Students are to prepare a report sharing their report results that consider the following overall questions:

Should Rio Tinto have lost its licence to operate in Australia following their disregard for cultural heritage by destroying Juukan Gorge on 24th May 2020?

What Corporate Governance failures led to the destruction of Juukan Gorge? Have Rio Tinto taken actions to address the governance limitations and is this sufficient?

To what extent are financial reports and ESG rankings useful in investment decision making under this example of governance failure?

Student guidance In answering the above questions there is no specific right or wrong answer. Different points of view are acceptable. What is required is that students should form an opinion based on research to back up their opinion(s). Submissions should take into consideration the company actions, legalities, policies leading up to the event and impact and influence of a variety of stakeholders. [These stakeholders may include (but not limited to): shareholders, debt providers, the local community, government agencies, employees and other.] Other items found during research not mentioned above may also be considered.

The following questions, comments and notes are listed to guide students thoughts in formation of opinions to back up their answer to the above questions. This is not an exhaustive list rather prompts to get students started in their research journey.

Examine Rio Tintos annual reports for 2019, 2020 and 2021 and explore the following:

(Years represent, the year before, the year of, and the year after the Juukan Gorge tragedy).

Provide a background to Rio Tinto as a company in Australia and globally. For example, what are the main operations, where do they operate, are they a good company, comment on their income statement and balance sheet ie are they doing well financially are they a good investment?

Provide a background to what happened at Juukan Gorge on 24th May 2020 and events leading up to the destruction of the culturally significant site.

Is there evidence of Rio Tinto destroying culturally significant sites before or after Juukan Gorge in Australia or anywhere else in the world?

What were the consequences for Rio Tinto for Juukan Gorge? IF any, are they impactful enough?

What relevant policies and guidelines are disclosed in Rio Tintos annual reports before and after the destruction of Juukan Gorge?

Do Rio Tinto disclose good governance practices and does what they disclose match actual practice?

Do auditors have an opinion on what happened at Juukan Gorge? How does this impact your opinion?

Have any financial amounts been disclosed in relation to Juukan Gorge? Why or why not?

What revenue streams and profits are Rio Tinto operations making in Australia and globally and how does this compare to what they are spending on philanthropy and controllable social and environmental practices? (Note: climate change is NOT the focus but should not be ignored. Practical positive contributions to stakeholders and rehabilitation should be emphasised).

Over the period 2019 to 2021 how have ESG/CSR/sustainability disclosures changed? IF they have, do you have an opinion on why you think this is the case? ALL items of ESG can be considered here and evidence of Greenwashing should be considered, including whether the ESG information is useful for decision making in this instance.

References are required using the most recent Chicago or APA style (only one style throughout). There is no specific word limit but waffling is discouraged. Make each sentence count and each paragraph should stick to a single clear point.