IM 2019 November 19 | Page 23

MINING INSURANCE and risk transfer solutions in the wake of significant losses/incidents at companies such as Norsk Hydro and Maersk,” Pryor said. “Whilst not specific to the mining industries, these incidents focus the attention on failures of the operational technologies of organisations, and the speed at which losses can manifest.” Underwriters are not yet insisting on certain cyber protections being in place before offering cover, but they would typically like to see miners employ a clear segregation between information technology and operational technology (OT), according to Pryor, with the markets keen to understand what measures are in place to ensure there are no links between the two. Another consideration is the operational resilience of miners’ OT environment; knowing what measures are in place to contain a potential problem should one occur, according to Pryor. The amount of redundant systems at site – some equipment being decades old – and the protections in place for these are also coming under the spotlight. Sidhant Soni added: “The site should have a modern malware protection, which should be tested frequently against any breach. It is considered good to have the offsite backup of all operational and critical data with regular backup frequency. The offsite backup server should also be well protected against a cyberattack.” Climate change concerns are already having an impact on those companies looking for insurance that mine and use thermal coal, with several underwriters reducing their exposure to this sector. In the US, insurer Chubb recently announced it would, from 2022, stop insuring thermal coal operations generating more than 30% of their revenue from such activities. This followed Zurich withdrawing from the market, in addition to many other global companies suspending coverage. Matt Clissitt, a Director at Willis Towers Watson’s Natural Resources division in London, highlighted this in the company’s recent report: “Another consideration for insurance buyers in the mining sector will be the developing mindset surrounding ethical mining and the consequent withdrawal of capacity for certain coal mining exposures.” Pryor remarked on this market move: “It’s probably not reached a crisis yet – there is still enough capacity out there – but it’s becoming more and more difficult for thermal coal mining and power plant companies to find sustainable operational insurance cover.” A company’s social licence to operate is too being considered – if not written into policies – with underwriters asking a lot more questions about a mining company’s community relationship and interactions, according to Pryor. “More recently, mining companies have come under increased pressure to develop corporate social responsibility strategies as part of their overall business strategies,” he said. This is seeing more insurers follow an “ethical underwriting route” where issues such as child labour, mine rehabilitation, environmental footprints and climate change are considered when determining how they allocate their insurance capacity. Wheeler sees operating to a licensed standard that considers a company’s neighbours and environment as “part and parcel of good mining management”, but admits operating – or not operating – to these standards may have more of an impact on the operation’s success or failure depending on the region in question. Several examples over the last few years back this up where not paying due attention to community or local stakeholder concerns has led to illegal blockades, court cases or failure to gain access to potential development projects. And, with issues such as water, energy and The increased use of autonomous vehicles could see mining companies invest in cyber security insurance policies (credit: Rio Tinto) climate change likely to increase in prominence, the risks associated with a company’s social licence to operate are only going to go up. While there are global indices that measure environmental, social and governance standards, insurers are, overall, not factoring these scores into their risk calculations. Wheeler questioned: “Can you understand what is meant by the social licence to operate and its influences and meanings to assess what is a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ risk? Yes, you can. Principally, though, it is very subjective. A lot of these incidents tied to a company’s social licence to operate are only understood by the sector after the event.” This is undoubtedly why insurers are currently so focused on the risks that come with tailings dam facilities. They will all hope the upcoming independent tailings dam report brings needed transparency to appropriately measure the risks associated with these structures. Similar industry reports that have applications in other classes of insurance coverage would also be appreciated by the sector, with Pryor’s assessment of the insurance industry ringing true: “As long as insurers can measure risk, they can put a price to it. It’s when they cannot measure this that it becomes problematic.” IM NOVEMBER 2019 | International Mining 21