Natural resources

From seedlings to saplings of hope: updated report on promising efforts to address environmental corruption

The diversity of activities to prevent and combat corruption that harms the environment is laudable. But it is far from the scale needed to tackle today's corruption and environmental challenges. Adopted in 2019, UNCAC Resolution 8/12 – Preventing and combating corruption as it relates to crimes that have an impact on the environment – urges States Parties to the UN Convention Against Corruption UNCAC to prevent, investigate and prosecute corruption offences where they may be linked to crimes that have an impact on the environment. In 2023, the Basel Institute on Governance published its Working Paper 50, Seedlings of hope , providing a panorama of emerging and promising initiatives across the world since the adoption of Resolution 8/12. The new Working Paper Saplings of hope , prepared for the 11th Conference of the States Parties CoSP in Doha, Qatar in December 2025, highlights what progress has been achieved since then. The report was made possible by the generous support of the Principality of Liechtenstein. Below are the main takeaways, but we urge you to read the full Working Paper for concrete examples from Bolivia, Canada, Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Namibia, Ukraine and other countries. Corruption prevention measures States have implemented a host of initiatives to strengthen integrity systems. Most commonly, this included the revision and adoption of internal control policies, more dedicated risk management efforts, including through the establishment of corruption prevention committees, and a range of capacity building efforts to strengthen environmental agencies’ ability to mitigate their own corruption risks, such as workshops on ethics codes and other integrity measures. Whistleblower protection programmes were increasingly designed, implemented and promoted. Corruption risk assessments were conducted in sectors such as wildlife management, forestry and fisheries. Promising corruption prevention interventions include: Conducting regular corruption perception and experience surveys among staff. This can help assess both progress and the effectiveness of corruption prevention measures. It can also create baselines against which to measure progress. Not enough interventions and reform efforts start with such a baseline, which means they then struggle to assess progress. Involving high-level management and leadership at each stage of the corruption prevention approach. This can help develop ownership and accountability. Explaining how integrity efforts support the strategic and political priorities of the leadership is crucial to achieve this. It requires adapting technocratic approaches to be relevant to the institutional leadership. Stipulating a mandatory budget for corruption prevention across ministries, agencies and departments. This can help ensure that minimal investments in integrity and anti-corruption activities are effectively prioritised and implemented. Sanctions for not respecting the mandatory budget should be imposed. Launching awareness-raising campaigns to promote knowledge of anti-corruption measures. This is an important first step to their effective implementation. Developing whistleblowing mechanisms. They can help increase reporting and detection of corruption. To achieve their potential, whistleblower mechanisms require a strong system, reliable protections and an institutional culture that welcomes such feedback. Peer-to-peer learning for government representatives from different countries and institutions to exchange on corruption prevention actions. This can be relevant, as anti-corruption officials often struggle with similar institutional challenges. Peer exchanges can help people and institutions to learn from each other’s successes and challenges and jointly identify effective mitigation measures. Enforcement actions Several countries have investigated and prosecuted corruption cases linked to crimes that have an impact on the environment. Financial investigations and money laundering legislation are more frequently used to tackle these crimes. The systematic seizure and confiscation of assets is still just beginning, as is the creation of multi-agency and interdisciplinary task forces, nationally and internationally. However, enforcement actions on corruption as it relates to crimes that have an impact on the environment are still limited. Promising enforcement interventions include: Assessing the economic, social and environmental losses from cases of corruption linked to crimes that have an impact on the environment – and using these to calculate associated penalties and fines – can