Mining and metals advocacy group the ICMM is, together with three other industry partners, making progress on public consultations in its efforts to consolidate the foremost major global voluntary responsible mining standards into one global standard.

Pleasingly, during the first public consultation, 63% of respondents said the consolidated standard system (including assurance, governance, reporting and claims) met or exceeded expectations for driving performance improvement across the industry at a global scale, although more than 4 000 comments were received for the partners’ consideration.

The partners, through the Consolidated Mining Standard Initiative (CMSI), aim to take the best of leading responsible standards of The Copper Mark, the Mining Association of Canada (MAC), the World Gold Council (WGC) and the ICMM and present them in a holistic manner for implementation by mining companies of all sizes, commodities and geographies.

The frameworks being consolidated are The Copper Mark’s Risk Readiness Assessment, MAC’s Towards Sustainable Mining, WGC’s Responsible Gold Mining Principles and ICMM’s Mining Principles, which have varying degrees of detail and assurance guidelines.

ICMM co-COO Aidan Davy tells Mining Weekly that the complex landscape of existing standards makes it complex for mining companies to decide which to implement, and for stakeholders to interpret.

The new standard will be overseen by a board with diverse multi-stakeholder participation, provide detailed requirements across 24 performance areas that cover issues society cares deeply about, and clarify assurance obligations with clear associated timelines.

Davy confirms that the CMSI aims to reduce confusion and improve comparability between standards, while it will include a graded approach to performance with three levels depending on where companies are in their environmental, social and governance (ESG) journey.

Notably, the three levels of performance the CMSI will outline are “towards good practice”, “good practice” and “leading practice” in respect of responsible mining.

This staged approach allows smaller companies to start with basic practices and gradually improve. Davy says the four CMSI Partners have always stressed the need for demonstrable continuous improvement in its guidelines to the global mining industry. 

The CMSI’s granular approach, with a three-tier performance structure, facilitates entry at a basic level with gradual movement towards higher levels.

CMSI STRUCTURE

Meanwhile, the governance model of the CMSI involves an independent chairperson and four groups of board members representing mining companies, value chain companies, mining industry stakeholders and value chain stakeholders.

Davy says it is vital for the founding organisations of the CMSI that a diverse range of experts from all spheres of the mining industry are represented on the board.

He expects the recruitment to the CMSI’s governance structure will be concluded during the first quarter of 2026, ahead of which the founding members of the CMSI will conduct a second public consultation in Q4 2025 in multiple languages to guide the scope of work needed.

So far, the process has been guided by two advisory groups: one comprising industry representatives and the other a stakeholder group made up of investors, nonprofit organisations, indigenous groups and multilateral organisations.

Notably, the advisory groups have profoundly helped to shape the initial process of establishing CMSI and drafting documents for public consultation.

When asked about some of the biggest challenges or considerations for such a consolidation effort, Davy points out that there is often a resistance to change in the mining industry, with standard owners having attachments to and investments in existing standards.

Some other considerations include balancing the CMSI’s ambition with practical implementation, balancing commercial and non-commercial interests and connecting the upstream operations of mining better through the value chain downstream.  

Commenting on how the various standards came about, Davy explains societal expectations for mining operations often far outstrip the regulations of any one country, hence the need for additional guidelines for companies wanting to meet the expectations of communities, investors and civil society.

In this regard, the CMSI will offer an easier proposition on “what good mining looks like” for companies when sharing progress with investors and other stakeholders.

Davy says much of the CMSI’s credibility will rest on how easy or difficult it is for companies to say that they meet the performance requirements of the standards. While there is a danger in setting this threshold so high that it deters uptake and implementation, there is also the risk of a too-low threshold that will not result in responsible company practices on the ground.

The founding partners of the CMSI ultimately want to simplify the current mining standards landscape and promote continual improvement of ESG practices along individual metals’ value chains.