While absolute results remain low overall, Antofagasta shows one of the five stronger results in Economic Development and Working Conditions. In Business Conduct, Lifecycle Management and Environmental Responsibility, the company’s results are above the average achieved across all 38 companies.

In the mine-site assessment Antofagasta ranks 16th among the 38 companies on its mine-site-level results, with an average score of only 15%.

In Economic Development, the company’s relatively stronger results are largely due to a well-established system for working in partnership with sub-national producing country governments on socio-economic development planning. Antofagasta also shows evidence of working in partnerships with in-country institutions to provide technical training and to work on R&D on socio-economic and environmental issues related to mining. In Working Conditions, the company demonstrates a programmatic approach to supporting a more diverse and inclusive workforce, and in another sign of the company’s continuous improvement efforts, Antofagasta has developed a new protocol for the prevention of sexual harassment of women workers.

Antofagasta is associated with several leading practices, including for example efforts to align the emergency plan at one of its mine sites with the UN Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies at Local Level (APELL) standard.

On the other hand, Antofagasta’s results in Community Wellbeing are below the average achieved across all 38 companies. The company still shows little evidence of measures to implement its human rights policy, although it is noted that plans are underway to fill this gap. And Antofagasta still shows little evidence of tracking its performance on social issues such as the quality of its relationships with affected communities or its efforts to manage its impacts on women. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence of the company tracking the effectiveness of its grievance mechanisms for communities and workers, or systematically assessing and addressing the risks associated with its use of hazardous materials.

Moreover, Antofagasta’s results in the mine-site-level assessments reveal that none of its four assessed mine sites show any evidence of disclosing information on their local procurement spend, nor do they show evidence of tracking and disclosing data on water quality. Likewise, none of the four mine sites show evidence of having an operational-level grievance mechanism for communities.