help compensate and restore some of the harm done. Combining calculations of losses due to corruption with those of losses due to the environmental crimes can result in stiffer sentences and penalties. Seizing and confiscating proceeds and instrumentalities of crime bank accounts, real estate, vehicles, machineries, etc. through the diverse legal instruments available in jurisdictions can help ensure that crime does not pay. It also removes the resources needed to continue activities that harm the environment, thereby halting ongoing destruction. Exploring legal avenues outside the anti-corruption field can help strengthen enforcement. These include legislation on money laundering and tax offences as well as the social re-use of seized and confiscation assets, sanctions and visa bans. Essential role of civil society and the media Alongside States, civil society organisations and the media have played an essential role in increasing our understanding of the relationship between corruption and crimes that have an impact on the environment. Their efforts span investigative reporting, publishing evidence-based research, capacity building, creating networks to bridge the gap between anti-corruption and environmental practitioners, as well as initiating strategic litigation cases. Their involvement is all the more commendable given that they are facing an increasingly repressive environment. The way forward As the Working Paper highlights, various activities are taking place to tackle corruption linked to crimes that have an impact on the environment. The paper picks out those that show significant promise. The diversity of engagements is laudable, but it is far from the scale needed to make a systemic difference to both societal corruption and environmental challenges. States Parties need to adapt and scale up initiatives that are effective or look promising, by, among other things: Ensuring more robust staffing and prioritisation of corruption prevention systems in government and state-owned enterprises tasked with conserving, managing or trading natural resources. Developing specialised knowledge and expertise of governmental institutions and agencies to better address corruption that impacts the environment. Incorporating anti-corruption measures into environmental and natural resource policies and strengthening environmental governance structures to include anti-corruption internal controls and mechanisms. Dedicating greater resources for specialised law enforcement to pursue complex financial flows linked to corruption and crimes that have an impact on the environment. Increasing inter-agency collaboration and conducting joint operations on corruption that has an impact on the environment. Making use of legal frameworks and testing new legal avenues to hold individuals and legal persons accountable, including through asset recovery and remedies to repair the damage. Engaging in platforms for representatives from governments, civil society and other stakeholder groups to exchange experiences and know-how in tackling corruption that has an impact on the environment. Sharing knowledge, case law, success stories, etc. Ensuring that this issue is integrated in all relevant United Nations processes such as the ones related to climate and biodiversity. Protecting and defending civil society space, press freedom and human rights defenders working on the environment and corruption-related issues. As these initiatives have now been conducted for six years, there is a sufficient body to scrutinise their effectiveness and efficiency. It is therefore essential to rigorously assess these measures, especially in an environment of increasingly scarce financial resources. Addressing corruption that has an impact on the environment The Working Paper also makes a case for moving from the concept of “corruption as it relates to crimes that have an impact on the environment” to “corruption that has an impact on the environment”. Focusing solely on corruption linked to crimes that have an impact on the environment overlooks situations where corruption causes environmental harm without an associated criminal offence. It does not take into consideration pressing issues such as corruption linked to climate finance, renewable energy and the exploitation of critical minerals. Adopting a holistic approach is crucial to address all forms of corruption that affect the environment, and thus to protect the environment and people. Learn more Read the full Working Paper 61: Saplings of hope: Addressing corruption that has an impact on the environment in line with UNCAC Resolution 8/12 and beyond View the recordings of the "Environment Day" at the 11th CoSP. Learn more about our Green Corruption programme

