Valuing regional geoscientific data acquisition programmes: addressing issues of quantification,uncertainty and risk

Abstract

Geological surveys worldwide are involved with research in support of sustainable mineral resource development. The socio-economic benefits to be derived from these activities, however, continue to raise organisational and government sector questions. Fundamental questions include whether or not the resources committed are appropriate and in economic balance with the total benefits to be derived. Another question concerns the degree to which such services should be funded by the community at large. These questions in turn raise important issues regarding the role and cost of geological surveys, the impact of their services, and how they should maximise community benefit from their activities and expertise. To assess the value of geoscientific information, standard valuation processes need to be modified. This paper reports on a methodology designed to quantify the 'worth' of programmes upgrading regional geoscientific infrastructure. An interdisciplinary approach is used to measure the impact of geoscientific information using quantitative resource assessment, computer-based mineral potential modelling, statistical analysis and risk quantification to model decision-processes and assess the impact of additional data. These modelling stages are used to address problems of complexity, uncertainty and credibility in the valuation of geoscientific data. A case study demonstrates the application of the methodology to generate a dollar value for current regional data upgrade programmes in the Geological Survey of Queensland. The results obtained are used for strategic planning of future data acquisition programmes aimed at supporting mineral resource management and stimulating effective exploration activity.

Mapping support for primary and secondary metal production

“…Australia: Several papers examine the support provided to mining firms through the below-cost provision of geo-scientific data by state or national geological surveys (Scott et al, 2002;Fogarty and Sagerer, 2016). The collection and public provision of these data reduces prospecting and exploration costs for the mining industry.…”

Analysis of improved government geological map information for mineral exploration: incorporating efficiency, productivity, effectiveness, and risk considerations

“…Scott et al (2002) addressed the societal value of updated geological information derived from royalties and reinvestment. Reedman et al (2002) observed that geological field surveys required for the production of new geological maps provide benefits from employment, charitable contributions, and their multiplier effects in developed countries.…”

Analysis of improved government geological map information for mineral exploration: Incorporating efficiency, productivity, effectiveness, and risk considerations

“…Anecdotal evidence suggests that updated geoscience information attracts investment, especially from junior exploration companies, and reduces risk at the earliest and riskiest stages of exploration when generally only smaller budgets are available. Empirical evidence was provided by Scott et al (2002), who applied a revealed preference technique using multiple regression to model the effect of age, type, and detail of government scientific data on total exploration dollars spent, to conclude that upgraded data sets accounted for 10% of the variance in proposed mineral exploration expense compared to a 5% contribution from old data sets. In the same study, an expressed preference procedure concluded that the perception of prospectivity at least doubled with the provision of the upgraded data sets.…”

“…The ultimate value of geoscientific information to the mineral explorer is different from the value to society (Gilbert, 1981). Scott et al (2002) addressed the societal value of updated geological information derived from royalties and reinvestment. Reedman et al (2002) observed that geological field surveys required for the production of new geological maps provide benefits from employment, charitable contributions, and their multiplier effects in developed countries.…”

“…Overall it remains difficult to assess a relationship between geoscience information and exploration investment given that the potential relationship is often blurred by lags between publication of information and exploration activities. Others, including Scott et al (2002) and Bhagwat and Ipe (2000) surveyed users to estimate the utility of geological information in hindsight. The challenge of this time-consuming approach lies in the framing of surveys and questions to elicit unbiased results (Mitchell and Carson, 1989;OXERA, 1999).…”