- LATEST BLOG POST
- echo $post_date ?>
- Cultural Entropy and Risk Management are intertwined. Cultural entropy is defined as the amount of energy in an organization that is…
- Read More
|Event:||Cyber and Operational Risk Management|
|Date/Time:||30/04/2019 - 01/05/2019 - All Day|
Riskope will present Fostering Sustainability and Value Through Convergent Risk Assessments at infonex’s Cyber and Operational Risk Management in Vancouver B.C.
Riskope’s presentation will discuss holistic and convergent approaches. Indeed, Risks generated by cyber, natural and man-made hazards, cannot be tackled by siloed approaches do not work
Cyber and Operational Risk Management
Cybersecurity ranks as the #1 priority for financial institutions today. That is mainly because cyberthreats affect all functions within the organization and there is an increasing number of actors.
Also, Operational and compliance risks have become complex and entwined. Indeed the potential for failed processes that govern control breakdowns had grown tremendously.
Thus a holistic governance approach bringing the entire risk portfolio of an organization together, is nowadays OpRisk leaders preferred way.
It is therefore paramount to mitigate risks with an eye to the big picture.
Meanwhile many risk leaders feel overwhelmed by the scale and breadth of potential threats.
Infonex’s Operational Risk event, now in its 14th year. The conference will provide strategies for mitigating risk in the current regulatory environment.
Riskope’s presentation Fostering Sustainability and Value Through Convergent Risk Assessments covers indeed many angles within the conference’s scope.
Go Beyond a One-Size-Fits-All Approach!
Who Should Attend This Event
|Event:||CIM Technical Session: "Towards Improving Environmental and Social Disclosure in NI43-101”|
|Date/Time:||02/05/2017 - All Day|
|Location:||Palais des congrès de Montréal, 1001 Jean Paul Riopelle Pl,, montreal,|
CIM Technical Session: “Towards Improving Environmental and Social Disclosure in NI43-101”
Co-chairs of CIM Technical Session: “Towards Improving Environmental and Social Disclosure in NI43-101”: Ian Thomson and Alistair Kent
The disclosure rule under NI 43-101 requires that companies provide technical information that is:
The Ontario Securities Commission and British Columbia Securities Commission review in 2013 , and 2015 , respectively, indicated that 80% of NI 43-101 was non-compliant and 32% of the environmental and social sections were not compliant.
The CIM has to date provided definitions, standards and best practices in the topics of geology and mining but has provided little guidance in social and environmental aspects. The fact that there are no defined requirements for what is a qualified person; definitions, standards and best practices for aspects such as water, tailings and mineral waste management would suggest that deficiencies in the environmental and social sections in NI 43-101 technical reports are higher than 32%.
The Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Disclosure Working Group has the mandate to codify best practices related to NI 43-101. The scope of this working group includes:
Topics for discussion could include:
CIM discussion abstract:
NI 43-101 and risks. What risks?
The definition of the “viewing angle” (corporate, investor, regulators, public, etc.), the success/ failure criteria, the resulting multi-dimensional consequences are of paramount importance when attempting to perform a risk assessment (RA). If any of those is missing or unclear any RA will be meaningless or at least misleading.
This is particularly important when looking at the relationship between the disclosure requirements intended for investors following, for example, NI43-101. NI43-101 reports should provide information about a mine to prospective investors. However, in our experience, numerous factors generally not included in the report can turn a great prospect into a financial disaster, with dire consequences to the investors.
Recent failures of tailings facilities brought back this particular issue with great emphasis.
Thus it is reasonable to ask: should an NI43-101 report contain information about critical mine’s facilities (risks) such as tailings, access roads, logistics, etc..? And, if positive, which ones? Should NI43-101 report include holistic convergent scalable and drillable risk assessments? Again, if positive, convergence should cover at least:
We will focus the attention on various well reported accidents such as Duke Energy, Mount Polley, Boliden, Samarco looking at the share valuation over the accident period and other consequences and comparing those “occurred risks” to other possible events. We will show the effect of “one out of many” possible events, compare it to “one out of one” event. As we have developed to date large spectrum risk assessments for tailings systems, dumps, road and railroad mining logistic, mining wharves, water, energy, cyber, etc. we will use these example to show that a risk assessment intended for investors is very different (in its conclusions) than the one intended for the corporation or a manager.
Conclusion: if considering investment in a new mine or investment in a mine upgrade read the NI43-101 report but don’t think it is enough. It is time to get the full picture and understand a few specific points about what risks really matter to you, the investor.
|Event:||Private presentation at Biotechnology Research Institute of the National Research Council of Canada|
|Date/Time:||28/04/2017 - 10:00 am - 12:00 pm|
|Location:||National Research Council Canada, 6100 Royalmount, montreal,|
Private presentation at Biotechnology Research Institute of the National Research Council of Canada
This Private presentation at Biotechnology Research Institute of the National Research Council of Canada is a two hours event covering a wide spectrum of interests.
Scope of the presentation