2.1 About social performance review and planning

Social performance review and planning encompasses the identification of appropriate, long-term, and strategic social performance objectives. It helps to deliver on Anglo American’s Purpose ‘to re-imagine mining to improve people’s lives.’ Long-term social performance objectives are set based on an understanding of the internal and external context, an analysis of stakeholder engagements and a review of grievances and incidents. Planning and review also support the development of an annual implementation plan to work towards achieving those objectives and to manage potential social and human rights impacts and risks.

Figure 2.1 provides an overview of the social performance review and planning process, including key inputs (baseline and context review; review of findings from stakeholder engagement, incident and grievance management and SHIRA) and outputs (SMP and SAR).

FIGURE 2.1 - Overview of Social Performance Review and Planning

Link to Sustainable Mining Plan

The Sustainable Mining Plan goes beyond compliance with legislation or regulatory requirements and comprises mutually reinforcing elements that will positively transform how our stakeholders experience our business, both locally and globally. The Sustainable Mining Plan is built around three global sustainability pillars (Trusted Corporate Leader, Thriving Communities and Healthy Environment) and is underpinned by our Critical Foundations which are common minimum requirements. The Social Way is one of the Critical Foundations of the Sustainable Mining Plan. A core element of the Sustainable Mining Plan is to bring long-term and sustainable development opportunities to the regions around our operations through Collaborative Regional Development.

Every Anglo American-managed operation is required to develop a five-year sustainability plan that delivers the detailed implementation plans for achieving the Sustainable Mining Plan pillars and stretch goals. The five-year sustainability plans should be aligned with and integrated into the site’s Life of Asset Plan.

Link to Life of Asset Plan

A site’s Life of Asset Plan (LoAP) is typically updated every three to five years or as significant changes occur in business context or objectives. The LoAP process is described in Figure 2.2. It is highly collaborative and includes multiple approval and review points, in which the Social Performance team should participate.

The key deliverables and activities for the Social Performance team are as follows, explained in more detail below:

Terms of Reference (ToR) – providing input into the ToR for the LoAP, which provides strategic direction and scope for the development of the LoAP from a social performance perspective.
Design Criteria Proforma (DCP) – writing the DCP for Social Performance, which provides planning input, assumptions and constraints for the development of the LoAP.
Review – participating in the cross-functional mine design and risk reviews with the objective of reviewing the draft LoAP from a social performance risk and impact perspective.
Social Performance Implementation Plan – writing the Social Performance Plan, which includes an implementation plan, schedule and cost estimate for delivering the social performance aspects of the LoAP.
Social Performance Chapter of the LoAP Report – writing the Social Performance Chapter of the LoAP Report, which provides an overview of the key social performance issues, objectives, milestones and plans for delivering the LoAP.
Integration into Site Plans and Budget – ensure that the social performance activities required to deliver the LoAP are integrated into site-level plans and resourcing, including the Social Management Plan.

Terms of Reference

In order to prepare the draft LoAP, the LoAP team needs to understand the site’s external context (see 2.2 Task 3) and its commitments register. The existing long-term social performance objectives (see 2.2 Task 5) can also be informative in preparing the LoAP. These issues should therefore be included in the Terms of Reference of the LoAP.

Design Criteria Proforma

The Design Criteria Proforma (DCP) follows a set format for inclusion of design criteria, considerations and requirements to be considered in the development of the LoAP. Sites should include:

Relevant context and baseline information: a summary of key issues and developments in context and baselines, to provide the LoAP team with an understanding of the social environment that may be affected or that may pose a risk to the business.
Constraints and opportunities: an overview of specific social performance constraints (including commitments made) and opportunities that need to be considered to deliver the draft LoAP, including:
- Commitments made to stakeholders that may restrict or limit planning i.e. agreements to only blast at certain times; agreements on limits to dust, noise, vibrations or other impacts; agreements to employ certain numbers or percentages of host community members; agreements related to land use; etc.
- Limits to accessing land i.e. areas being used by community members for economic or livelihood purposes; areas being used by community members for residential purposes; the timing, costs and requirements for accessing certain portions of land through securing lease agreements or purchasing property; etc.
- Areas identified as cultural heritage or sites of cultural or archaeological importance and associated buffer zones. Where relevant this may include time, costs and requirements should permits be required for relocation or removal.
Key potential social and human rights impacts and risks to the business associated with the delivery of the draft LoAP.
Budgetary and scheduling implications to deliver the draft LoAP.

