2
In this paper we define Resource Governance as the
conjunction of environmental, social, and mineral governance,
which has a spatial and business process foundation. Like
Edmans (2023), who suggests “ESG is both extremely
important and nothing special,” our holistic systems
approach is consistent with a focus on all long-term value
drivers and not singling out ESG by itself as a value driver.
ESG should not be treated as a niche area of interest but as
an integrated part of the whole.
By conceptualizing Resource Governance in this way,
we envision an integrated systems approach to data man-
agement, accountability, authority, process control and
public disclosure that combines spatial information and
traditional data systems to enable a greater level of trans-
parency internally and externally for a mining business.
The Resource Governance vision presented here can help
the mining industry combine discussion of environmen-
tal, social, and mineral governance issues, which are inter-
related (Rowland et al, 2023).
After defining Resource Governance, a summary of the
types of information that fall within scope of this vision are
described. Following this is a discussion of common prob-
lems and opportunities related to business process control
and then a description of the potential benefits of taking
a holistic systems approach. Prior to concluding, we offer
some ideas about the application of advanced analytics that
are made possible by adopting the proposed holistic sys-
tems approach to Resource Governance.
DEFINITION OF RESOURCE GOVERNANCE
The (very simplified) domains of Resource Governance
are shown schematically in Figure 1. There are many more
dimensions to Resource Governance than can be accom-
modated in a simple figure, the idea here is that in the
past the data, systems and processes have been segregated
and siloed, and a more holistic systems view is possible.
Highlighted on the left side are what we refer to as ‘Natural
Resource Governance’, which relates to the natural capital
in, on and above the surface of the earth typically centered
around license to operate matters, and ‘Mineral Resource
Governance’, which relates to matters in the sub-surface
domain (leaving surface stockpiles aside).
Both these domains exist under the same spatial foot-
print and interact in substantive ways to define the con-
straints and potential of a mining project. On the right
side is shown Resource Governance encapsulating both
Natural and Mineral Resource Governance domains,
which are often treated separately by mining companies in
various ways.
From a business process perspective, the Natural and
Mineral Resource Governance domains have often been
managed separately because of the different expertise
involved, different types of activities, different locations,
and the daunting breadth of issues involved. The people
and processes involved in Mineral Resource and Mineral
Reserve definition, mine planning and design, and operating
a mine have been separated from the people and processes
involved in addressing the Natural Resource Governance
matters, which constitute establishing and maintaining the
licenses to operate. We believe that Resource Governance
expectations from regulators and society will be better
served by establishing a conjoined and aligned knowledge
base, which enables digitally encoding business processes
and governance across the organisation. What this means is
that there is irrefutable traceability along the data chain that
ensures accountability for public disclosures, and those dis-
closures are intrinsically aligned to the licenses to operate.
RESOURCE GOVERNANCE INFORMATION
To illustrate the breadth, scope, and complexity of the
Resource Governance challenge, Figure 2 shows examples
of the types of issues that drive subject matter experts to col-
lect, interpret, and model information related to Resource
Governance.
BUSINESS PROCESS CONTROL
As can be seen in Figure 2 there are many functional areas
relevant to Resource Governance, many of which are inter-
related. Each functional area in a mining company will
comprise individuals and teams, both internal and external,
working to plan, acquiring data, making sense of informa-
tion, drawing conclusions, and proposing actions. Rapidly,
the number of people involved, the complexity, and the
interdependency of business processes becomes a substan-
tial challenge to manage in an efficient and well governed
way.
Traditional management approaches result in siloes of
people focused almost exclusively on their own functional
area (swim-lanes), working to deliver against key perfor-
mance indicators that describe the things they have control
over and can reasonably be measured against. The corollary
of this approach is that data management, interpretation
and modelling within a function also become siloed. By its
very nature, this type of organisation will:
• Struggle to share information across functions,
• Miss opportunities for collaborative solutions to
problems,
• Duplicate efforts,
In this paper we define Resource Governance as the
conjunction of environmental, social, and mineral governance,
which has a spatial and business process foundation. Like
Edmans (2023), who suggests “ESG is both extremely
important and nothing special,” our holistic systems
approach is consistent with a focus on all long-term value
drivers and not singling out ESG by itself as a value driver.
