Assurance

Gold Fields Internal Audit (GFIA) provides independent assurance on the effectiveness of the governance, risk management and control processes within Gold Fields to the Group Audit Committee.

The internal audit activities performed during the year were identified through a combination of the Gold Fields risk management and combined assurance framework, as well as the
risk-based methodology adopted by GFIA. Internal Audit complies with the Institute of Internal Auditors’ International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, in the execution of its assurance function. Furthermore, GFIA operates a quality assurance programme that involves performing detailed quality review assessments. In 2020, GFIA underwent an External Quality Assurance and was found to be generally complaint with the International Professional Practices Framework as well as the Code of Ethics as prescribed by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

Annually, the risk-based annual audit plan is approved by the Audit Committee. The internal audit activities are executed by a team of appropriately qualified and experienced internal auditors, or through the engagement of external practitioners on specified and agreed terms. The Vice-President and Group Head of Internal Audit has a functional reporting line to the Audit Committee, to which quarterly feedback is provided.

The Covid-19 pandemic resulted in travel restrictions to Gold Fields’ operations, which led to GFIA adjusting its approach, objectives and scope on a number of audit activities, to continue meeting its audit mandate.

Based on the work performed by GFIA during the year, the Vice-President and Group Head of Internal Audit has presented the Audit Committee with an assessment on the effectiveness of the Company’s governance, risk management and system of internal control. It is GFIA’s opinion that the governance, risk management and internal control environment are effective within the Gold Fields business and provide reasonable assurance that the objectives of Gold Fields will be achieved. This GFIA assessment forms one of the basis for the Audit Committee’s recommendation in this regard to the Board.

Shyam Jagwanth

Vice-President and Group Head of Internal Audit

Johannesburg, South Africa

31 March 2021

ERM Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd (ERM) was engaged by Gold Fields to provide reasonable assurance in relation to selected sustainability information set out below and presented in Gold Fields’ 2020 Integrated Annual Report for the year ended 31 December 2020 (the Report).

Engagement summary
Engagement scope (subject matters):		1. Whether the 2020 data, for the period 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020, for the selected performance indicators listed in Tables 1 and 2 below, are fairly presented, in all material respects, with the reporting criteria 2. Whether the Directors’ statement in the “About this Report” section of the Report that Gold Fields has complied with the International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM) Sustainable Development Framework, Principles, Position Statements and reporting requirements is, in all material respects, fairly stated
Reporting criteria:		For environmental, health and safety and social indicators: GRI Standards (‘Core’ in-accordance option) and the GRI’s Mining and Metals Sector Disclosure (2013) Gold Fields GRI Standards Sustainability Reporting Guideline, V26 (November 2020) Gold Fields Group Protocol for Energy and Carbon Performance Data Management, V3 (October 2020) Gold Fields Group Health and Safety Reporting Guideline, V6 (January 2019) Guidance on Host Community Procurement Spend and Job Creation, V1.2 (January 2020) ICMM Sustainable Development Framework Reporting Requirements (2008) For Mining Charter-related indicators: Gold Fields Limited South Deep Gold Mine Non-Financial Data Assurance Reporting Guidelines, V6 (January 2021) Gold Fields Limited South Deep Gold Mine Procurement Mining Charter 2018 Reporting Guideline, V2 (January 2021) Gold Fields Limited South Deep Gold Mine Local Economic Development Progress Monitoring Procedure, V0 (April 2020) Broad-Based Socio-Economic Empowerment Charter (BBSEEC) for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (2018) and the related scorecard (2018) Implementation Guidelines for the BBSEEC for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (2018)
Assurance standard used:		ERM CVS’ assurance methodology based on the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (Revised) and ISAE 3410 (for GHG Statements)
Assurance level:		Reasonable assurance for all subject matters
Respective responsibilities:		Gold Fields is responsible for preparing the Report, including the collection and presentation of the selected sustainability information within it, in accordance with the reporting criteria, the design, implementation and maintenance of related internal controls, and for the integrity of its website. ERM’s responsibility is to provide an opinion on the selected information based on the evidence we have obtained and exercising our professional judgement.

