LSE: RIO
NYSE: RIO
ASX: RIO
Headquarters:
UK
Australia
Sector:
Diversified
Government Ownership:
No State Ownership
Pre-tax Revenues (in BUSD):
33.781 (31/12/2016)
Number of employees:
not reported
Number of workers
(employees + contract workers):
51,018 (31/12/2016)
Company-reported mining worker fatalities:
  • 2015 |
    Workers: 5
  • 2016 |
    Workers: 7
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

Rio Tinto achieves one of the ten strongest results for four different areas: Economic Development, Business Conduct, Working Conditions and Environmental Responsibility. In Economic Development, Rio Tinto shows some evidence of a systematic approach to enhancing the national skills base and employability of local populations around its mine sites. In Business Conduct, Rio Tinto’s performance reflects its formal commitments on anti-bribery and corruption and the transparency of mineral revenues (while the company has also made a formal commitment on business ethics, there is less evidence that it has taken measures to implement this commitment). Rio Tinto also shows some evidence of disclosing the payments it makes to sub-national and national governments, including some site-level information on these payments.

In Working Conditions, Rio Tinto shows evidence of having operationalised its commitment to provide safe and healthy working conditions and tracked its performance on this issue. In Environmental Responsibility, Rio Tinto’s best result relates to its commitment to manage its environmental impacts systematically, through the mitigation hierarchy approach, and its assignment of responsibility and resources to implement this commitment.

Overall though, Rio Tinto’s results are limited by a lack of evidence of systematic attention to Community Wellbeing issues. For example, no evidence was found of the company systematically reporting on its management of human rights, issues, tracking the quality of its relationships with affected communities, or tracking its performance on addressing potential human rights abuses related to its security management.

Economic Development

0.223 / 1.000

Business Conduct

0.630 / 1.000

Lifecycle Management

0.254 / 1.000

Community Wellbeing

0.214 / 1.000

Working Conditions

0.570 / 1.000

Environmental Responsibility

0.447 / 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)
Oyu Tolgoi5266665.17
QIT Madagascar Minerals0000000.00
Richards Bay Minerals5232343.17
Rössing3200321.67

List of all mine sites

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryCompany's share (%)ProductsMining types
ArgyleAustralia100Diamond CaratsOpen-pit, Underground
BoronUSA100Borates
Coal & AlliedAustralia100Coal
Dampier Salt operationsDampier, Port Hedland, Lake MacLeodAustralia68Salt
DiavikCanada60Diamond CaratsUnderground
Energy Resources of AustraliaRanger, JabilukaAustralia68.4Uranium Oxide
Escondida (Rio Tinto)*Chile30Copper, Gold, SilverOpen-pit
GoveAustralia100BauxiteOpen-pit
Hail CreekAustralia82CoalOpen-pit
Hamersley iron minesBroackman, Broackman no. 4, Channar, Eastern Range, Marandoo, Mount Tom Price, Nammuldi, Paraburdoo, Western Turner Syncline, YandicooginaAustralia100Iron Ore
Hope Downs minesHope Downs 1, Hope Downs 4Australia50Iron Ore
Hunter ValleyAustralia67.6CoalOpen-pit
IOC mineCarol LakeCanada58.7Iron Ore
KennecottUSA100Copper, Gold, Molybdenum
KestrelAustralia80CoalUnderground
Mount ThorleyAustralia80CoalOpen-pit
Oyu TolgoiMongolia33.5Copper, Gold, SilverOpen-pit
QIT Madagascar MineralsMadagascar80TitaniumOpen-pit
Richards Bay MineralsSouth Africa74Titanium, Iron Ore, ZirconiumOpen-pit
Rio Tinto Fer et Titane (RTFT)Canada100Titanium, Iron Ore, Zirconium
Robe River minesMesa J, Mesa A, West AngelasAustralia53Iron Ore
RössingNamibia68.6Uranium OxideOpen-pit
WarkworthAustralia55.57CoalOpen-pit
WeipaAustralia100BauxiteOpen-pit
*Joint-Venture not under direct control of the company and not included in RMI assessment

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

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryCompany's share (%)ProductsMining typesYear of closure
FlambeauUSA100CopperOpen-pit1997
KelianIndonesia90GoldOpen-pit2006
RidgewayUSA100Gold, SilverOpen-pit1999

Assets sold during the assessment period

Mine Site NameAliasesCountryProductsMining types
BengallaAustraliaCoal
Mount PleasantAustraliaCoal
MurowaZimbabweDiamond CaratsUnderground
Zululand Anthracite CollierySouth AfricaCoal

Main Shareholders

As of: 09/02/2018Shares (%)
Aluminum Corp of China Ltd13.64
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.9.54
Capital World Investors2.76
The Vanguard Group, Inc.2.35
Legal & General Investment Management Ltd.2.11
Aberdeen Asset Investments Limited1.51
Capital Research Global Investors1.45
JPMorgan Asset Management U.K. Limited1.25
M & G Investment Management Ltd.1.19
State Street Global Advisors (UK) Ltd.1.08
Standard Life Investments Ltd.1.05
SAFE Investment Company Limited1.02
Aviva Investors Global Services Limited1
BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd.0.97
UBS Asset Management (Switzerland)0.92

Known Subsidiaries

As of: 31/12/2017Country
10029734 Canada Inc.Canada
1043802 Ontario LtdCanada
1109723 B.C. Ltd.Canada
201 Logistics Center, LLCUSA
46106 YUKON INC.Canada
46117 YUKON INC.Canada
535630 YUKON INC.;Canada
7999674 CANADA INC.Canada
9230556 CANADA INC.Canada
9539549 CANADA INC.Canada
AGM Holding Company Pte LtdSingapore
Alcan Alumina Ltda.Brazil
Alcan Asia LimitedHong Kong
Alcan Betriebs- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft GmbHGermany
Alcan Chemicals LimitedUK

Known Tax Jurisdictions

ArubaAustraliaBelgiumBermudaBrazilBritish Virgin Islands
CanadaChileChinaCyprusFinlandFrance
GabonGermanyGuineaHong KongIcelandIndia
IndonesiaItalyJapanJerseyKazakhstanLao PDR
LuxembourgMadagascarMalaysiaMaltaMauritiusMexico
MongoliaMoroccoMozambiqueNamibiaNetherlandsNew Zealand
OmanPanamaPapua New GuineaPeruPhilippinesRussia
SerbiaSingaporeSouth AfricaSouth KoreaSpainSweden
SwitzerlandTurkeyUAEUKUSAVenezuela
Zambia

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

No case

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.