Conceptual tensions and practical limitations of transparency in the mining sector

Transparency is widely promoted in the mining sector as a governance mechanism to build trust, strengthen accountability, and ultimately reduce environmental and social risks. However, in practice, information disclosure does not always achieve these aspirations. This study draws upon qualitative interviews with transparency practitioners from a diversity of backgrounds to examine the conceptual tensions and practical limitations of transparency in the mining sector. Practitioners emphasised that visibility of information alone is insufficient. Meaningful transparency is seen as requiring information that is accessible, timely, and tailored to audience and purpose, and supported by dialogue and verification. Transparency is positioned as central to trust and social licence, yet participants highlighted a paradox: transparency is expected to build trust while often requiring trust to be also precondition of materializing transparency outcomes. Reported barriers included organisational and industry cultures, compliance focused disclosure, technical and lengthy reporting, aggregated and delayed information, misaligned metrics, limited regulatory scrutiny, consultation fatigue, and symbolic engagement. Improvement pathways recommended co-design, site-specific disclosure, plain language communication, participatory monitoring, and alignment between internal and external communications.