How tackling green corruption can help us get ahead in the race to net zero

Juhani Grossmann and Amanda Cabrejo le Roux explain the strategic re-focusing of our Green Corruption programme on energy and climate: What is “green” corruption and why does it matter? Green corruption refers to corruption and other financial crimes and governance failures that harm the environment and hinder global efforts to combat climate change. It’s the reason crimes such as illicit deforestation, mining and wildlife trade continue to be multimillion-dollar illegal industries making organised criminals rich at the expense of our planet and the livelihoods of local communities. Green corruption also diverts crucial investments intended for renewable energy and other climate-related projects. Adapting to humanity’s changing energy needs in a just and sustainable manner are challenging enough. We cannot afford to let corruption undermine these generational challenges. What are some key achievements of the programme so far? We are proud that since its launch in 2018, the Green Corruption programme has contributed to significant strides in tackling corruption affecting the environment. Our programme started with an enforcement focus: applying “follow the money” approaches to environmental crimes like illegal wildlife trade and illegal logging. In practice, that means mentoring and training law enforcement officers of national partner agencies to investigate financial transactions that fuel environmental crimes, including between criminal groups and corrupt facilitators. And ideally, to seize and confiscate illicit profits or assets used in the crimes. That’s the only way to get beyond the low-level perpetrators – such as poachers – to the high-level facilitators and organised crime networks. And the only way to take the profit out of the crime, reducing the incentives to engage in it. At the end of 2024, assets worth around CHF 29.6 million were being targeted in 56 cases directly supported by our advisors. We had quite a few “firsts” – like Uganda’s first ever indictment for tax evasion and money laundering against a wildlife trafficking syndicate, Malawi’s first ever corruption cases related to natural resource crimes, Peru’s confiscation of over CHF 3 million in assets related to forestry and gold trafficking, and Indonesia’s first ever conviction on money laundering in relation to an illegal logging case. Behind the headlines lie many more positive steps towards changing mindsets and the priorities of law enforcement agencies to go after the finances of environmental criminals. Our prevention work rapidly grew as we and our partners realised the chronic under-investment in building systems that strengthen resilience to corruption in the environmental sector. Government agencies and state-owned enterprises in countries as diverse as Indonesia, Malawi, Ukraine and Bolivia have now begun to systematically assess and address corruption risks that are affecting their ability to carry out their important functions of protecting the environment and natural resources. Our prevention specialists supported these in applying our bespoke methodology of assessing and prioritising corruption risks and implementing targeted mitigation measures. We developed a customised internal controls maturity assessment tool to reflect the historic lack of investment in this space, which meant that mainstream assessment tools were insufficiently granular at the first stage of maturity to reflect nuances and chart paths to growth. As result of our partnerships, mitigation measures have been institutionalised in many agencies – for example: in Malawi through the creation of Internal Integrity Committees in environmental agencies; in Ukraine through the empowerment of anti-corruption officers to participate in key decision-making processes; in Ecuador by reducing unsupervised discretion in environmental inspections; in Indonesia in the adoption of conflict of interest regulations in the management of timber sales; and in Peru through the automation and digitalisation of numerous permitting and licensing processes related to the wood value chain. Also pleasing to see are the many collaborations and partnerships that have sprung from our work. In Latin America, for example, forestry officials in Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador are now collaborating on protecting the Amazon rainforest through corruption prevention. Still, targeting and preventing corruption tends to be a lonely effort. So, we have established the Countering Environmental Corruption Practitioners Forum together with WWF, TRAFFIC and Transparency International as a support network, and it has now grown to over 800 members and four working groups. There are frequent meetings and collaborations between practitioners dedicated to tackling corruption and improving governance, and those specialised in environmental conservation or climate initiatives. It’s a sign there’s much appetite and energy for action against green corruption Why is now the time to focus on the energy transition? Whatever happens in these volatile times, one thing is certain: we’ll continue to see growing demands for energy transition and climate mitigation and adaptation. The urgency of tackling the energy transition, and the rapid increase in investments from both the public and private sectors, leaves the door wide open to criminals and the corrupt seeking to profit at the expense of investors and donors – as well as the planet. A clear example in this space is the growing geopolitical centrality of critical minerals and rare earths. The rapid rise in demand has been accompanied by particularly fragile governance structures, intense political and economic subsidies, and even warfare. Our experience shows that these are all breeding grounds for corruption. We are therefore prioritising efforts to analyse and mitigate corruption risks in this space in Bolivia, Indonesia and Ukraine. Ensuring that the energy transition is safeguarded from corruption is essential for achieving net-zero goals. As outlined in our Working Paper on good governance and the just transition, corrupt practices can jeopardise renewable energy investments and hinder the development of clean energy infrastructure. Rapidly emerging market-based solutions to stimulate responsible behaviour, such as carbon offsets, are also affected by weak governance systems and opportunities for corruption. The fast-evolving and highly technical nature of these activities only increases this risk. Corruption risks similarly threaten the effectiveness of climate mitigation and adaptation efforts. If funds are embezzled, used fraudulently or diverted to benefit powerful elites, that’s bad for donors and investors. And it’s bad for local communities, many of which are also directly affected by climate change. On the other hand, there are opportunities. Using corruption risk management tools and enhancing enforcement capabilities can help companies and governments to create thriving, profitable supply chains of critical minerals needed for renewable energy facilities, electric vehicles and the like. What does this shift in priorities mean in practice? Through our Green Corruption programme, we are adapting to this evolving landscape by sharpening our focus on transition minerals and the renewable energy sector. We will continue our dual approach of prevention and enforcement, working closely with long-standing partners in Ukraine, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malawi, Uganda, Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador. Some things you might see us doing in the next years: Strengthening transparency and anti-corruption measures in the extraction and trade of lithium, nickel, germanium and other minerals and rare earths essential for the energy transition. Customising financial investigation and asset recovery tools to the specifics of the energy transition. Working with governments, financial institutions and civil society to safeguard energy transition and climate mitigation funds from corruption, fraud and related crimes. We will continue full force our ongoing engagement related to metals gold in particular and the forestry sector, which remain highly strategic. In other areas, such as illegal wildlife trade, fisheries and waste, we will be more discerning, carefully assessing the potential of engagements prior to pursuing them. What impact do we hope to achieve? By applying our expertise to emerging climate and energy challenges, we want to contribute to measurable improvements in the energy transition, environmental conservation, climate change mitigation and equitable economic development. Through these efforts, our Green Corruption programme will continue to play a vital role in ensuring that the green transition is not only sustainable but also just, transparent and a win-win for all: businesses, local communities and society at large – as well as our planet.