Our assurance activities

We planned and performed our work to obtain all the information and explanations that we believe were necessary to reduce the risk of material misstatement to low, and therefore provide a basis for our assurance opinion. Using the ICMM Sustainable Development Framework: Assurance Procedure (2008) as a guide, a multi-disciplinary team of sustainability, Mining Charter and assurance specialists performed the assurance activities, including, among others:

• Reviewing external media reporting relating to Gold Fields, peer company annual reports and industry standards to identify issues relevant to the assurance scope in the reporting period
• Interviews with relevant corporate-level staff to understand Gold Fields’ sustainability strategy, policies and management systems, including stakeholder engagement and materiality assessment
• Interviews with a selection of staff and management, including senior executives, to gain an understanding of:
  • The status of implementation of the ICMM Sustainable Development Principles in Gold Fields’ strategy and policies
  • Gold Fields’ identification and management of sustainable development risks and opportunities as determined through its review of the business and the views and expectations of its stakeholders
• Reviewing supporting evidence related to external stakeholder engagement on material issues facing the business
• Reviewing policies and procedures and assessing alignment with ICMM’s 10 Sustainable Development Principles and other mandatory requirements set out in the ICMM’s Position Statements in effect as at 31 December 2020
• Testing the processes and systems, including internal controls, used to generate, consolidate and report the selected sustainability and Mining Charter information
• Reviewing the suitability of the internal reporting guidelines, including conversion factors used
• Physical visit to interview responsible staff and verify source data and other evidence at the following site:
  • Gruyere, Australia
• Remote reviews to verify source data for the following sites:
  • Damang, Ghana
  • Tarkwa, Ghana
  • Agnew, Australia
  • Granny Smith, Australia
  • St Ives, Australia
  • Cerro Corona, Peru
  • South Deep, South Africa
• An analytical review of the year-end data submitted by the sites listed above, and testing of the accuracy and completeness of the consolidated 2020 Group data for the selected indicators
• Reviewing the presentation of information relevant to the scope of our work in the Report to ensure consistency with our findings

Our assurance opinion

In our opinion:

• The selected sustainability performance information set out in Tables 1 and 2 for the year ended 31 December 2020 is prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the Gold Fields reporting criteria
• The Directors’ statement in the “About this Report” section of the Report that Gold Fields has complied with the ICMM Sustainable Development Framework, Principles, Position Statements and reporting requirements is, in all material respects, fairly stated

The limitations of our engagement

The reliability of the assured data is subject to inherent uncertainties given the methods for determining, calculating or estimating the underlying information. It is important to understand our assurance opinions in this context. Our independent assurance statement provides no assurance on the maintenance and integrity of the Gold Fields’ website, including controls used to achieve this integrity, and in particular, whether any changes may have occurred to the information since it was first published.

Force majeure – Covid-19

As a result of travel restrictions arising from the current global pandemic, we were unable to carry out our assurance activities as originally planned and agreed with Gold Fields. In-person visits to operations and the head office were replaced with remote reviews via teleconference and video calls for this year’s assurance engagement. While we believe these changes do not affect our reasonable assurance opinions above, we draw attention to the possibility that if we had undertaken in-person visits we may have identified errors and omissions in the assured information that we did not discover through the alternative approach.

Our observations

We have provided Gold Fields with a separate detailed management report. Without affecting the opinion presented above, we have the following observations:

• Operations across all regions were found to have improved adherence to the measurement, verification and reporting requirements for energy saving initiatives, as recommended by ERM in last year’s Assurance Statement, although there is an opportunity to improve the accuracy of site-level information for selected Australian operations by consistently applying the most updated local energy conversion and emission factors used to calculate energy savings initiatives
• There have been improvements in strengthening documentation and formalising the consolidation and reporting process of selected social performance information across the Australian region, although consistent with ERM’s recommendation in last year’s Assurance Statement, we recommend giving attention to strengthening the documentation and consolidation of host community workforce employment information, specifically for contractors, at selected Australian operations 

ERM Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd, Johannesburg, South Africa

www.erm.com

Email: clemence.mcnulty@erm.com

ERM Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd and ERM Certification and Verification Services (CVS) are members of the ERM Group. Our work complies with the requirements of ERM's Global Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (available at https://erm.com/global-code). Further, ERM CVS is accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service and its operating system is designed to comply with ISO 17021:2011. Our assurance processes are designed and implemented to ensure that the work we undertake with clients is free from bias and conflict of interest (refer to both the abovementioned Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the ERM CVS Independence and Impartiality Policy available at
http://www.ermcvs.com/our-services/policies/independence/). The ERM and ERM CVS staff that have undertaken work on this assurance engagement provide no consultancy related services to Gold Fields in any respect related to the subject matter assured.

Table 1. Selected sustainability performance indicators for the 2020 reporting year presented for reasonable assurance in accordance with the reporting criteria.

