What Gives You a Social Licence? An Exploration of the Social Licence to Operate in the Australian Mining Industry

Sara Bice

doi:10.3390/resources3010062

Abstract

This article analyses the ways in which major, multinational mining companies operating within Australia understand sustainable development and articulate their “social licence to operate”. The article contributes a novel perspective to ongoing discussions about the social licence by exploring the ways in which leading Australian mining companies define and assert their social licences through sustainable development discourse. A content and discourse analysis of 18 sustainability reports across a four year period, supplemented by qualitative interview data, draws out these issues. While most companies use these reports to confirm beliefs in the necessity of a social licence, the ways in which the licence is specifically defined and maintained are not generally made explicit. Additionally, key theoretical criteria required for a social licence, such as free, prior and informed consent, appear to be overlooked. In conclusion, the article suggests ways in which criteria for a social licence within the mining industry could be defined more clearly and raises consequent questions to shape future research.

Highlights

Forty years ago, Shocker and Sethi [1] declared that modern business requires a “social contract” in order to operate successfully within society
Of especial relevance to the analysis completed here, the authors argue that “not all companies use the term in the same way or give the term equivalent weight” [10] (p. 2). These concerns about vagueness, lack of criteria and measurability of sustainable development and social licence underpin the rationale for the analysis presented here
Australia-based mining companies define sustainable development and their social licence to operate through three broad areas of interest: environment, social and community issues and employment practices

Summary

Introduction

Shocker and Sethi [1] declared that modern business requires a “social contract” in order to operate successfully within society Today, this theoretical proposition is progressively visible within business policies, with many transnational corporations publicly declaring the necessity of a “social licence to operate” through communications such as sustainability reports [2,3]. The move from theoretical tenet to business practice has been a difficult one and gaps exist between scholarly models and on-ground implementation of the social licence This is true for the global resources industry, where a “social licence to operate” is widely recognized by companies as a vital component to successful operations [4]. Many major, resources corporations openly insist that procuring and maintaining a social licence is essential to their operations, in practice, the criteria defining these metaphorical licences remain relatively murky [10]

Methods

Results

Conclusion