90
7 Let’s Start with Some Serious “Do Nots”!
Risk assessments should start by recognizing that the absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence: if something has “never” occurred it does not mean it does not
exist.
The Arena is “Known knowns”. These are “facts” and likely the realm of service
life/operational “incidents”, stuff that we all know occurs time to time. These can
also be uncertainties, when their probability is “one” and the only parameter that can
vary is the magnitude.
Blind spots is where we find “Known Unknowns”. These are unexpected evolutions
of known events: they should be considered as visible emerging risks.
Facade is where we find corporate “Unknown Knowns”, i.e., issues management
prefers not to see, not to know. Companies that keep playing rosy scenarios and
censoring their risks have a strong Facade.
Finally the true Unknown, i.e., the “Unknown Unknowns”. These are issues we
truly do not know we do not know…and only swift adaptive management can solve
these….i.e., working with a sustainable, highly resilient system.
Appropriate Risk Assessment and Management quite obviously expand the corporate
Arena at the expenses of Blind-spot and Unknown.
These dynamics will result in a more disciplined and rigorous approach that will, if
taken seriously, work towards significant improvements in the rational management
of hazardous situations, hence risks related to the design and operation of tailings
storage facilities. Uncertainties will be identified and reduced, remaining hazards
will be addressed and critical control procedures will developed with the objective
of mitigations of risks that may have been created by bad management practices.
Maintaining the status quo while merely changing the words to claim a goal of
“zero failures”, talking about robust, resilient and responsible mining practices will
not do.
7.5.1 Dynamics Within the Tailings Responsibility
Framework
Another way of looking at how hazards can go unrecognised or fail to be properly
addressed is to examine the dynamics within the TRF and how each major participant
may influence or respond to pressures within their respective organizations. As indicated earlier (see Sect. 1.2), the term regulatory capture has been used by the Auditor
General of British Columbia to describe the situation where the regulator, created to
act in the public interest related to the design and operation of tailings storage facilities, may, in certain situations, serve instead the interests of a company or the industry
(BC AG 2016). Using the same perspective for mining companies, economic capture
could be described as the situation where short or long term economic factors are
7 Let’s Start with Some Serious “Do Nots”!
Risk assessments should start by recognizing that the absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence: if something has “never” occurred it does not mean it does not
exist.
The Arena is “Known knowns”. These are “facts” and likely the realm of service
life/operational “incidents”, stuff that we all know occurs time to time. These can
also be uncertainties, when their probability is “one” and the only parameter that can
vary is the magnitude.
Blind spots is where we find “Known Unknowns”. These are unexpected evolutions
of known events: they should be considered as visible emerging risks.
Facade is where we find corporate “Unknown Knowns”, i.e., issues management
prefers not to see, not to know. Companies that keep playing rosy scenarios and
censoring their risks have a strong Facade.
Finally the true Unknown, i.e., the “Unknown Unknowns”. These are issues we
truly do not know we do not know…and only swift adaptive management can solve
these….i.e., working with a sustainable, highly resilient system.
Appropriate Risk Assessment and Management quite obviously expand the corporate
Arena at the expenses of Blind-spot and Unknown.
These dynamics will result in a more disciplined and rigorous approach that will, if
taken seriously, work towards significant improvements in the rational management
of hazardous situations, hence risks related to the design and operation of tailings
storage facilities. Uncertainties will be identified and reduced, remaining hazards
will be addressed and critical control procedures will developed with the objective
of mitigations of risks that may have been created by bad management practices.
Maintaining the status quo while merely changing the words to claim a goal of
“zero failures”, talking about robust, resilient and responsible mining practices will
not do.
7.5.1 Dynamics Within the Tailings Responsibility
Framework
Another way of looking at how hazards can go unrecognised or fail to be properly
addressed is to examine the dynamics within the TRF and how each major participant
may influence or respond to pressures within their respective organizations. As indicated earlier (see Sect. 1.2), the term regulatory capture has been used by the Auditor
General of British Columbia to describe the situation where the regulator, created to
act in the public interest related to the design and operation of tailings storage facilities, may, in certain situations, serve instead the interests of a company or the industry
(BC AG 2016). Using the same perspective for mining companies, economic capture
could be described as the situation where short or long term economic factors are