evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Tolagnaro Littoral Forest Compensation Sites — QMM Ilmenite Mine (Madagascar)

Madagascar · Tolagnaro · See the Madagascar profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 99% 13/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Rio Tinto's QMM ilmenite mine near Tolagnaro offsets 1,665 ha of forest loss with ~6,000 ha of protected forest, about 3.5x the footprint, but researchers find the offset habitat ecologically mismatched and patrollers paid below minimum wage.

1,665 ha
Littoral forest affected by mining concession
~6,000 ha
Total offset forest area created
~3.5x
Offset-to-impact area ratio
~4,000 ha
Bemangidy-Ivohibe offset site area
500 ha
Sainte Luce offset site area
1,500 ha
Agnalahaza offset site area
350,000+ US$
Conservation management budget (Asity Madagascar) (2015-2019)
~25,000 ariary (~US$6.80)
Forest-patrol worker monthly pay (2018)
170,000 ariary (~US$45)
Madagascar minimum wage (2018)
~40 US$ billion
Rio Tinto global revenue (2018)
Tolagnaro Littoral Forest Compensation Sites — QMM Ilmenite Mine (Madagascar)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) / Rio Tinto, with Asity Madagascar
Period
2008–present (40+ year mine life)
Keywords
ilmenite and mineral sands mining, biodiversity offset, littoral forest conservation

Context

QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM), a Rio Tinto subsidiary, has mined ilmenite and zircon from littoral forest near Tolagnaro (Fort Dauphin) in southeastern Madagascar since 2008, in a project expected to run more than 40 years, affecting around 1,665 hectares of littoral forest - among the rarest and most threatened forest types on Earth.

Objectives

Offset the forest loss from mining with protected forest sites intended to exceed the destroyed area.

Activities

QMM created three protected forest sites - Bemangidy-Ivohibe (part of the 60,000-hectare Tsitongambarika Protected Area, roughly 4,000 ha), Sainte Luce forest (500 ha) and Agnalahaza forest (1,500 ha) - managed on the ground by the NGO Asity Madagascar with an estimated budget of at least US$350,000 over 2015-2019.

Results

The combined ~6,000 hectares of offset forest is about 3.5 times the 1,665-hectare mine footprint. Unlike Rio Tinto's separately evaluated Ambatovy offset elsewhere in Madagascar - found on track for no net loss of forest in a 2022 Nature Sustainability study - QMM's offset habitat at Bemangidy-Ivohibe is lowland humid forest, ecologically distinct from the littoral forest being destroyed at the mine, a mismatch researchers say undermines the offset's 'like-for-like' premise.

Conclusions

Reporting found forest-patrol workers paid around 25,000 ariary (roughly US$6.80) per month in 2018, well below Madagascar's contemporaneous minimum wage of 170,000 ariary (roughly US$45), while Rio Tinto's global revenue that year (roughly US$40 billion) dwarfed Madagascar's entire GDP (roughly US$12 billion). FAPBM, which joined the offset-linked COMBO+ programme, has itself stated that questions about funding sustainability, effectiveness and greenwashing risk remain openly unresolved.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) / Rio Tinto (mine operator), Asity Madagascar (NGO managing on-the-ground conservation activity), Fondation pour les Aires Protegees et la Biodiversite de Madagascar (FAPBM) - COMBO+ programme

Conditions for success

  • Offset area substantially exceeding the mine footprint (3.5x)
  • A dedicated NGO partner managing conservation sites on the ground

Common failure modes

  • Offset habitat at Bemangidy-Ivohibe (lowland humid forest) is ecologically distinct from the littoral forest being destroyed, a mismatch researchers say undermines the offset's 'like-for-like' premise, unlike Rio Tinto's separately evaluated Ambatovy offset
  • Forest-patrol workers were paid roughly 45% below Madagascar's contemporaneous minimum wage in 2018
  • FAPBM itself states questions about funding sustainability, effectiveness and greenwashing risk remain openly unresolved

Commonly funded by

Own resources / municipal budget

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful