In this interview, Antonio speaks with Anna Triponel, founder of Human Level and a human rights expert who advises mining companies (including Newmont) on community relations and social strategies. She explains why the “social license to operate” is often more important than a legal license, and much more.
TL;DR
Anna reminds us that poor stakeholder engagement and human rights risks can derail projects through protests, lawsuits, regulatory blocks, asset write-offs, and reputational damage, even in jurisdictions where companies have government approvals. Using real-world examples, Triponel shows that these issues frequently start at the exploration stage in already complex, high-risk locations and are exacerbated by evolving global regulations (such as the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive) and increased scrutiny. She emphasizes that proactive, preventive measures like robust community engagement teams, genuine listening (including to vulnerable groups), and operational grievance mechanisms, are far cheaper than the massive costs of later remediation or crisis response, and she offers practical advice for investors on how to probe beyond investor-relations spin to evaluate real risk management.
Ignoring community relations and human rights risks can destroy or severely impair mining assets, often at far greater cost than markets currently price in.
Triponel stresses that mining companies are geographically locked into specific locations that frequently come with pre-existing challenges (corruption, conflict, artisanal miners, or weak governance), and decisions like using government or private security can tie the company to human rights impacts. When trust breaks down, the consequences are severe. First Quantum Minerals’ Cobre Panamá copper mine (a roughly $10 billion investment) was effectively stranded after nationwide protests and a 2023 Supreme Court ruling declaring the contract unconstitutional. Newmont wrote off its ~$5 billion Conga project in Peru due to widespread opposition. Rio Tinto faced executive resignations and major reputational damage after the legally permitted destruction of culturally significant Juukan Gorge rock shelters in Australia. Vedanta Resources was held accountable by the UK Supreme Court (2019) as parent company for pollution at its Zambian copper mine subsidiary. Gemfields paid a ~$7.8 million settlement over security-related abuses at its Mozambique ruby mine plus ongoing costs to implement a grievance mechanism. Markets may apply some discount to high-risk jurisdictions, but Triponel notes the financial hits are often much larger and more sudden than anticipated, with additional risks from new laws, M&A carry-over liabilities, and rising activism.
Investing early and continuously in genuine stakeholder engagement and human rights risk management is dramatically cheaper and more effective than trying to fix problems later.
Prevention starts at exploration and must be ongoing. Companies need adequately resourced stakeholder engagement teams that maintain regular, two-way communication on the ground, operational-level grievance mechanisms that allow for dialogue and mediation rather than litigation, and human rights impact assessments that reach beyond formal leaders or elders to include vulnerable groups (women, Indigenous peoples, etc.). Triponel repeatedly notes that these measures are relatively inexpensive compared with mining budgets yet are often scaled back when things appear calm, only for mistrust to erupt into protests, stoppages, or lawsuits. A humble, listening approach (acknowledging community concerns, co-designing solutions where possible (especially Free, Prior and Informed Consent for Indigenous groups), and avoiding top-down imposition) builds the trust that can prevent escalation. Relying too heavily on third parties for consultations frequently lets important messages fall through the cracks. In short, the old “ask for forgiveness later” mindset is extremely costly in today’s environment.
Investors can materially reduce their downside risk by asking deeper, more specific questions that cut through investor-relations boilerplate and reveal whether companies are truly managing these issues.
Generic claims of “good community relations” or CSR programs often mask superficial or incomplete engagement. Triponel recommends probing whether a company has conducted a proper human rights impact assessment (which by design includes marginalized voices), how it ensures it is hearing from all relevant stakeholders (not just those required by protocol), the quality and accessibility of its grievance mechanisms, and how it plans to handle crises (favoring acknowledgment, mediation, and bringing other responsible parties to the table rather than default legal denial or counter-suits). She points out that investor questions can give internal social-performance teams the mandate and resources they need to act. Because risks are rising (declining democracy, retaliation against activists, new mandatory due-diligence laws) while markets have not fully caught up, asking these targeted questions is one of the highest-leverage things investors can do to protect capital and encourage better corporate behavior.
Anna Triponel Interview
VERY IMPORTANT WARNING
Please note that none of the companies mentioned/featured herein have paid Resource Talks for the creation of this content. This website is a business that charges for the creation and publication of content. This means there will always be a potential conflict of interest which means you can never rely on anything said herein.
By consuming this content, you acknowledge that Resource Talks and/or its affiliates and/or their personnel may own, have owned, or will own interests in and/or may have a business relationship with some or all companies/entities mentioned/featured in this publication. You further acknowledge that entities which may be referenced or featured in this publication or their related parties may hold an interest in Resource Talks or its affiliates, which may create further conflict of interest.
The information provided herein is general & impersonal in nature and meant for entertainment purposes only. The reader acknowledges and agrees that the information does not constitute a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any security or instrument or to participate in any trading strategy. The author is not a licensed investment advisor. He is just another talking head on the internet. He might own shares of companies mentioned in this publication. Always assume he doesn’t know much more than a potato does. The mining & exploration space is among the riskiest sectors to invest in. The risk of anything mentioned in this publication is 100% loss of capital. If you don’t read the official documents provided by the company on http://www.SedarPlus.ca, you will lose all of your money.
