Agreed. Thanks for articulating this, Tomas!

Thanks for your interesting contribution. Efficiently gathering and promoting the perspectives of those local stakeholders targetted/affected by CSR programmes --and measuring outcomes through distributed reporting-- are some of our objectives at BetterChain. As we go about it, contributions from skeptics will be invaluable and I look forward to getting in touch. 

Hi Tomas! Interesting review of the RMI. I would like to know your opinion on how to gather data that shows more of the complexity of responsibility activities and strategies. I agree with you that checking the behavior of mining companies on the ground is necessary, but there still seems to be a lack of an integrated approach to doing so. How can we do it cost-effectively? Who should be in charge of doing it? How often? What´s the best way to report on the findings?

@Tomas @Paul @Benjamin - Thank you for your feedback on the Responsible Mining Index. Verifying accuracy of information for more than 850 operating mine sites and about 150 closed mines (our scope in RMI 2018) would truly be a methodological and operational challenge. We have been mulling over this issue and discussing with civil society groups and other stakeholders how the evidence that companies provide to RMI (that RMI makes freely available to all) can be cross-checked with other sources and used by stakeholders to encourage continuous improvement in companies’ responsible mining policies and practices. Our intention is that RMI can contribute to a global shift in how information is shared between companies and project-affected stakeholders, as the basis for more informed and meaningful engagement. As iterations of the Index will be published every two years, we hope to observe a progressive normalisation of transparency on economic, environmental, social and governance issues and open data principles across the mining sector.