Review of Draft LoAP

The Social Performance team should participate in the cross-functional mine design and risk review and subsequent Preliminary Business Risk and Mitigation Plan Review to critically assess the potential impacts and risks associated with the draft LoAP. The objectives of the reviews are to:

Identify opportunities to minimise adverse impact and maximise stakeholder value.
Identify potential adverse social and human rights impacts on external stakeholders associated with new or changed activities proposed in the LoAP (e.g. a proposed increase in the size of a waste-rock dump may require land acquisition, resulting in physical or economic displacement).
Identify potential risks to the business (e.g. an increase in the amount of site traffic in local communities arising from construction activities may result in community protests where local communities have previously indicated that they will not tolerate more site vehicles).
Identify any conflicting or opportunistic aspects relevant to the Sustainable Mining Plan stretch goals, current progress against targets and any potential impact of the LoAP on achieving these targets.
Identify key requirements for creating an enabling environment and supporting the implementation of the LoAP.
Identify the implications in terms of required social performance activities, timelines, and resourcing to deliver the draft LoAP (e.g. the construction of an access road may require an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and community consultation which might impact schedule and budget).

Where potential significant adverse impacts to external stakeholders, risks to the business, and/or implications in terms of timelines and resourcing are identified, these must be communicated to the LoAP team and the SPMC so that:

Adjustments can be made to the LoAP activities, schedule, and/or budget, in order to avoid or reduce potential adverse social and human rights impacts and risks to the business and include adequate time and budget for analysis and relevant controls.
There is internal awareness of, and agreement on, the implications of the LoAP in terms of potential social and human rights impacts, risks to the business, social performance budget, and required timelines.

Social Performance Implementation Plan

The site’s social performance team should write the Social Performance Implementation Plan, which includes an implementation plan, schedule and cost estimate for delivering the social performance aspects of the LoAP.

Social Performance Chapter Report

The site’s social performance team should write the Social Performance Chapter of the LoAP Report, which provides an overview of the key social performance issues, objectives, milestones and plans for delivering the LoAP.

Integration into Site Plans and Budget

Once aligned and approved in the LoAP, the Social Performance requirements identified must be translated into the 5-year business plan and budget owned by the site’s General Manager. It is through the annual planning cycle that business objectives are operationalised in line with the Anglo American Operating Model. The Social Performance team supports this process by providing the necessary budget and resourcing inputs for the plan, with input from BU and Group as required.

The social performance implications of the final LoAP should also be reflected in the social performance review and planning process and in the SMP. In some cases, for example, this could mean that long-term social performance objectives need to be updated (see 2.2 Task 5), or that new or different baseline data needs to be collected (see 2.2 Task 5). In other cases, no additional activities may be necessary.

Lifecycle planning

Social Performance Review and Planning should begin early in the Project Development phase and continue until Post-Closure.

Social Performance Review and Planning needs to reflect an appropriate level of consideration for future lifecycle transitions. Significant changes or developments within each lifecycle stage (e.g. stay-in-business or expansion projects) should be considered.

Planning for social transition (i.e. mine closure) should be incorporated in initial project design and throughout the operations phase. With five years of life of mine remaining, a Closure Social Impact Assessment must be completed. The results of the Closure Social Impact Assessment should be incorporated into the SMP.

Sites in Care and Maintenance are not required to undertake full Social Performance Review and Planning (e.g. baseline updates, long-term objectives) but should continue to produce an annual implementation plan as part of the SMP . Sites going back into operations after being on Care and Maintenance should immediately conduct a comprehensive update to their baseline data collection and context review.

