1 (a): "This Ag​ ree​ ment and the docu​ ments re​ quired to be sub​ mit​ ted under Sec​ tion 2.4, by any past and pre​ sent part​ ies is a pub​ lic docu​ ment, and shall be open to free in​ spec​ tion by mem​ b​ ers of the pub​ lic at the approp​ riate State of​ fice and at the files de​ sig​ nated in the fol​ low​ ing sub​ sec​ tion (e), and at the Com​ pany’s of​ fice in the State dur​ ing norm​ al of​ fice hours." Similar lan​ guage is now being in​ cor​ p orated into in​ dividu​ al co​ unt​ ry model ag​ ree​ ments.

IS DIS ​ CL OS URE A B RE ACH OF CONTRA​ CT?
How is pub​ lica​ tion of ex​ ist​ ing deals re​ con​ ciled with the ex​ ist​ ence of con​ fiden​ tial​ ity clauses? When ex​ amined close​ ly, the idea that cur​ rent ag​ ree​ ments must re​ main sec​ ret is a myth. Most govern​ ments could pub​ lish their min​ ing contra​ cts with​ out risk of legal con​ sequ​ ence. Con​ fiden​ tial​ ity clauses may be more nuan​ ced than ex​ p ec​ ted. Typical​ ly, re​ stric​ tions are li​ mited to “in​ for​ ma​ tion and data” and not neces​ sari​ ly the contra​ ct it​ self. For ex​ am​ p le, the Australia-McArthur River Pro​ ject ag​ ree​ ment specif​ ies (Ar​ ticle 24) that: "Ex​ cept to the ex​ tent ot​ herw​ ise re​ quired by law or the Stock Ex​ chan​ ge Li​ st​ ing Rules, the Ter​ rito​ ry and the Com​ pany agree that a party shall not make pub​ lic any con​ fiden​ ti​ al in​ for​ ma​ tion pro​ vided by the other party pur​ suant to this Ag​ ree​ ment with​ out first ob​ tain​ ing the con​ sent of the other party." The Sier​ ra Leone - Sier​ ra Rutile contra​ ct similar​ ly notes: "The Govern​ ment will keep con​ fiden​ ti​ al all in​ for​ ma​ tion pro​ vided to it by the Com​ pany, wheth​ er be​ fore or after the date of this Ag​ ree​ ment and con​ firms that

204

Legal and Negotia​ tion Con ​ sidera​ tions

it shall not dis​ close such in​ for​ ma​ tion to any third party with​ out the Com​ pany's prior writt​ en con​ sent." There is cer​ tain​ ly no shor​ tage of data generated in re​ la​ tion to a modern min​ ing op ​ era​ tion – seis​ mic, geolog​ ical, drill​ ing and trad​ ing data. Much of this may be just​ ifiab​ ly pro​ p rieta​ ry or com​ mer​ cial​ ly sen​ sitive. Yet such in​ for​ ma​ tion does not sur​ face in min​ ing contra​ ct docu​ ments. Where dis​ closure has oc​ cur​ red, it has not ten​ ded to generate op ​ p osi​ tion from eith​ er party. Even where the law does not re​ q uire dis​ closure, as in Guinea, the govern​ ment has dis​ closed ag​ ree​ ments retro​ ac​ tive​ ly with​ out issue. Moreov ​ er, many contra​ cts are al​ ready avail​ able if you are able and will​ ing to pay to ac​ cess high-cost com​ mer​ ci​ al databases. These are typical​ ly used with​ in in​ dust​ ry. So, de​ spite the legal grey area, com​ p an​ ies are re​ gular​ ly ac​ cess​ ing ag​ ree​ ments of com​ p etitors, which ques​ tions the valid​ ity of al​ leged con​ cerns about dis​ clos​ ing com​ mer​ ci​ al sen​ sitiv ​ ity. The real issue is as​ y m​ metric ac​ cess to contra​ ct data-- not the un​ availabil​ ity of such data.

