Reference no: EM133537106
Case scenario
In May 2020, mining giant Rio Tinto carried out a blast at the Juukan Gorge 1 and 2, which were ancient Aboriginal rock shelters dating back 46,000 years. The blast aimed to access approximately $135 million worth of iron ore. These rock shelters were of immense historical and cultural significance to the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura (PKKP) people, the land's traditional owners. They were also believed to be the only sites in Australia preserving evidence of human occupation during the last ice age. The destruction caused significant distress among the Aboriginal community and sparked condemnation nationwide.
However, it is important to note that the destruction of the rock shelters was not unlawful. In 2013, Rio Tinto obtained ministerial consent to expand its iron ore mine in the area in accordance with Western Australia's Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. While Section 17 of the act makes it an offence to excavate, destroy, damage, conceal, or alter any Aboriginal site without ministerial consent, Section 18 allows landowners, including mining license holders, to apply to the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee for consent to proceed with development activities. This reveals serious loopholes in the legislation, as Section 18 contradicts Section 17 and does not require consultation with traditional owners.
It is believed that Rio Tinto provided incomplete or misleading information to the PKKP people about the development options in the area, leading to the destruction of the rock shelters. Following the incident, Rio Tinto admitted that better communication with the traditional owners could have prevented the destruction. The blast crisis severely damaged Rio Tinto's reputation, resulting in the removal of the CEO and calls for greater accountability from mining companies and changes to relevant Aboriginal legislative acts.
In this analysis, you will examine the case through the lens of stakeholder management theory and seek to answer several questions.
Question
Develop a stakeholder engagement assessment matrix for the end of May 2020, immediately after the blast, and discuss the selection of current and desired engagement levels that informed your choices.