JSE: ANG
NYSE: AU
ASX: AGG
GhSE: AGA
Headquarters:
South Africa
Sector:
Precious Metals
Government Ownership:
No State Ownership
Pre-tax Revenues (in BUSD):
4.223 (2016)
Number of employees:
not reported
Number of workers
(employees + contract workers):
52,649 (2016)
Company-reported mining worker fatalities:
  • 2015 |
    Workers: 11
  • 2016 |
    Workers: 9
Home countries, where the company is headquartered
Producing countries, where the company has mining operations
Mine sites selected for mine-site-level assessment

Summary Results

AngloGold Ashanti is the highest performing company on Working Conditions, one of the three strongest performers for Lifecycle Management, one of the five strongest for Community Wellbeing and Environmental Responsibility, and one of the ten strongest for Business Conduct. In Working Conditions, AngloGold Ashanti’s best results relate to its commitment to provide safe and healthy workplaces and its tracking of its performance on this issue, as well as its company-wide systems to carry out regular due diligence on the risk of using forced labour or child labour in its operations or supply chain.

In Lifecycle Management, the company’s best result relates to the systematic and participatory manner in which it plans for land rehabilitation and post-mining land-use. In Community Wellbeing, the company shows evidence of having systems to ensure its operations engage with local communities and artisanal and small-scale miners, respect Indigenous Peoples, and avoid, minimise and mitigate the impacts of physical or economic displacement. In Environmental Responsibility, the company has some of its best performances in tracking and improving its effectiveness; it demonstrates systematic tracking of its performance on managing its tailings-related risks, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption.

On the other hand, AngloGold Ashanti’s overall results are limited by a lack of evidence on Economic Development. For example, no evidence was found of the company developing procurement opportunities for producing country suppliers beyond those located locally to its mine sites. In addition, AngloGold Ashanti’s performance on human rights-related indicators is somewhat mixed. While the company has made a formal commitment to respect human rights and shows evidence of addressing the specific human rights risks related to its security management, no evidence was found of the company reporting on its overall management of human rights issues.

Economic Development

0.185 / 1.000

Business Conduct

0.594 / 1.000

Lifecycle Management

0.620 / 1.000

Community Wellbeing

0.473 / 1.000

Working Conditions

0.821 / 1.000

Environmental Responsibility

0.577 / 1.000

The maximum value of 1.000 represents the aggregation of best scores achieved for all indicators in a given thematic area, taking into account all companies’ results. As the aggregate best score varies from one area to another, these charts cannot be used to compare company performances across different areas.

All company results are based on public domain data that have been sourced by RMI analysts or provided by companies. In the case of a few companies, very little information was available. It is important to note that a low score may only reflect a lack of relevant information in the company’s publicly available documentation.

Relative company performance

Commitment (11 indicators)

Action (41 indicators)

Effectiveness (21 indicators)

1.000 = aggregation of best scores for all indicators of this measurement area.

Indicator-by-indicator results

Economic Development

Selected Mine sites results

Mine sites individually assessed but not included
in the overall company score

Mine Site NameLocal Procurement (score /6.00)Local Employment (score /6.00)Community grievance mechanism (score /6.00)Workers grievance mechanism (score /6.00)Water quality and quantity (score /6.00)Biodiversity management (score /6.00)Mine site (score /6.00)
Cuiabá Complex1000010.33
Geita6100221.83
Iduapriem6100221.83
Sadiola6100221.83
TauTona2200000.67

List of all mine sites

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryCompany's share (%)ProductsMining types
Cerro VanguardiaArgentina92.5GoldOpen-pit, Underground
Cuiabá ComplexCuiabá, LamegoBrazil100GoldOpen-pit, Underground
Córrego do SítioCdS I, São Bento, CdS II, Carvoaria, Laranjeiras, Cachorro Bravo, RosalinoBrazil100GoldOpen-pit, Underground
GeitaTanzania100GoldOpen-pit
IduapriemGhana100GoldOpen-pit
KopanangSouth Africa100GoldUnderground
Mine Waste SolutionsChemwes, First Uranium SASouth Africa100Uranium OxideOpen-pit
Moab KhotsongSouth Africa100GoldUnderground
MponengSouth Africa100GoldUnderground
SadiolaMali41GoldOpen-pit
Serra GrandeMina III, Mina Nova, PequizãoBrazil100GoldOpen-pit, Underground
SiguiriGuinea85GoldOpen-pit
Sunrise DamAustralia100GoldOpen-pit, Underground
Surface OperationsSouth Africa100GoldTailings Leach
TauTonaSouth Africa100GoldUnderground
TropicanaAustralia70GoldOpen-pit

