Despite being highly supportive of private-sector led development, I often find Canada's Fraser Institute overly strident. The stridency impulse has improved marginally since libertarian Michael Walker's departure as President in 2005. That being said, the Fraser Institute does do some interesting and useful data collection and analysis that is often overlooked simply because of its source. One such report is its Survey of Mining Companies: 2010 Mid-Year Update . This survey of mining company executives rates their perceptions of jurisdicational (that is, above ground risk) attractiveness of global mining locales.
Predictability in operating and regulatory environment is fundamentally what the survey assesses. Only one African country is in the top ten, Botswana, but only one is in the bottom ten, Zimbabwe. Six other African mining stalwarts are also rated (though not emerging ones such as Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Mali, or Mozambique). Many highly regulated jurisdications are in the top ten, including various Canadian provinces, Finland, Chile, and two American states. One of my upcoming research projects will be to utilize the survey results over time (the survey began in 1997) to check these results against investment decisions by Canadian senior and junior mining companies in Africa. Do changes in perceptions of attractiveness of mining jurisdications track closely to changes in mining codes, regulation, and/or other political factors? If so, what exactly? And can upward or downward trends in survey results predict future upward or downward cumulative investment ? The common sense answer should be yes, as the survey is asking those making the decisions. But the balance between above ground risks and below ground (geological) attractiveness can impact decision-making, as can misperceptions of some business leaders versus others.
Predictability in operating and regulatory environment is fundamentally what the survey assesses. Only one African country is in the top ten, Botswana, but only one is in the bottom ten, Zimbabwe. Six other African mining stalwarts are also rated (though not emerging ones such as Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Mali, or Mozambique). Many highly regulated jurisdications are in the top ten, including various Canadian provinces, Finland, Chile, and two American states. One of my upcoming research projects will be to utilize the survey results over time (the survey began in 1997) to check these results against investment decisions by Canadian senior and junior mining companies in Africa. Do changes in perceptions of attractiveness of mining jurisdications track closely to changes in mining codes, regulation, and/or other political factors? If so, what exactly? And can upward or downward trends in survey results predict future upward or downward cumulative investment ? The common sense answer should be yes, as the survey is asking those making the decisions. But the balance between above ground risks and below ground (geological) attractiveness can impact decision-making, as can misperceptions of some business leaders versus others.
RSS Feed