TABLE 2.1 - Social Performance activities across the lifecycle

Discovery

Early stakeholder mapping and engagement. Ongoing grievance and incident management.
Regular analysis of social/human rights risks and potential impacts caused by the Discovery activity, and development and implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures, commensurate to the level of risk and potential impacts in the context of the Discovery activities.
Initial social and economic baseline data collection.
Initial assessment of local capacity and needs to inform the planning and implementation of strategic SED projects and local procurement and employment programmes for Discovery activities. Start of strategic SED activities, typically focused on local procurement and local employment.
Social performance capability, including resourcing, systems and processes, should be commensurate with the context and level of potential impacts and risks.
Detailed guidance on social performance review and planning, impact and risk assessment, and stakeholder engagement for Discovery is provided in the Discovery section of the toolkit.

Project development

Analysis of social and human rights risks and potential impacts caused by the Project activity, and development and implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures, commensurate with the level of risk and potential impacts in the context of the activities being undertaken to plan the Project.
Detailed social and economic baseline data collection. Analysis of potential social and human rights impacts and risks related to Project development, construction, and operation, and development of mitigation/enhancement measures, in the context of the various options for implementation of the project during options analysis. This typically includes the development of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. Its scope depends on context and should be commensurate with the level of risk and potential impacts, and should consider all topics covered in section 4, Impact and Risk Prevention and Management, of the toolkit.
Planning and implementation of physical and/or economic displacement as needed, acquisition of land required for project implementation.
Stakeholder engagement, including establishment of Community Engagement Forum (CEF).
Assessment of local capacity and needs to inform the planning and preparation of longer-term strategic SED projects.
Some SED programmes, such as local supplier development and local employment programmes, may need to commence to create an enabling environment for the Project.
Social performance capability, including resourcing, systems and processes, should be commensurate with the context and level of impacts and risks of the project under development.
Relevant Sustainable Mining Plan goals and milestones should be included during project planning.
Project-specific requirements on social performance review and planning, impact and risk assessment, and stakeholder engagement for Projects is provided in the Investment Development Model’s Investment Criteria by Stage and associated guidance.

Construction

With a ramp-up and change in site activities during the construction phase, risks and potential impacts must be carefully managed. Potential social and human rights impacts and risks during construction depend on context, but typically include an increase in traffic on public roads, risks and potential impacts related to worker accommodation, contractor social management, security, site-induced in-migration, conflict, security, social land management, environmental impacts, etc.
Social performance capability, including resourcing, systems and processes, should be commensurate with the context and level of risk and potential impacts of the construction activities. The size of the Social Performance team or other social performance-related resources and support is typically larger during construction and operations compared with Discovery and Project Development.
Annual analysis of potential social/human rights impacts and risks, and implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures related to construction activities.
Ongoing stakeholder engagement via the CEF and other relevant stakeholder engagement approaches, including grievance and incident management.
Continuous preparation of long-term SED initiatives. Implementation of long-term sustainable SED projects begins.

Operations

Social performance capability, including resourcing, systems and processes, should be commensurate with the context and scale of impacts and risks.
Annual analysis of potential social and human rights impacts and risks, and ongoing implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures related to operational activities.
Ongoing stakeholder engagement via the Community Engagement Forum and other relevant stakeholder engagement approaches, including grievance and incident management.
Implementation and ongoing planning and development of long-term sustainable SED projects continues.

Care and maintenance

Significantly reduced activities and number of workers on site typically results in a reduction in social and human rights impacts and risks.
Social performance capability, including resourcing, systems and processes, should be commensurate with the context and level of potential social and human rights impacts and risks. This capability may reduce significantly if a site is on Care and Maintenance.
Annual analysis of potential social/human rights impacts and risks, and ongoing implementation of mitigation/ enhancement measures as relevant to the Care and Maintenance context.
Regular but reduced stakeholder engagement via the CEF and other relevant stakeholder engagement approaches, with the aim of maintaining stakeholder relationships and informing them of developments and timings. Ongoing grievance and incident management is needed.
Implementation of long-term sustainable SED projects may or may not continue. Delivery of short-term SED projects to ensure continued support by communities may or may not be needed.

