2378 spanning communication and trust, transparency and accountability, building a common agenda, innovationled wealth creation, regional development, economic diversification, artisanal and informal mining, government capacity, and defining and communicating impact. Participant feedback was unambiguous about what the methodology produced that conventional meetings do not: access to stakeholders — faith groups, artisanal miners, community representatives — who are otherwise unreachable in industry settings; a structured environment that lowered barriers and created trust; and genuine dialogue rather than positional exchange. One participant noted: "The environment created during the sessions lowered barriers and helped create trust." Another observed that participants "saw something different and the possibility of new approaches” (DPI, 2018). The session also identified three Peruvian regions — Apurimac, Cajamarca, and Arequipa — as priority locations for follow-on Catalyst work, demonstrating the methodology's capacity to generate its own replication pathway from within the process itself. 6. SCALABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION The case studies above demonstrate Catalyst execution on three distinct scales: global/sectoral (RESCO), national/government-led (Zambia), and regional/cross-sectoral (Peru). The conditions for replication are identifiable and finite: a neutral convener with no policy agenda, a stakeholder group that is diverse but bounded by the scope of the specific challenge, a structured process that enforces equal representation and role clarity, and a commitment to beginning dialogue before a plan exists. The Zambia case illustrates a further capability of the methodology: the process extended beyond visioning into pilot initiatives grounded in local community needs. This provides evidence that the Catalyst's initial stage creates conditions for the subsequent phases of co-design and implementation. See Table 1 below for a comparison of the three cases, with different stakeholder compositions and outcome types, but the same methodology applied across all. Table 1 – Methodology and case comparison Case Geography Stakeholder composition Dialogue stage Outcome type RESCO (Responsible Sourcing Coalition) Global Whole of value chain Initial – visioncreation Stakeholder alignment Zambia – Social Investment Framework Country Mining value chain and civil society Initial – investment strategy creation Pilot initiatives grounded in local needs Peru – Country Catalyst Crosssectoral Mining value chain, civil society and faith groups Initial - exploratory Opportunities for further work None of the conditions to replicate the Catalyst are jurisdiction-specific. In fact, similar models do already exist, such as the First Nations Major Projects Coalition (FNMPC) approach in Canada, bringing Indigenous, government and private sector stakeholders together around major project governance. However, a neutral, jurisdiction-agnostic, whole-of-industry approach is needed for a united solution to the shared issue of low trust and high tension. As an industry, the mining sector could (and should) look to broader acceptance of a model and methodology like the Triangle of Trust/Catalyst approach.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2