ESG should not be treated as a niche area of interest but as
an integrated part of the whole.
By conceptualizing Resource Governance in this way,
we envision an integrated systems approach to data man-
agement, accountability, authority, process control and
public disclosure that combines spatial information and
traditional data systems to enable a greater level of trans-
parency internally and externally for a mining business.
The Resource Governance vision presented here can help
the mining industry combine discussion of environmen-
tal, social, and mineral governance issues, which are inter-
related (Rowland et al, 2023).
After defining Resource Governance, a summary of the
types of information that fall within scope of this vision are
described. Following this is a discussion of common prob-
lems and opportunities related to business process control
and then a description of the potential benefits of taking
a holistic systems approach. Prior to concluding, we offer
some ideas about the application of advanced analytics that
are made possible by adopting the proposed holistic sys-
tems approach to Resource Governance.
DEFINITION OF RESOURCE GOVERNANCE
The (very simplified) domains of Resource Governance
are shown schematically in Figure 1. There are many more
dimensions to Resource Governance than can be accom-
modated in a simple figure, the idea here is that in the
past the data, systems and processes have been segregated
and siloed, and a more holistic systems view is possible.
Highlighted on the left side are what we refer to as ‘Natural
Resource Governance’, which relates to the natural capital
in, on and above the surface of the earth typically centered
around license to operate matters, and ‘Mineral Resource
Governance’, which relates to matters in the sub-surface
domain (leaving surface stockpiles aside).
Both these domains exist under the same spatial foot-
print and interact in substantive ways to define the con-
straints and potential of a mining project. On the right
side is shown Resource Governance encapsulating both
Natural and Mineral Resource Governance domains,
which are often treated separately by mining companies in
various ways.
From a business process perspective, the Natural and
Mineral Resource Governance domains have often been
managed separately because of the different expertise
involved, different types of activities, different locations,
and the daunting breadth of issues involved. The people
and processes involved in Mineral Resource and Mineral
Reserve definition, mine planning and design, and operating
a mine have been separated from the people and processes
involved in addressing the Natural Resource Governance
matters, which constitute establishing and maintaining the
licenses to operate. We believe that Resource Governance
expectations from regulators and society will be better
served by establishing a conjoined and aligned knowledge
base, which enables digitally encoding business processes
and governance across the organisation. What this means is
that there is irrefutable traceability along the data chain that
ensures accountability for public disclosures, and those dis-
closures are intrinsically aligned to the licenses to operate.
RESOURCE GOVERNANCE INFORMATION
To illustrate the breadth, scope, and complexity of the
Resource Governance challenge, Figure 2 shows examples
of the types of issues that drive subject matter experts to col-
lect, interpret, and model information related to Resource
Governance.
BUSINESS PROCESS CONTROL
As can be seen in Figure 2 there are many functional areas
relevant to Resource Governance, many of which are inter-
related. Each functional area in a mining company will
comprise individuals and teams, both internal and external,
working to plan, acquiring data, making sense of informa-
tion, drawing conclusions, and proposing actions. Rapidly,
the number of people involved, the complexity, and the
interdependency of business processes becomes a substan-
tial challenge to manage in an efficient and well governed
way.
Traditional management approaches result in siloes of
people focused almost exclusively on their own functional
area (swim-lanes), working to deliver against key perfor-
mance indicators that describe the things they have control
over and can reasonably be measured against. The corollary
of this approach is that data management, interpretation
and modelling within a function also become siloed. By its
very nature, this type of organisation will:
• Struggle to share information across functions,
• Miss opportunities for collaborative solutions to
problems,
• Duplicate efforts,