Closure

Annual analysis of potential social/human rights impacts and risks, and ongoing implementation of mitigation/ enhancement measures as relevant to the social transition context. A winding-down and halting of production may result in out-migration, a reduction in employment and procurement opportunities, a phasing out/handover of SED programmes, etc.
Ongoing stakeholder engagement via the CEF and other relevant stakeholder engagement approaches should include social transition-related issues, such as agreeing on a closure vision, closure criteria, and post-closure land use. Ongoing grievance and incident management.
Social transition planning requires extensive social performance capability, resourcing, and systems, which, depending on context, may be transferred to a nearby site or BU level at the end of production and scaled down during the monitoring and maintenance phase. A minimum level of social monitoring activities is likely to continue until relinquishment, depending on context.
Further guidance on social transition planning, including requirements for impact and risk assessment, stakeholder engagement, and input into a closure plan, depending on years remaining to closure, is provided in the Anglo American Mine Closure Toolbox (MCT), and the Investment Development Model’s Investment Development Criteria by Stage closure requirements.

Social performance review and planning should recognise that lifecycle stages are not always linear; for example:

A site must be actively planning for social transition, beginning in the Project Development phase. The Social Performance team should be involved in the development of social and human rights impact and risk assessments related to social transition (e.g. out-migration, reduction in employment opportunities, including through discussions with stakeholders), and should include social transition-related activities in the SMP and Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) during operations.
A site in operation may have various projects in study phases or in execution (e.g. stay-in-business projects, incorporation of new technologies, addition of infrastructure such as concentrators, tailings storage facilities, waste rock dumps, etc). These should be included as part of the LoAP process as appropriate and may require stakeholder engagement, planning and assessment from a social performance perspective as they may have associated social risks, impacts and opportunities that require assessment and management. The Social Performance team should be involved in project development and use its knowledge of the site’s stakeholders and social and human rights impacts and risks to inform decision-making. The site’s SMP and SEP should reflect integration with Projects where relevant.
A site in operation may have exploration activities ongoing in an adjacent area, managed by the site or the Discovery team. The operation’s Social Performance team may not be responsible for social performance and stakeholder engagement activities related to such exploration activities. At a minimum, however, it should be aware of these activities and co-ordinate with the Discovery team to inform its stakeholder engagement and social and human rights impact and risk analysis.

BOX 2.1 Closure planning: social transition

Social Transition planning should be conducted and integrated into the SMP from the Project Development phase and continue throughout Operations, with the aim of leaving a positive legacy and avoiding dependence on the site; i.e. diversification of the local economy away from mining. The baseline data collected for ongoing social performance review and planning will inform strategic planning for social transition (see Tool 1 of the Mine Closure Toolbox (MCT)).

Key aspects to consider in social performance review and planning for social transition include:

What activities are required to enable co-definition of a closure vision, post-mining land use and social transition success criteria with stakeholders? For example, is capacity building needed, and does the scope of the external context review undertaken as part of Review and Planning provide the required information to inform planning for social transition? (see MCT Tool 1 and 2).
Do long-term social performance objectives and associated management actions align with the mine closure vision and post-mining land use plan?
Are commitments related to social transition captured in the site’s commitments register?
Have social aspects been incorporated into the Mine Closure Plan to the required level of detail (i.e. preliminary, draft, detailed, final) and does this align with the SMP ? Have any gaps related to social aspects in the closure plan been identified and are actions to close those gaps included in the SMP (see Tool 2 of the MCT )?

With five years life of mine remaining, a closure phase Social Impact Assessment will need to be undertaken and the SMP updated for social transition accordingly.

Note that the scope for ‘social’ in the Mine Closure Toolbox includes impacts on employees. Assessment and planning for workforce transition and management of closure impacts on employees is the responsibility of Human Resources, with support from and alignment with the Social Performance team as needed. For example, SMP interventions for alternative livelihoods will likely be led by the Social Performance team, whereas portable skills programmes may be a joint effort or HR-led. HR leads on engagement with employees relating to social transition and should provide the relevant inputs for those aspects under their responsibility into the social part of the Closure Plan.

2.1 Introduction

2.1 Introduction