Parameter	Unit	Gold Fields reported 2020 data
Environment
Total CO2 equivalent emissions, Scope 1 – 3	Tonnes	1,969,305
Electricity purchased	MWh	1,196,585
Diesel	Kl	184,701
Total energy consumed	GJ	13,128,575
Total water consumed (withdrawal – discharge)	Ml	19,780
Total water recycled/re-used per annum	Ml	54,207
Number of environmental incidents: Level 3 and above	Number of incidents	0
Total CO2 equivalent emissions avoided from initiatives	tCO2e saved	229,986
Total energy saved from initiatives	GJ saved	1,085,328
Occupational health
Number of cases of Silicosis reported	Number of cases	10
Number of cases of Noise-induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) reported	Number of cases	3
Number of new cases of Cardio Respiratory Tuberculosis (CRTB) reported	Number of new cases reported	13
Number of cases of Chronic Obstructive Airways Disease (COAD)	Number of cases	3
Health
Number of cases of Malaria tested positive per annum (employees and contractors)	Number of positive cases	412
Number of South African employees in the HAART programme (cumulative)	Number of employees	657
Number of West African employees in the highly-active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART) programme (cumulative)	Number of employees	10
Percentage of South African workforce on the voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) programme	Percentage of workforce	70%
Percentage of West African workforce on the VCT programme	Percentage of workforce	21%
Safety
		Employees: 2.91 (45 TRIs/15,446,600 manhours)
Total recordable injury frequency rate (TRIFR) – employees, contractors, total	Number of TRIs/manhours	Contractors: 2.13 (62 TRIs/29,117,748 manhours)
		Total: 2.40 (107 TRIs/44,564,347 manhours)
Serious injuries: As per Gold Fields Group Health and Safety Reporting requirements	Number of injuries	6 (including 2 at South Deep)
Serious injuries: As per the South African Department of Mineral Resources and Energy requirements (applicable to South Deep mine only)	Number of injuries	9
Near-miss incidents	Number of incidents	475
Social
Total socio-economic development (SED) spend	US$	$17,189,125
Percentage of host community workforce employment	%	53%
Percentage of host community procurement spend	%	29%

1	As per the Implementation Guidelines for the BBSEEC for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (2018)
2	Only seven of the nine projects were active for the 2020 reporting period
3	Historically Disadvantaged South African
4	Historically Disadvantaged Persons
5	Black Economic Empowerment

Table 2. Selected South African Mining Charter performance indicators for the 2020 reporting year presented for reasonable assurance in accordance with reporting criteria.

Parameter	Unit	Gold Fields reported 2020 data
Mine community development
Percentage implementation of Mine Community Development Projects in approved and published Social and Labour Plan (SLP) ("Table S"1)2	Number of projects Progress to date	Total: 9 Active: 7Average progress for 9 projects: 48% Average progress for 7 active projects: 59%
Employment equity
HDSAs3 in management (in proportion to applicable demographics) made up of:
Board: 50% black persons with exercisable voting rights, of which 20% must be black women	Board: Percentage black persons	67%
	Board: Percentage black women	33%
Executive/top management: 50% black persons of which 15% must be black women	Exec: Percentage black persons	67%
	Exec: Percentage black women	33%
Senior: 50% black persons of which 15% must be black women	Senior: Percentage black persons	35%
	Senior: Percentage black women	6%
Middle: 60% black persons of which 20% must be black women	Middle: Percentage black persons	56%
	Middle: Percentage black women	20%
Junior: 70% black persons of which 25% must be black women	Junior: Percentage black persons	69%
	Junior: Percentage black women	21%
Employees with disabilities: 1.5% as a percentage of all employees	Disabilities: Percentage	0.49%
Core/critical skills: 50% black persons	Core skills: Percentage	76%
Inclusive procurement
Mining goods
70% of procurement spend on goods (excluding non-discretionary spend) must be on South African manufactured goods, proportioned as follows regarding the manufacturing entity:
21% by HDPs4 owned and controlled company	Percentage procured from HDPs owned and controlled company	31%
5% by women or by young owned and controlled company	Percentage women OR by young owned and controlled company	5%
44% by BEE-compliant company	Percentage procured from BEE-compliant company	48%
Mining services
80% of procurement spend on services (excluding non-discretionary spend) must be sourced from South African companies, proportioned as follows:
50% on HDP-owned and controlled company	Percentage discretionary spend on HDPs owned and controlled company	47%
15% on women-owned and controlled company	Percentage discretionary spend on women owned and controlled company	16%
5% on youth	Percentage discretionary spend on youth	0%
10% on BEE-compliant company	Percentage discretionary spend on BEE compliant company	85%
Research and Development (R&D) budget spent of which 70% must be spent on South African-based R&D entities	% of spend on R&D entities	100%
	R-value of spend	R2,437,080
Mineral sampling to be done by South African-based companies (Target of 100%)	Number of samples analysed	28,526
	% analysed by South African-based companies	99.95%

1	As per the Implementation Guidelines for the BBSEEC for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (2018)
2	Only seven of the nine projects were active for the 2020 reporting period
3	Historically Disadvantaged South African
4	Historically Disadvantaged Persons
5	Black Economic Empowerment