Peter Maurer on new priorities in addressing corruption, environment and climate challenges

Environmental destruction and corruption are two of the greatest global challenges of our time. Both are closely interrelated… This was the starting point of a high-level meeting hosted by the Principality of Liechtenstein. Dominique Hasler and Panagiotis Potolidis of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs led the discussions together with Peter Maurer, President of the Basel Institute on Governance, and Juhani Grossmann, Head of our Green Corruption Programme. The participants took a fresh look at the interconnected threats posed by corruption, environmental degradation and climate change, and at our Green Corruption programme's renewed focus on climate and the energy transition. In his address, Peter Maurer also reflected on the need for bold collective action across borders to tackle these key global challenges. Our Green Corruption programme – made possible through core funding from Liechtenstein – is a powerful example of how international partnerships and innovative solutions can make a real difference. An edited excerpt of Peter Maurer’s speech follows: Building on 20 years of global and national experience in the fight against corruption, we at the Basel Institute have had the opportunity over the last seven years to look more closely at the interfaces between corruption and the environment. In our Green Corruption programme we are working with partners across four continents, supporting both enforcement and corruption prevention. While the political focus on environmental issues and the protection of natural resources in the past has brought many positive results, we have also seen how corruption and financial crime have become drivers of environmental problems: Standards are not adhered to. Illegal trade and financial activities lead to new forms of exploitation of nature. Regulatory authorities can be influenced, supervisory and enforcement authorities bribed into inaction. Climate legislation is manipulated. And wherever a lot of new funds flow in – like climate finance or renewable energy projects – there are direct and indirect risks of abuse. Integrity and anti-corruption are crucial in effectively tackling the climate and environmental crisis. But the relevant authorities, such as law enforcement and environmental protection agencies, cooperate very little, either with each other or with other stakeholders. The good news is: There are encouraging examples. Our broad geographical focus allows us to take stock and make concrete suggestions for the future. Where corruption and environmental issues converge Our Green Corruption team is intensifying efforts in key areas where we see corruption undermining our collective ability to tackle the climate crisis: the energy transition and climate finance. Energy transition Renewable energy is essential to address climate change. The renewables sector comes with new regulations, financial flows, processes, actors. The new settings also mean new integrity risks to address. In addition, renewable energies depend on the mining of critical raw materials. Lithium or nickel, for example, are used in the production of batteries or renewable power generation in turbines or solar modules. There is growing long-term demand for the mining of these minerals. The increasing competition for these resources invites new players, such as technology companies and commodity traders. And this new rush is accompanied by numerous corruption scandals. Despite the high risks, very few safeguards are put in place to prevent corruption from undermining the effective, consensual and sustainable extraction of critical materials. In the next phase of our Green Corruption programme, we are starting detailed investigations into corruption risks, including with regard to lithium in Ukraine and nickel in Indonesia. These studies will also help us to support government authorities in strengthening their internal controls and risk mitigation measures. Climate finance We all know today that tackling the effects of climate change will require enormous investments. These are necessary to a slow down climate change, and b prepare and adapt to the unavoidable effects of the changing climate. Despite these two strategies being subject to political volatility, the basic facts make this an even stronger growth area in the medium to long term. The UN puts the cost of tackling climate change at USD 5.5 trillion a year. This is more than the combined GDP of Germany and Switzerland. Very substantial financial resources are already being invested in mitigating and adapting to climate change. As money is tight and climate change compete with other financial priorities like defence and migration, we need to get more out of existing funds. That means ensuring that they are not lost to corruption. Unfortunately, our partners at Transparency International are documenting a growing number of corruption incidents in climate initiatives: Bribery to secure land for carbon capture; permits and licences for infrastructure that can only be obtained through corruption; bribes for environmental impact assessments; corruption in the certification and sale of carbon credits. There are multiple, complex reasons for corruption being present in the responses to climate change. These range from weak internal controls and excessive decision-making powers at environmental regulatory authorities to poorly designed and safeguarded carbon offsetting projects. Overall, our efforts aim to boost cooperation between different actors to help integrity standards and better practice to take hold. There is a need for greater understanding of systemic issues, more effective training and better legal, political and institutional guidance. Seeking answers The international community is faced with a number of pertinent questions: How can we use the money we have to make an impact on important problems relating to the environment, climate change, biodiversity, water and food? How can we build on market forces and support competitive companies that contribute to the necessary energy and economic policy changes? How can we make access to critical materials transparent so that we can better utilise them to bring about environmental and energy policy change globally? How can we better harmonise regulatory measures and our own initiatives? Finding and implementing answers to these questions is challenging, not least in the face of geopolitical volatility and transactional politics. But it also presents opportunities for players of all sizes, including small and medium-sized countries, to show leadership, push for innovative solutions and get involved in tangible ways. The Principality of Liechtenstein is doing just that. Its support of initiatives at the intersection of corruption and the environment such as our Green Corruption programme goes a long way.

