Australia’s geologists say they favour a “principles” approach rather than a “prescriptive” approach if there are to be any structural changes to the country’s reporting standard for minerals resources.

The Australian Securities Exchange is reviewing the way the country’s listed miners and explorers report their updates on exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves under what is known as the JORC code.

“JORC, as a principles-based system can deal with the complexity of mineral deposits and, back by qualified geologists, meet clear standards able to properly inform the public,” AIG president Andrew Waltho said in a statement.

He said the ASX appeared to favour a “checklist” or “prescriptive” approach in its recently released ASX Listing Rules discussion paper.

The Australian Institute of Geoscientists, one of the parent bodies of the JORC code, said the code had for more than three decades served regulators, industry and the public well in ensuring that all relevant minerals information was objectively disclosed.

The Institute believes a “checklist approach” may not deliver additional market transparency or the materiality of reporting by resources companies, compared to the current JORC approach.

“We note that every other resources reporting code in the word, except Canada, follows the JORC model,” Waltho said.

“No overseas minerals jurisdiction has adopted the prescriptive Canadian model now being considered by the ASX – so that is a performance yardstick that needs to be given some weight if there are major changes eventually proposed by the ASX.

“We would not want to see changes in reporting guidelines that either reduced the quality of reporting or damaged investor confidence in a sector now very much driving jobs and project growth in this country.

“It may more be a case that the JORC code itself does not need changing but that because of the mining booms underway at state and national levels in Australia, that the ASX’s regulatory staff may need additional resources to achieve timely administration and policing of minerals reporting.”

He said JORC had become internationally recognised and respected as a balanced and proven process for minimising market manipulation through deliberate misinformation.

Since the introduction of the JORC code in 1989, there had been no serious problems with the regime of self-regulated public reporting of resource company information it established in Australia.

“This has largely been due to the strength of the system created in Australia by JORC and the ASX working closely together,” Waltho said.

“The institute knows that the JORC committee would welcome ongoing consultation with the ASX on its proposed new regulatory regime.

“The overseas experience with a prescriptive approach has not prevented serious problems such as deliberate fraud.

“The JORC code review presents an opportunity for the ASX, the institute and other key stakeholder groups to continuously improve the transparency and materiality of information disclosed to investors.

“This in turn would further maintain Australia’s leadership and reputation in geoscience reporting integrity and investor confidence.”

He said the institute formally supported a measured and evolutionary refinement of securities exchange reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves, as any changes to the JORC code would also have international impacts in the equities and resources sectors.