Social licence and consent

This records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given. Consent belongs to rights-holders, and a self-assessed consent score is itself a risk.

Filtered for a community and indigenous engagement lead

Record the process evidence a rights-holder or an assurer would expect to see, with consent questions marked as belonging to rights-holders.

Before you start

Free, prior and informed consent is given or withheld by rights-holders. It cannot be self-assessed, self-certified or scored by a proponent, and this suite does not attempt to.
A high score on process evidence says nothing about whether a relationship is in good standing.
State and territory cultural heritage regimes differ materially and are not mapped here.

1. See the scope

Social licence and consent progress

Answered 0 of 17. The average describes the answers you gave. It is not a score, a grade, or a statement that anything is adequate.

Can you produce a publicly available human rights policy commitment, approved at senior level, that states what it expects of personnel and business partners?
Can you produce human rights due diligence records covering impacts you caused, contributed to, and impacts linked to you through business relationships?
Where adverse impacts have occurred, can you produce records of the remediation provided or cooperated with?
Can you produce records showing complaints received through your grievance mechanism, how each was handled, and how long it took?
Can you produce a review of the grievance mechanism against the effectiveness criteria, carried out with the people who use it?
Can you show that people who raise a concern are protected from retaliation, and that this protection has been communicated in the languages people actually use?
Can you produce an engagement plan that identifies affected communities and shows how they were identified, including people who are harder to reach?
Can you produce dated records of engagement showing what was raised, what you said in response, and what actually changed as a result?
Can you produce a register of commitments made to communities, showing which have been met and which are outstanding?
Can you produce a record of the consent process, kept in terms the rights-holders themselves recognise, including where they disagree with your account of it?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Can you show that the process gave rights-holders the time, information and independent advice they asked for, on their terms rather than your project schedule?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Can you show what happens if rights-holders withdraw or decline consent, and that this has been communicated to them?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Can you produce agreement documentation with Traditional Owners, including how it was negotiated and what independent support was available to them?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Can you produce a cultural heritage management plan and survey records developed with Traditional Owners, under the state or territory regime that applies to you?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Can you show that a decision to disturb a site of significance cannot be taken below board level, and that Traditional Owners are party to it?
This is determined by rights-holders, not by the proponent. What follows records whether process evidence exists. It does not, and cannot, establish that consent was given.
Where physical or economic displacement has occurred, can you produce resettlement or livelihood restoration planning and monitoring of outcomes?
Can you show that affected communities and workers are party to closure planning, including what happens to employment and infrastructure?

Section 1 of 3

Filtered for a community and indigenous engagement lead

Before you start

1. See the scope

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

Folded · 1 artefact requested

Folded · 2 artefacts requested

No evidence requests yet