How corruption threatens the forests of Ukraine: launch of Environmental Corruption Deep Dive report

Your browser does not support the video tag. The Basel Institute has published a comprehensive new analysis of corruption and illegal logging in Ukraine. Juhani Grossmann, who leads the Basel Institute’s Green Corruption programme, explains what it covers and why the report comes at a crucial time for Ukraine and its partners. Ukrainian forests cover over 10 million hectares – about the size of Iceland, or 2.5 times the size of Switzerland – mainly in the western and northern parts of Ukraine. Their preservation is key for the rich ecosystems and climate benefits that Ukrainian forests represent and the communities that depend on them. Economically, the full-scale Russian attack on Ukraine in 2022 has drastically heightened the relative value of the previously under-utilised role that forests play in the national economy. This is because Ukraine’s main industrial areas are located in occupied and fought-over territories and a large share have thus become dysfunctional. Forests, thankfully, are largely located in the “safe” areas of Ukraine and thus remain a largely intact resource. Corruption: an ever-present threat to Ukraine’s forests Continued attacks on civilian infrastructure are creating high demand for forest products to generate heat and be used in reconstruction efforts. The Ukrainian Government has recognised the sector’s increased importance by creating a new state-owned enterprise, Forests of Ukraine. However, corruption still fails to appear at the core of the discussions in the governance of the forestry sector. In this regard, Ukraine is unfortunately no different from many of the other countries in which the Basel Institute’s Green Corruption programme operates: environmental corruption prevention efforts are a low priority everywhere. For Ukraine’s forests to play their role in its reconstruction, significant reforms are needed: both its sustainability and governance are currently insufficient to meet this challenge. - Without sustainability, any short-term benefits of exploiting forests will be outweighed by the long-term harm to Ukraine’s environment and economy. - Without solid governance systems, corruption could undermine even short-term reconstruction benefits. First Environmental Corruption Deep Dive The report, in English and Ukrainian, is the first in a new Environmental Corruption Deep Dive series of research papers by the Basel Institute on Governance. The research series is funded by the Principality of Liechtenstein, which provides core funding to the Basel Institute's Green Corruption programme. It seeks to take systematic stock of the pre-war governance and corruption issues in Ukraine’s forestry sector. It reveals significant challenges as governance reforms have not yet had a significant effect. Considering that the EU is tightening its transparency and sustainability requirements for forestry products, and that the EU makes up the majority of Ukraine’s wood products exports, these reforms are increasingly urgent to ensure this vital market remains accessible. This report identifies a typology of the main corruption patterns that enable illegal logging, involving both private actors and culprits within national authorities. It illuminates, among other corruption patterns, the challenge of corruptly obtained permits allowing illegally sourced wood to be sold and exported “legally” and contributing to the governance issues. And it proposes targeted recommendations for European authorities, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada and Cabinet of Ministers, and relevant Ukrainian government agencies. Building back greener We urge all actors to come to the table at this critical time and take stock of corruption challenges and anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine’s forestry sector so far. And, based on their knowledge, to play their parts to ensure that Ukraine’s forestry sector does not become the reconstruction effort’s Achilles’ heel. It is our hope that this pre-war stock-taking will enable Ukraine to rebuild back better and greener. Download and launch event - Download the report in English and Ukrainian. - View a summary of the launch event on Wednesday, 5 April 2023.