How to Do it?
As with many newer trends, the nuts and bolts of the pro​ cess are still being tes​ ted. In co​ unt​ ries where contra​ ct trans​ p aren​ cy is re​ q uired, there can be am​ biguit​ ies as to the “what, when, where, who and how” of dis​ closure. Neith​ er re​ levant legis​ la​ tion nor the contra​ ct it​ self may spec​ ify when the contra​ ct should be made pub​ lic​ ly avail​ able. It may not spec​ ify where contra​ cts will be avail​ able – pub​ lished in newspap ​ ers, in the nation​ al gazet​ te, on a de​ dicated govern​ ment web​ site? In some cases, only a sum​ ma​ ry of key terms is made avail​ able (this re​ mains an opt​ ion for com​ p an​ ies in pro​ jects with IFC in​ vest​ ment). But who de​ ter​ mines what is “key”? In Li​ beria, contra​ cts are pub​ lished on the multi-stakeholder LEITI web​ site. In Guinea, the govern​ ment created a de​ dicated web​ site to post all contra​ cts with an​ nota​ tions of key pro​ v is​ ions to facilitate un​ derstand​ ing of the key terms (contra​ tsminiersguinee.org).

205

To Pub​ lish or Not to Pub​ lish?

Why Pub​ lish?
Per​ haps the real ques​ tion should be “why not”? Putt​ ing contra​ ct terms in the pub​ lic domain can be rea​ ssur​ ing to in​ v es​ tors and local stakehold​ ers alike. Of​ fici​ als negotiat​ ing on be​ half of their govern​ ments may be even more care​ ful to en​ sure they pro​ tect the pub​ lic in​ terest when they know the re​ sult​ ing deal will be made pub​ lic. Pub​ lica​ tion can help build trust bet​ ween contra​ ct​ ing part​ ies and society. It can avoid mis​ p er​ cep ​ tions around the con​ tents of the ag​ ree​ ments. This is im​ p or​ tant for govern​ ment, but also for the min​ ing com​ p any, which may be​ come a local pre​ s​ ence for de​ cades. Pub​ lica​ tion en​ ables broad​ er an​ alysis of the deal. Above all, it can facilitate more ef​ fective monitor​ ing of contra​ ct im​ p lemen​ ta​ tion both by govern​ ment and by third part​ ies. For ex​ am​ p le, civil society groups are ac​ tive​ ly monitor​ ing com​ p lian​ ce with par​ ticular contra​ ctu​ al ob​ liga​ tions in co​ unt​ ries as di​ v er​ se as Peru, Bur​ kina Faso, Afghanis​ tan and Canada. Com​ p an​ ies, too, are also keen to an​ alyze deals awar​ ded to com​ p etitors and are often the most vigilant in not​ ing pos​ sible in​ dica​ tions of cor​ rup ​ tion. Such motiva​ tions help ex​ p lain why contra​ ct dis​ closure is now re​ com​ mended good prac​ tice ac​ cord​ ing to the World Bank and the In​ ter​ nation​ al Moneta​ ry Fund. The IFC re​ q uires the dis​ closure of the prin​ cip ​ al contra​ ct for min​ ing pro​ jects in which it in​ v ests. A numb​ er of com​ p an​ ies, such as Rio Tinto, have stated that they have no ob​ jec​ tion to contra​ ct dis​ closure. It is in line with ICMM’s prin​ ci​ p les. The new EITI stan​ dard en​ courages par​ ticipat​ ing co​ unt​ ries to dis​ close contra​ cts or to ex​ p lain the basis for non-disclosure. This is pro​ mpt​ ing ad​ dition​ al co​ unt​ ries, such as Sen​ eg​ al and Mozam​ bique, to com​ mit to mak​ ing min​ ing contra​ cts trans​ p arent, going for​ ward. The Open Contra​ ct​ ing Partnership, a new multi-stakeholder ef​ fort, is de​ v elop ​ ing a stan​ dard for re​ lease of contra​ ct in​ for​ ma​ tion, in​ clud​ ing an adap ​ ta​ tion for extra​ ctives contra​ cts.

206

AP ​ P ENDIX
G LOS ​ S A​ RY L IS T OF COM ​ MON​ LY RE​ FEREN​ CE D CONTRA​ CTS

GLOS ​ SA​ RY
(Terms as used in this book)

Amor​ tiz a​ tion
Pro​ cess of de​ creas​ ing an amount owed over a per​ iod. It re​ f​ ers to pay ​ ing debt con​ sist​ ing of in​ terest and part of the prin​ cip ​ al by mak​ ing re​ gular pay ​ ments over a per​ iod of time.

Biome
Major ecolog​ ical com​ mun​ ity type often re​ fer​ red to as an ecosys​ tem.

B rown field
In​ v est​ ment in ex​ ist​ ing in​ frastruc​ ture.

