reporting from 2003 to 2015, using the data the company discloses through its annual reports. The analysis is thus not based on what communities, workers or other stakeholders have to say1. In the face of Amplats claims to promote sustainable development and be socially responsible, two issues have to be raised:  To whom is Amplats ultimately reporting when it drafts its SDRs?  Is real sustainability possible when stakeholders of the local mining communities are not fully included in the decision making relating to issues which impact directly on them, such as the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) relating to Labour, Human Rights and Society, which are reported on through the SDRs? Amplats Sustainable Development Reports reports have also won numerous awards giving it international respectability, but reports in themselves don’t always tell it like it is, as this study will show. Our findings reveal that Amplats has been closely managing the information it discloses in its annual SDRs. Three distinct reporting periods, characterised by specific disclosure trends, were identified, with a constant, alleged focus on identifying and addressing “all material risks” and delivering “a postmining environment that is both sustainable and beneficial”. After many years of trial and error, it seems that the company has now found its recipe for its SDR. It has identified the sustainability issues which are important to its purposes and the associated stories it wants to tell its SDR readers, as illustrated by the numerous awards received in this process. This study has assessed whether the company’s narrative matches its actual data on sustainability impacts over the years. Our analysis of the economic key performance indicators (KPIs) disclosed by the company shows that Amplats made choices favouring shareholders over workers and communities during the period when it returned substantial profit. Amplats did not fairly share the value created from platinum group metals (PGM) mining with all its stakeholders. As annual gross revenue increased from R16.5 billion in 2003 to R51.1 billion in 2008 (a significant increase of 209.7%), annual dividend payments increased by a massive 406.7% from R2.7 billion in 2003 to R15.2 billion in 2008. At the same time, however, annual overall distributions to workers increased by only 101% from R4 974 million in 2003 (when there were 44 217 full-time employees) to R8 847 million in 2008 (when 58 103 people were employed full-time), whereas annual community spending in 2008 (R21 million) was only 91% of its level in 2003 (R23.1 million) – a 9% decrease. When the global economic crisis started in 2008, Amplats’ situation changed dramatically… but not for the better. Though annual dividends were significantly lower for the period 2008 to 2015, compared to 2007 and 2008, so too was the total workforce, with contractors made progressively redundant. This occurred in the face of a lack of any clear evidence that the quality of life and working conditions of the remaining workforce had significantly improved. For example, there was no disclosure of minimum wage per employee category and gender, no clear statistics on the gaps between promises made on staff housing and actual delivery, and no health statistics such as on HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, for staff members, their families, or local communities. At the date of publication of Amplats’ 2015 SDR, the housing crisis facing workers remained unresolved. There were 5 743 employees housed in hostels, and 26 000 employees were still in receipt of living-out allowances, which, as acknowledged by the company, are often used for other purposes. This left 12 545 persons unaccounted for (44 288 total workforce disclosed in 2015 SDR2). However, it must be noted that the 26 000 workers receiving a living out allowance largely live in informal shanty towns or in backyard shacks, largely in dismal conditions. In addition, the extent of the company’s contribution to its R2.5 billion staff housing plans is less than 50%, according to Amplats’ 2008 and 2013 SDRs. Though that amount is unlikely to address all housing and service delivery problems to staff and their families, we question the lack of funds in the light of the good years before the onset of the financial crisis. Indeed, R2.5 billion is only 2.79% of total dividends paid to shareholders from 2003 to 2008. Furthermore, the Chief Executive Officer’s total remuneration package in 2014 was R18 492 937, which is:  About 5% of total royalties and rent paid to owners of surface and mineral rights (R374 million) in 2014;  About 17% of total local economic development expenditure (R107 million) in 2014;  4.3 times higher than total “community social investment” (R4.3 million) in 2006; and  72.5 times the average cost to company of the rest of the employees. This was calculated by dividing the sum of the employee annual salaries, wages and other benefits, including executive and non-executive remuneration, of R12 377 000 000 by the total workforce of 48 519 full-time employees and contractors. However, it should be noted that the average from this calculation is not a true reflection of the average wages of the majority, since the wages of the lowest paid workers are mixed up with executive remuneration, giving the impression of higher wages for these low-paid workers. Amplats should