While absolute results remain low overall, Anglo American shows the strongest results in all six thematic areas: Economic Development, Business Conduct, Lifecycle Management, Community Wellbeing, Working Conditions and Environmental Responsibility.

In contrast, Anglo American ranks 18th out of the 38 companies on mine-site-level results, with an average score of only 14% in the mine-site assessment.

Anglo American’s relatively stronger results in the company-wide assessment are due to its establishment not only of formalised commitments but also company-wide systems on a wide range of issues. For example, in Economic Development, Anglo American has put a standard in place for collaborating with producing country regional governments on socio-economic development planning. In Business Conduct, the company has systematic measures to hold board directors and senior managers accountable for responsible business conduct on ESG issues. In Lifecycle Management, Anglo American is the only company to have put in place guidelines designed to ensure its operations plan for post-closure transition for workers as well as for communities. In Community Wellbeing, the company has systems designed to ensure its operations support local entrepreneurship and local procurement. In Working Conditions, Anglo American has systems to assess and address the risks of child labour and forced labour in its operations and supply chains, while in Environmental Responsibility the company has a standard to assess and address the risks associated with its use and generation of hazardous materials.

Anglo American has shown progress in a number of areas since the RMI Report 2018, including supporting a public statement on the need to protect human rights defenders, and becoming an accredited living wage employer, in one country (the UK). In addition, Anglo American is associated with several leading practices, including the disclosure of data on its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions.

On the other hand, Anglo American’s results continue to be held back by lack of evidence on a number of issues, particularly on other public disclosure matters (such as legal titles or water quality data), and on reviewing and tracking its performance, for example on how it manages human rights issues. In addition, the company could strengthen its disclosure of how its corporate guidelines on issues such as national procurement and human rights due diligence are being implemented in practice.

Moreover, Anglo American’s results in the mine-site-level assessment are very variable. While one of its mine sites shows one of the three stronger results (scoring 50%) among the 180 sites assessed, five of the six other Anglo American mine sites assessed show very weak results (scoring under 10%). None of these five mine sites show any evidence on basics of responsible mining such as an operational-level grievance mechanism for workers, circulation of emergency response plans to local stakeholders, and tracking and disclosure of air quality and water quality data. Although Anglo American discloses some mine-site information, it is most often aggregated regionally and does not offer site-level disaggregated data.