Australia’s mining sector is confronting an uncomfortable truth: in the latest Fraser Institute survey, Western Australia slid from 4th to 17th place, Queensland fell from 13th to 39th, and New South Wales dropped 32 places to 62nd. These rankings are often treated as a bellwether for investment confidence and suggest policy headwinds are stiffening. However, global experience tells a more complex story.

Resolute Mining built its reputation on operating profitable gold mines in Mali and Senegal despite both nations languishing near the bottom of policy perception tables. The company’s success has often been attributed to its investment in automation, cost optimisation, and relationship-building with host governments, strategies that have allowed it to maintain steady production in politically and regulatory challenging environments.

That said, recent years have underlined the limits of such resilience. Rising operating costs, declining grades, and changing fiscal regimes have increased pressure on margins, while a high-profile dispute with the Malian government in late 2024 led to the temporary detention of senior executives and a substantial settlement payment. These events highlight that even with strong operational expertise, navigating high-risk jurisdictions requires constant vigilance and flexibility.

Similarly, Ivanhoe Mines’ development of the Kamoa-Kakula copper complex in the Democratic Republic of Congo has shown how world-class geology can attract major international investment, even in a country ranked among the lowest for policy perception. The project has delivered globally significant production milestones, supported by major infrastructure investment, skilled local employment, and phased expansion plans.

Yet 2025 has reminded investors in Ivanhoe of the operational risks inherent in mining, with seismic flooding forcing a temporary suspension of underground mining, the withdrawal of annual guidance, and a sharp downgrade to production forecasts. These setbacks, while being addressed through extensive remediation works, are being navigated through a less favourable jurisdiction that may impose additional challenges and are a reminder of the complexity around sustaining momentum in such operating environments.

In Southeast Asia, PanAust has operated successfully in Laos for over a decade. The company’s track record reflects the value of long-term engagement, consistent community investment, and integration with regional logistics networks. While Laos has experienced fluctuating rankings in international assessments, PanAust’s approach has been to focus on what it can control, such as operational efficiency, workforce development, and maintaining stable relations with the government. This strategy has enabled it to navigate policy changes without derailing its production or profitability.

For Australia, the recent declines hopefully prompt governments to address regulatory bottlenecks and policy uncertainty, but they probably don’t need to be interpreted as a death knell for investment. Companies with strong technical expertise, adaptable strategies, and robust stakeholder engagement can evidently still achieve success, even in jurisdictions with far less favourable ratings, so why not Australia?

In the end, jurisdictional rankings are a valuable tool for assessing risk, but they are not a substitute for detailed due diligence. For investors and operators alike, the lesson should not be lost that success depends as much on the ability to adapt to local realities as it does on the perceived ease of doing business.

Australia’s mining sector remains fortunate in its geology so the challenge, and perhaps opportunity, will be to ensure that while its rankings may fluctuate, its capacity to navigate the changing playing field plus attract and sustain investment in world-class projects remains steady.