disaggregate wages according to levels of employment. From 2003 to 2013, Amplats focused much of its attention on environmental management, which includes compliance with legislation and permits together with the absence of significant environmental incidents. However, its detailed statistics on water use, sources and discharges do not explain their impact on people and nature, in time and space, and how Amplats effectively implemented the impact mitigation hierarchy. Furthermore, there is a complete lack of meaningful information on the impact on biodiversity and the ecosystem services used by surrounding communities. Reports on efforts to reduce annual air emissions tend to obscure the accumulated impacts of such emissions on climate. Amplats’ contribution to GHG emissions accumulated in the atmosphere had risen from under 10 000 kilotons in 2003 to 72 059 GHG kilotons by 2015, thus putting into perspective the company’s efforts at monitoring, managing and reducing both its Scope 1 (internally generated emissions) and Scope 2 (emissions due to purchased electricity) GHG emissions. Carbon neutrality for 2003 – 2013, at least for all Scope 1 emissions, should have been reached several years ago through carbon offset projects with social and biodiversity co-benefits. With roughly 70% of the world’s annual platinum production coming from South Africa, the platinum market is effectively an oligopoly. As Amplats produced 37% of the world’s platinum in 2015, it is astonishing that only 14% of the world’s supply of auto-catalysts comes from South Africa. At least 75%, if not more, of the platinum extracted in South Africa should be used locally in the production of manufactured goods, and it is a blight on the South African government and civil society that low levels of local production have continued for so long. The lack of local beneficiation, coupled with the lack of demonstrated positive social and environmental legacies, including job losses, widespread lack of housing for the workforce, no proper environmental, health and human rights statistics, as well as the disproportionally high dividends paid to shareholders from 2003 to 2008, do not constitute success stories. In particular, we cannot deduce from a reading of the company’s SDRs that it has made it a major point to check with community leaders on important community issues. Neither is there clear evidence that SDRs relating to community development are driven from the outcome of community consent and discussion between equals. Rather, there is an imbalance in power relations when it comes to community relations and decision making which involves the community. Our impression is that the company makes decisions on behalf of the mining communities in the area, but, because of the power imbalance, the community’s voice is not heard or incorporated into SDR decision making and implementation. Indeed, Amplats looks at SDRs from its own perspective. It lacks community involvement in SDR decision making relating to or impacting on the local mining community. The fact that the company has a licence to mine and a high budget does not mean that the local community is subservient to the mining company. That may have been the case in mining in the colonial area, but in a time where mining takes place in a geographical region which in the first instance belongs to the community and where the community has to consent to a Social Licence to Operate (SLO), there can be no place for a parent /child relationship or attitude either from the company’s perspective or indeed the state’s. To conclude, while all disclosure gaps identified throughout this report should be addressed by Amplats to provide stakeholders with a complete and fair account of its sustainability performance, several critical recommendations by Bench Marks Foundation are highlighted:  The need for Amplats to develop a comprehensive accounting model to disclose all its environmental and social benefits and costs to stakeholders, especially workers, their families, the communities surrounding mines and those aspects that are silent, such as biodiversity;  The need for Amplats to achieve net positive water, air and biodiversity impacts with social co-benefits, which implies (a) the full implementation of the impact mitigation hierarchy, including impact avoidance, minimisation, restoration and offset measures, (b) demonstrating that positive impacts outweigh corresponding negative ones (i.e. ecological equivalents between residual impacts and offset measures), and (c) building local capacity and creating jobs, especially for restoration and offset measures;  The need for all stakeholders to discuss how to use a significant share of the global value created from PGM mining to fund immediate, meaningful local beneficiation (manufacturing job creation), long-term job creation, viable local communities, and net positive environmental impacts;  The need for Amplats to support the Bench Marks Foundation’s Independent Capacity Building Fund and Independent Problem Solving Service with the intention of establishing equality in relations between company and community regarding issues which involve the community; and  The need for Amplats to recognise that the local community and local municipality could have differing viewpoints on specific issues. Taking cognisance of the municipality’s views should not mean that the community’s view is ignored.