C a pi t ​ al E x​ pe n ​ di​ t u r e ( C A P E X)
Money in​ v es​ ted to buy or upgrade a fixed asset (e.g., build​ ing or mac​ hine​ ry) that will create fu​ ture be​ nefits that ex​ tends be​ y ond the tax year. Its co​ un​ terpart, op ​ erat​ ing ex​ pen​ di​ ture (OPEX), is the cost of runn​ ing it. The purchase of a photocopi​ er, for ex​ am​ p le, would in​ v ol​ v e CAPEX, while the paper and toner re​ p resents OPEX.

208

Ap​ pendix

Con ​ sor​ tium
Busi​ ness ag​ ree​ ment where part​ ies agree to par​ ticipate in a com​ mon ac​ tiv ​ ity or pool their re​ sour​ ces in order to ac​ hieve a com​ mon goal. Each party re​ tains its separate legal status and the con​ sor​ tium's con​ trol is li​ mited and de​ lineated in the contra​ ct.

De​ pr e cia​ tion
De​ crease or loss in value be​ cause of age, wear or mar​ ket con​ di​ tions. In ac​ coun​ tan​ cy, it re​ f​ ers to two as​ p ects of the same con​ cept: (a) the de​ crease in value of as​ sets, and (b) the al​ loca​ tion of the cost of as​ sets to per​ iods in which the as​ sets are used. It can be used as an in​ come tax de​ duc​ tion that al​ lows a tax​ p ay ​ er to re​ cov ​ er the cost or other basis of cer​ tain pro​ p er​ ty.

Dou b ​ le Taxa​ tion Prin ​ ci​ ple
Re​ f​ ers to in​ come taxes that are paid twice on the same sour​ ce of in​ come. It oc​ curs when cor​ p ora​ tions are con​ sidered separate legal en​ tit​ ies from their sharehold​ ers and both pay taxes (cor​ p ora​ tions over their earn​ ings and sharehold​ ers over the di​ v idends). It is often mitigated by tax treat​ ies bet​ ween co​ unt​ ries.

Du e Di​ lig​ en ce
In​ v es​ tiga​ tion car​ ried out by a party to learn and ver​ ify the full background, his​ to​ ry and cur​ rent situa​ tion of a party with which it may contra​ ct or an asset it may ac​ q uire.

E con om​ ies Of S cale
Oc​ curr​ ing when the cost per unit of out​ p ut di​ minis​ hes with the in​ creas​ ing scale of the pro​ ject as fixed costs are spread out over more units of pro​ duc​ tion.

209

Glos​ sa​ ry

E con om​ i e s O f S c o pe
In the con​ text of a min​ ing and re​ lated in​ frastruc​ ture op ​ era​ tion, such econom​ ies of scope will arise when the out​ p uts of one type of in​ frastruc​ ture can be used as the in​ p uts of an​ oth​ er type of in​ frastruc​ ture.

Fly R ock
Rocks blown up or brok​ en apart by ex​ p losives.

Free On B oard ( FOB )
Trade term re​ q uir​ ing the sell​ er to de​ liv ​ er goods on board a ves​ sel de​ sig​ nated by the buyer. It means that the sup ​ p lier/sell​ er pays for trans​ p or​ ta​ tion of the goods.

Free Prior An d In ​ for​ med Con ​ s en t ( FPIC)
Prin​ ci​ p le that in​ digen​ ous com​ munit​ ies have the right to give or with​ hold their con​ sent to pro​ p osed pro​ jects that may af​ fect the lands they cus​ tomari​ ly own, oc​ cupy or ot​ herw​ ise use. In the con​ text of min​ ing, is in​ creasing​ ly being ad​ v ocated to in​ clude other com​ munit​ ies that will be af​ fected by min​ ing pro​ jects.

Green​ field
In​ v est​ ment in new as​ sets (mine or in​ frastruc​ ture) with no pre-existence.

H edg​ in g
In​ v est​ ment posi​ tion in​ ten​ ded to of​ fset poten​ ti​ al los​ ses/gains that may be in​ cur​ red by a com​ p an​ ion in​ v est​ ment. In sim​ p le lan​ guage, a hedge is a tech​ nique used to re​ duce any sub​ stan​ ti​ al los​ ses/gains suf​ fered by an in​ dividu​ al or an or​ ganiza​ tion.

210

Ap​ pendix

Home Co​ unt​ ry
Co​ unt​ ry where an in​ v es​ tor is re​ sident.

Hos t Co​ unt​ ry
Co​ unt​ ry where an in​ v est​ ment is made. Often re​ fer​ red to when the in​ v est​ ment is made by a foreign in​ v es​ tor.

In ​ ter​ n ation ​ al M in ​ in g Com​ pan y ( IM C)
Used to refer to foreign min​ ing com​ p an​ ies.