Opening Extractives: how beneficial ownership transparency in extractive sectors helps curb corruption

Publishing information on the real owners of companies, also known as beneficial owners, can help governments curb corruption and support a more transparent environment for business. A session at the 4th International Collective Action Conference in Basel discussed how the new ‘ Opening Extractives ’ programme seeks to create new momentum for beneficial ownership transparency in a sector that has been prone to corruption risks. This guest blog by Mark Robinson, Executive Director of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative EITI explains the key takeaways with insights from the other panellists. Why beneficial ownership transparency matters As countries around the world face the dual challenges of climate change and the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, sustainable governance of natural resources is becoming an ever more critical issue. Funds are urgently required to address healthcare, economic and social needs arising from the pandemic. In resource-rich countries, the extractive sector makes a key contribution to tax revenue. There is a new wave of understanding of the importance of beneficial ownership transparency, including how government, industry and civil society organisations can support it. Anonymous companies remain a major obstacle in the fight against money laundering, corruption and tax evasion, which costs developing countries billions of dollars of lost revenue, in addition to the severe social costs. Protecting the real owners of the companies, also known as beneficial owners, can deter investment and make it harder for governments to curb corruption. No one makes the case for open registers more strongly than countries which are heavily exposed to mining, oil and gas revenues. This case, and the legal framework on which it relies, was clearly articulated at the International Collective Action Conference by Alhaji Garba Abubakar, Registrar-General at the Corporate Affairs Commission in Nigeria: “Companies must know the real owners and beneficiaries of the companies with whom they are dealing to ensure compliance with the law.” – Alhaji Garba Abubakar, Registrar-General, Corporate Affairs Commission, Nigeria How does beneficial ownership data combat corruption? Access to quality beneficial ownership data strengthens accountability in several ways. It shines a light on potential areas for corruption, strengthens responsible investment and provides information for citizens to hold those who misuse anonymous companies to account. By reducing the scope for corruption, tax evasion and other financial crimes, information about the beneficial owners of companies supports the potential for increased government revenues from the extractives sector, as well as the chances that these revenues will be used for development, rather than the enrichment of the few. Making sure this essential data is available, however, can only be possible with support from all sectors. This is the goal of our ambitious joint initiative, Opening Extractives. Working with governments, industry and civil society, Opening Extractives is committed to pushing the agenda forward and moving from commitments to action on beneficial ownership transparency. “Opacity about who owns companies is at the heart of wide-ranging weaknesses in the global financial system. It is a massive gap in our knowledge about the businesses that shape our lives. Without it, we will continue to tackle corruption, tax evasion and governance failures blindfolded and with our arms tied behind our backs.” – Thom Townsend, Executive Director, Open Ownership A new programme, new momentum Opening Extractives will build on progress made by governments, companies, civil society and other stakeholders to establish the legal reforms and technical systems required to make ownership data public and promote its use. For the past year, EITI and Open Ownership, who are jointly implementing the programme, have worked with local stakeholders to create a platform for government, civil society and industry to define their priorities to advance beneficial ownership transparency at the national level. Argentina, Armenia, Ghana, Indonesia, Liberia, Mexico, Mongolia, Nigeria, the Philippines, Senegal, and Zambia will draw on the programme to support their national efforts on beneficial ownership transparency, with launch events in eight of these countries to date. The programme has also provided technical support on disclosure of beneficial ownership data for national governments and capacity building to increase its use. It works to ensure that knowledge and lessons are shared at regional levels, and that evidence and insights are communicated globally to scale impact. In addition to fostering discussion and engagement, Opening Extractives has worked to understand the state of beneficial ownership reform through scoping studies that provide the foundation for technical assistance and capacity building. What does Opening Extractives aim to achieve? Through the initiative, we hope to achieve three outcomes by the end of 2025: Ensure government, industry, and civil society actors have greater access to comprehensive and reliable information on the ultimate owners of extractive industry companies. Enable government, industry, and civil society actors to more easily identify and address the risks related to hidden ownership. Advance beneficial ownership transparency in the extractive industries by communicating the impact and outcomes of the programme. The programme is primarily supported by the BHP Foundation and is working with other donors to broaden its support base and its potential reach and impact. A collective response to corruption The role of beneficial ownership transparency is paramount to closing channels for corruption, enabling effective taxation and building fairer markets. By involving governments, companies and civil society, Opening Extractives capitalises on the success of EITI’s multistakeholder approach and provides an opportunity for quality beneficial ownership data to become accessible to citizens. “Opening Extractives empowers citizens with information that helps them harness the transformative power of natural resource wealth for sustainable and inclusive human development. For beneficial ownership transparency to be successful working collectively across sectors is critical, which is why this initiative is so important.” – Claire Harbron, Chief Investment Officer, BHP Foundation

Corruption risks in the forestry sector in Ukraine