Closed mine sites (controlled assets under care & maintenance, closure or post-closure management)

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryCompany's share (%)ProductsMining typesYear of closure
Nova Lima SulRaposos, Morro da GlóriaBrazil100GoldUnderground2000
ObuasiGhana100GoldOpen-pit2016
YatelaMali40GoldOpen-pit2013

Assets sold during the assessment period

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryProductsMining types
CressonCripple Creek & VictorUSAGoldOpen-pit

Main Shareholders

As of: 30/03/2018Shares (%)
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.10.83
Public Investment Corporation (SOC) Limited6.23
Investec Asset Management (Pty) Ltd.5.12
Van Eck Associates Corporation5.03
The Vanguard Group, Inc.3.42
Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM)2.12
Capital Research Global Investors1.12
Old Mutual Investment Group (South Africa) (Pty) Limited0.97
Dimensional Fund Advisors, L.P.0.6
TOBAM0.55
Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec0.53
Majedie Asset Management Limited0.44
First State Investments (U.K.) Ltd0.42
Prudential Portfolio Managers (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd0.39
California Public Employees' Retirement System0.38

Known Subsidiaries

As of: 31/12/2016Country
AngloGold Ashanti Australia LimitedAustralia
AngloGold Ashanti Córrego do Sítío Mineração S.A.Brazil
AngloGold Ashanti (Ghana) LimitedGhana
AngloGold Ashanti Holdings plcIsle of Man
AngloGold Ashanti (Iduapriem) LimitedGhana
AngloGold Ashanti USA IncorporatedUSA
Cerro Vanguardia S.A.Argentina
Geita Gold Mining LimitedTanzania
Kibali (Jersey) LimitedJersey
Mineração Serra Grande S.A.Brazil
Societé AngloGold Ashanti de Guinée S.A.Guinea
Société des Mines de Morila S.A.Mali
Société d’Exploitation des Mines d’Or de Sadiola S.A.Mali
Société d’Exploitation des Mines d’Or de Yatela S.A.Mali
Tropicana joint ventureAustralia

Known Tax Jurisdictions

ArgentinaAustraliaBrazilGhanaGuineaIsle of Man
JerseyMaliSouth AfricaTanzaniaUSA

Recent involvements in Investor/State investment disputes (since 2014)

Case DateCase numberCase descriptionStatus
2016ARB/16/15AngloGold Ashanti (Ghana) Limited vs. Republic of Ghana (Mining concession)Pending

Disclaimer

The findings, conclusions and interpretations within this 2018 Responsible Mining Index (RMI) report do not necessarily represent the views of funders, trustees, and employees of the Responsible Mining Foundation, and others who participated in consultations and as advisors to the report.

This report is intended to be for information purposes only and is not intended as promotional material in any respect. The report is not intended to provide accounting, legal, tax or investment advice or recommendations, neither is it intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument. In order to fully understand the methodology of the 2018 Responsible Mining Index, the respective sections on the website should be consulted.

The RMI seeks evidence of companies’ policies and practices on economic, environmental, social and governance (EESG) issues, but does not seek to measure the actual outcomes achieved on EESG issues. Results are based only on evidence sourced from the public domain or provided by companies as open data. Whilst this information is believed to be reliable, no guarantee can be given that it is accurate or complete, nor does it preclude the possibility that policies and practices may exist, but which the RMI has not been able to consider for purposes of assessment. In this respect, the results of the low-scoring companies do not necessarily reflect a lack of relevant policies and practices; as they may be due to a lack of public reporting by the companies, limitations in accessing information, and/or any difficulties in accessing the RMI company portal.

It should be noted that, prior to publication, all companies in the Index were invited to check the factual accuracy of the contextual data and evidence upon which the Index is based and to review company information in the RMI document library.

Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of translations, the English language version should be taken as the definitive version. The RMI reserves the right to publish corrigenda on its web page, and readers of the 2018 RMI report should consult the web page for corrections or clarifications https://www.responsibleminingindex.org.