In ​ vest​ men t Treaty
Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween states in which they com​ mit to pro​ v ide co​ v ered foreign in​ v es​ tors speci​ al sub​ stan​ tive and pro​ cedur​ al pro​ tec​ tions. An in​ v est​ ment treaty may be a bi​ later​ al in​ v est​ ment treaty (BIT), multi​ later​ al in​ v est​ ment treaty, or in​ v est​ ment chapt​ er that is part of a bi​ later​ al or multi​ later​ al free trade ag​ ree​ ment.

Join t Ven ​ tu r e ( JV) Ag​ ree​ ment
Ag​ ree​ ment where two or more com​ p an​ ies agree to share pro​ fit, loss and con​ trol in a cer​ tain pro​ ject. This is com​ mon where the pro​ ject is too big for a single com​ p any to fin​ an​ ce on its own. Partn​ ers can be from both the pub​ lic and private sec​ tors.

Lon​ don Met​ als E x​ ch an ​ ge
Cent​ er for in​ dustri​ al met​ als trad​ ing and price-risk man​ age​ ment. More than 80% of glob​ al non-ferrous busi​ ness is con​ duc​ ted here. Its prices are used as the glob​ al be​ nchmark.

211

Glos​ sa​ ry

Nation ​ al M in ​ in g Com​ pan y ( N M C)
Some​ times used to refer to a state-owned min​ ing com​ p any.

Op​ erat​ in g E x​ pe n ​ di​ t u r e ( O P E X)
On​ go​ ing ex​ p en​ se that a busi​ ness in​ curs for per​ form​ ing its norm​ al busi​ ness op ​ era​ tions. Its co​ un​ terpart CAPEX is the cost of buy ​ ing it. The purchase of a photocopi​ er, for ex​ am​ ple, would in​ v ol​ v e CAPEX while purchase of the paper and toner re​ p resents OPEX.

Op​ po r ​ tun​ ity Cos t
Value of the best al​ ter​ native for​ gone in a situa​ tion in which a choice needs to be made bet​ ween sever​ al mutual​ ly ex​ clusive al​ ter​ natives (e.g., extra​ ct or not).

Rent
Re​ v enue stream that accrues above and be​ y ond a norm​ al economic re​ turn on ac​ tiv ​ ity or pro​ fit. The con​ cept was first de​ v eloped by econom​ ists Adam Smith and David Ricar​ do in th th the 18 and 19 cen​ tu​ ries. It dominates the economics of the glob​ al min​ ing in​ dust​ ry be​ cause of sharp ​ ly vary ​ ing cost of pro​ duc​ tion for a com​ mod​ ity sold at rough​ ly the same price. Econom​ ists dif​ feren​ tiate bet​ ween rent and a norm​ al re​ turn on capit​ al, or pro​ fit, and argue that it should be treated dif​ ferent​ ly. Rent en​ courages rent seek​ ing, an in​ tegr​ al part of the con​ cept of Re​ sour​ ce Curse.

R i gh t - O f - W a y
Type of eas​ e​ ment gran​ ted or re​ ser​ v ed over the land for trans​ p or​ ta​ tion pur​ p oses.

212

Ap​ pendix

S oci​ al Li​ cen ​ s e T o Op​ erate
Con​ cept ex​ p ress​ ing the on​ go​ ing ac​ ceptan​ ce of the pro​ ject by the sur​ round​ ing com​ mun​ ity.

Tail​ in g
Materi​ al left over after the extra​ c​ tion of ore.

Tran s​ f​ er Pric​ in g
Price at which di​ v is​ ions of min​ ing (or other) com​ p an​ ies trans​ act with each other. Trans​ ac​ tions may in​ clude the trade of sup ​ p l​ ies or ser​ v ices among the part​ ies. This price is below the mar​ ket price.

Was te R ock
Rock that must be re​ moved in order to gain ac​ cess to the de​ sired miner​ al.

213

LIST OF COM ​ M ON ​ L Y RE ​ FEREN ​ C ED CONTRA ​ C TS
Afghanis​ tan: Qara Zag​ han Gold Pro​ ject Contra​ ct bet​ ween Kryst​ al Natur​ al Re​ sour​ ces Com​ p any and the Minist​ ry of Mines of the Is​ lamic Re​ p ub​ lic of Afghanis​ tan (Janua​ ry 10, 2011) ("Afghanis​ tan - Qara Zag​ han (2011)") Australia: McArthur River Pro​ ject Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Northern Ter​ rito​ ry of Australia and Mount Isa Mines Ltd. (May 4, 2007) ("Australia - McArthur River Pro​ ject (2007)") De​ moc​ ratic Re​ p ub​ lic of the Congo: Avenant No. 1 à la Minière Amendée et Re​ for​ mulée du Sep ​ tembre 2005 entre Répub​ lique Démoc​ ratique du Congo et La Générale des Carriéres et des Mines et Lun​ din Hold​ ings Ltd. et Tenke Fun​ gurume Min​ ing S.A.R.L. (De​ cemb​ er 11, 2010) ("DRC - Tenke Fun​ gurume (2010)") Ecuador: Contra​ to de Ex​ p lotac​ ion Minera Otor​ gado por Minis​ terio de Re​ cur​ sos Naturales no Re​ nov ​ ables a favor de La Compañía Ecuacor​ rien​ te S.A. (March 5, 2012) ("Ecuador Ecuacor​ rien​ te (2012)") Guinea: Con​ v en​ tion de Base Entre La Répub​ lique de Guinée et BSG Re​ sour​ ces (16 De​ cembre 2009) ("Guinée - Zogota, (2009)") Guinea: Con​ v en​ tion de Base Entre La Répub​ lique de Guinée et Alliance Min​ ing Com​ modit​ ies (Juin 2010) ("Guinée - Koum​ bia (2010)")

214

Ap​ pendix

Guinea: Con​ v en​ tion de Base Entre La Répub​ lique de Guinée et Simf​ er SA La Société Pour L'Ex​ p loita​ tion des Gise​ ments de fer de Siman​ dou (26 Novembre 2002) ("Guinée - Simf​ er (2002)") Li​ beria: Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of the Re​ p ub​ lic of Li​ beria, China-Union (Hong Kong) Min​ ing Co., Ltd. and China-Union In​ v est​ ment (Li​ beria) Bong Mines Co., Ltd. (Janua​ ry 19, 2009) ("Li​ beria - China Union (2009)") Li​ beria: Ex​ p lora​ tion Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of the Re​ p ub​ lic of Li​ beria and Af​ rican Aura Re​ sour​ ces Li​ mited (Feb​ rura​ ry, 27, 2004) ("Li​ beria - Af​ rica Aura Re​ sour​ ces (2004)") Li​ beria: Amen​ ded Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of the Re​ p ub​ lic of Li​ beria and Mitt​ al Steel Hold​ ing A.G. and Mitt​ al Steel (Li​ beria) Hold​ ings Ltd. (De​ cemb​ er 28, 2006, amend​ ing the ag​ ree​ ment of August 17, 2005) ("Li​ beria - Mitt​ al (2006)") Li​ beria: Iron Ore Apprais​ al and Ex​ p lora​ tion Ag​ ree​ ment for the Putu Range bet​ ween the Re​ p ub​ lic of Li​ beria and Mano River Iron Ore (Li​ beria) Inc. (May 18, 2005) ("Liberia-Mano River-Exploration (2005)") Li​ beria: Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of the Re​ p ub​ lic of Li​ beria, Putu Iron Ore Min​ ing, Inc., and Mano River Iron Ore Ltd. (Sep ​ temb​ er 2, 2010) ("Li​ beria - Putu (2010)") Li​ beria: Miner​ al De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of Li​ beria and Wes​ tern Clust​ er Li​ mited, Sesa Goa Li​ mited, Bloom Foun​ tain Li​ mited, Elenil​ to Miner​ als & Min​ ing LLC ("Li​ beria - Wes​ tern Clust​ er (2011)") Mon​ golia: In​ v est​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of Mon​ golia and Ivan​ hoe Mines Mon​ golia Inc. LLC and Ivan​ hoe Mines Ltd. and Rio Tinto In​ ter​ nation​ al Hold​ ings Ltd. (Oct. 6, 2009) ("Mon​ golia - Oyu Tol​ goi (2009)") Sier​ ra Leone: Ag​ ree​ ment bet​ ween the Govern​ ment of the Re​ p ub​ lic of Sier​ ra Leone and Sier​ ra Rutile Ltd. (Novemb​ er 20, 2001) ("Sier​ ra Leone - Sier​ ra Rutile (2001)")

215

List of Com​ mon ​ ly Re​ feren ​ ced Contra​ cts

Sier​ ra Leone: Draft Model Min​ ing De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment (July 2012) ("Sier​ ra Leone MMDA (2012)") Model Mine De​ v elop ​ ment Ag​ ree​ ment 1.0 (April 4, 2011) ("MMDA")

216

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful