Contracts and licenses

Contract disclosure is a crucial element of natural resource governance. It helps combat corruption, mobilise revenues, build trust and secure fair deals. By making the rules and terms governing extractives projects transparent, contract disclosure enables citizens to evaluate whether their country is receiving a fair share of benefits from its natural resources.

Publishing contracts provides insight into expected government revenues and company obligations, including environmental and social responsibilities. This transparency enables citizens to hold companies and governments accountable for non-compliance. It is also essential for informing strategies on energy transition, particularly when evaluating the distribution of risks and rewards in legal and fiscal terms.¹

Contract transparency strengthens governance by ensuring that all government agencies have access to the same information about companies’ financial and non-financial obligations. For companies, disclosure reduces reputational risks, builds trust and strengthens their social license to operate.

Requirement 2.4 of the EITI Standard requires that countries fully disclose any contracts and licenses that are granted, entered into or amended from 1 January 2021. This is intended to provide greater public understanding of how extractive operations are managed and their expected contribution to the country. The requirement further aims to ensure that contract disclosure is contributing to stakeholders’ ability to monitor compliance with contractual obligations. 

This note explains Requirement 2.4 and key concepts related to contract transparency. It offers practical guidance to multi-stakeholder groups (MSGs) on disclosing contracts, including steps to address barriers. It supplements the EITI’s policy brief on contract transparency.²

For a checklist of suggested activities to integrate contract disclosure into EITI work plans, see Annexe A. For a list of common challenges and frequently asked questions related to contract disclosure, see Annexe B.

Governments, acting on behalf of citizens, enter into agreements with companies to exploit natural resources. These agreements, known as contracts, licenses, concessions or permits, grant companies the right to extract resources in exchange for a share of the profits. 

Under EITI Requirement 2.4, a contract is defined as the full text of any agreement setting out the terms for exploiting oil, gas or minerals. A license refers to the full text of any license, lease, title or permit granting rights to exploit these resources. Each country has different types of agreements, with some applying individually negotiated contracts and others using standard terms across agreements.

Regardless of the type of agreement, MSGs are responsible for determining the full scope of production contracts and licenses that should be disclosed. With respect to exploration contracts and licenses, MSGs should discuss what should be disclosed, based on materiality and practicality. The requirement applies equally to countries that operate under a license regime, where contracts typically have uniform stipulations.

Various types of agreements are used across countries and industries. Common examples include:

• Production sharing agreements (PSA): The state grants a company the exclusive right to explore and produce oil and gas in exchange for a portion of the production. The company provides financial and technical resources, while the state retains ownership of the resources.
• Concessions: In some jurisdictions, companies are granted full ownership of the production, subject to royalties and taxes, and proprietary rights over the contract area.
• Licenses: In some countries, terms are embedded in legislation and do not vary between contracts (e.g. Germany, Norway, UK, Zambia). 

Although these agreements differ in structure, they all regulate resource extraction. Some agreements also combine multiple elements from different types.

Petroleum contracts are typically signed before exploration begins, and they include provisions on exploration and relinquishment. Mining contracts, on the other hand, are usually signed after discovery, focusing on the project lifecycle from development onwards.

Contracts and licenses contain key provisions that outline the fiscal and operational terms governing the extraction of natural resources. These terms guide the relationship between companies and governments and influence the project’s financial, social and environmental impact.

Key terms typically include:

• Preliminary provisions: Details such as the contracts’s execution date, the parties involved and the reasons for entering into the contract;
• Fiscal terms: Royalties, fees and production-sharing arrangements;
• Non-fiscal terms: Social obligations, environmental commitments and plans for rehabilitation or decommissioning;
• Administrative provisions: Reporting obligations, inspection rights, force majeure clauses, stabilisation clauses, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

MSGs can be guided by EITI Requirements, including fiscal terms (Requirement 2.1), state participation (Requirement 2.6), exploration (Requirement 3.1), production (Requirement 3.2), infrastructure and barter agreements (Requirement 4.3), transportation revenues (Requirement 4.4), transactions related to SOEs (Requirement 4.5), subnational payments (Requirement 4.6) and social and environmental payments (Requirement 6.1). They may also be guided by encouragements relating to the term of the sale of the state’s share of production (Requirement 4.2.c) and environmental, social and gender impact assessments (Requirement 6.4.b).

Annexe C presents a list of typical contract provisions.

The EITI Standard requires the full text of all contracts and licenses to be disclosed without exceptions. Redactions or omissions due to commercial sensitivity or confidentiality will prevent the country from meeting the EITI’s disclosure requirement (see Steps 4 and 5). Publishing contracts in full helps avoid misunderstandings, misrepresentation or mistrust that may arise from incomplete or inaccurate summaries.

Annexe D presents a framework for identifying agreements, plans and assessments. Annexe E provides a typology of agreements and documents relevant to the implementation of Requirement 2.4.

Annexes, addenda and riders are supplementary documents attached to contracts. Some contracts explicitly append, and refer to, additional documents that are considered integral to the agreement. These can include site maps, accounting procedures, details of the project cycle, takeover procedures, management procedures, guarantees and feasibility studies.

MSGs must determine which documents should be classified as annexes, addenda or riders, taking into account national stakeholder demand and the country context. If there is uncertainty about which documents fall into these categories, MSGs should request disclosure from the contracting parties to ensure full adherence to Requirement 2.4 (see Step 1).

Annexe F presents examples of common documents included as annexes, while Annexe G lists country examples of annexes, addenda and riders.

Any revisions to the terms of a contract, including changes to the parties involved, must be fully disclosed. The EITI Standard does not distinguish between substantial or minor amendments—any alteration or amendment must be published to meet disclosure requirements.  Under Requirement 2.4, amendments should trigger the disclosure of the full contract that has been amended, not just a disclosure of the amended provision.

Some projects may have additional agreements, documents or policies that clarify, decrease or expand exploitation rights, even if they are not formally labelled as amendments. These should be disclosed under  Requirement 2.4. Similarly, contracts for associated projects—such as transportation, processing or infrastructure—that alter the original exploitation rights should also be disclosed. It should be noted that Requirement 4.3 of the EITI Standard requires countries  to disclose infrastructure and barter agreements, where such agreements provide a substantial portion of government benefits from extractive projects.

Annexe H presents examples of agreements that alter exploitation rights.

In some countries, contract disclosure policies are established through constitutions, laws or regulations or public commitments made by senior government officials. Findings from EITI Validations show that countries with clear policies are more effective in implementing this requirement. MSGs should review the official policy and its practical application, documenting any inconsistencies.

It is important for all stakeholders in the MSG to understand the benefits of contract disclosure. The overall objective of  Requirement 2.4 is to ensure the public accessibility of all licenses and contracts underpinning extractive activities (at least from 2021 onwards) as a basis for the public’s understanding of the contractual rights and obligations of companies operating in the country’s extractive industries. The requirement further aims to ensure that contract disclosure is contributing to stakeholders’ ability to monitor compliance with contractual obligations. When agreeing on objectives, the MSG could consider how contract disclosure links to broader reforms, such as reducing corruption, increasing tax revenues, and monitoring environmental and social obligations.

Possible objectives include:

• Understand fiscal terms in contracts to better project national and subnational revenue flows;
• Enable citizens and oversight bodies to monitor compliance with legal obligations in contracts;
• Clarify the state’s legal rights and obligations, including cost auditing, stabilisation clauses, and revenue allocations to local governments or communities;
• Address reputational risks for companies;
• Ensure access to contractual precedents for future negotiations;
• Assess the impact of contract terms on broader strategies, such as energy transition plans.

The MSG is required to integrate contract disclosure plans in their annual work plan, and the objectives above could help guide these efforts. The MSG is expected to agree and publish a plan for disclosing contracts with a clear timeline and actions to address any barriers to comprehensive disclosure. The plan should be fully costed, identifying staff and funding needs, and include measures to address funding gaps. MSGs should also set measurable targets and clarify immediate and long-term reforms (e.g. legal amendments) required for implementation.

Achieving full contract transparency requires commitment of high-level officials and technical staff in government and industry. The MSG should identify challenges in securing commitment and adopt strategies to address them, such as developing a stakeholder engagement plan. Aligning contract disclosure with government and company objectives is key, and civil society can also play a role in advocating for transparency and highlighting specific contracts or terms that should be made public.

In engaging stakeholders, the MSG could identify:

• Champions of contract transparency
• Potential blockers and effective communicators (including media)
• Drivers of related reforms (e.g. anti-corruption actors),
• Technical assistance providers and responsible government officials (e.g. contract repositories).

Legal advisers are often key players in discussions about legal barriers. The MSG may wish to ensure that they engage with all relevant agencies involved in awarding and monitoring contracts, which may be housed in different ministries.

Contract transparency should contribute to better sector governance, which requires that stakeholders understand and analyse contractual stipulations with a view to monitoring compliance. MSGs could consider capacity-building activities that align with this objective. For example, if the goal is to improve revenue collection, the MSG could organise workshops on understanding fiscal terms in contracts.

Countries must publish a list of all active exploration and production contracts, including those signed before 1 January 2021 (Requirement 2.4(c)(ii)). The MSG should agree on what constitutes an extractive contract and determine which annexes are relevant. 

Steps for producing and publishing this list:

Scoping exercise

The MSG should begin by conducting a scoping exercise. This should include exploitation and exploration contracts, annexes, amendments, addenda or riders.

1. Request a list of active contracts: The MSG should request a list of all active exploration and production contracts from the government agency responsible for granting exploration and exploitation rights. Industry can be asked to confirm the information. Even in countries with license regimes, all issued licenses must be included in the list. 
   
   Other sources could also be consulted. For example, some jurisdictions require  extractive contracts to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission or with parliament, or for these contracts to be published in national gazettes. Some companies also disclose contracts on their websites. The MSG could draw on these sources to cross-check the list provided by the government agency that executed the agreement. The MSG may also wish to consult resourcecontracts.org, a global repository of extractive contracts.
    
2. Include exploration contracts: All exploration contracts, regardless of materiality, should be included in the list. The MSG has the discretion to decide which exploration contracts should be disclosed in full based on materiality and practicality. However, where the terms of exploration are bundled with exploitation contracts (as is common in the petroleum sector), the contract should be disclosed in full. 
   
   In determining the materiality and practically of exploration contracts, the MSG should consider:

• Material payments in exploration contracts, commesurate with thresholds used for material payments in EITI reporting.
• Whether contracts are with material companies as defined in EITI reporting.
• Whether non-fiscal obligations  in exploration contracts is of public interest.³
• Administrative burden and practicality of disclosing these contracts, including their accessibility and state of archiving.
   

3. Identify relevant annexes, addenda or riders: The scoping exercise should determine documents must be disclosed (Requirements 2.4(d)(ii) and 2.4(e)(ii)). Stakeholder consultations are essential to clarify which documents fall within the scope public disclosure. The MSG should document the rationale for including and excluding specific documents. 
   
   Where clear rules exist, either by law or through a contract, specifying what is considered an annexe, addendum or rider, the MSG should ensure that these documents are disclosed. The MSG should also examine any additional documents necessary to fully explain the terms attached to the rights granted to the company. 
   
   The MSG should also map out all agreements that might alter the original exploitation rights, as well as any plans and assessments submitted by companies that describe their obligations and implementation. Additionally, the MSG should identify any project-specific agreements or contracts for associated projects (such as transportation or infrastructure) signed in parallel with, or after, the original contract, which alter the exploitation rights for the project. 
   
   All discussions should be documented by the MSG, with reference to specific rules on what constitutes an annexe, addendum or rider to ensure compliance with applicable law.
    
4. Indicate which contracts are publicly available: For each published contract or license, include a link or reference to its location (Requirement 2.4(c)(ii)). The MSG could encourage relevant ministries to systematically disclose this information.   

Ongoing and future bidding or negotiations

To monitor new contracts, government agencies should routinely publish information on bidding rounds and negotiations on their websites and, where feasible, inform the MSG of their progress.

To ensure full compliance with Requirement 2.4, it is important to assess the current state of contract disclosure in the country and address any legal or practical barriers that hinder full transparency. The MSG should aim to identify gaps, clarify policies and work towards removing obstacles to contract and license disclosure.

The MSG could consider the following steps:

Current policy and practice

1. Assess current disclosure practices: The MSG should first understand which contracts are already being disclosed, which could be disclosed without legal restrictions, and which are still not disclosed despite legal mandates.
    
2. Review existing policies: The MSG should review  existing contract disclosure policies in laws, regulations or contracts. The could include:

• The country’s contract regime and regulatory framework (e.g. which government entity is responsible for granting, implementing and monitoring extractive contracts? What are their roles and responsibilities?);
• Laws, policies or contractual terms that restrict contract and license disclosure;
• Ongoing reforms (e.g. are confidentiality clauses still included in contracts entered into after 1 January 2021? Are there opportunities to remove clauses from future contracts?); 
• Other laws and policies that support contract disclosure.

The MSG should documents its discussions on government policies related to contract disclosures.

Legal barriers

To address legal barriers, the MSG could consider the following steps:

1. Implement waivers: Where laws or contracts prohibit disclosure, the MSG should explore the option of voluntary disclosure through waivers.⁴ It should develop a time-bound action plan to remove legal barriers permanently, amend confidentiality clauses in future contracts and integrate policies. These measures should be included in the MSG’s work plan.
    
2. Review confidentiality clauses: The MSG should assess what the confidentiality clauses cover and whether they apply to the contract itself. In some cases, confidentiality provisions are misunderstood or applied too broadly. The MSG can facilitate dialogue to clarify their application, considering:

• The definition of “confidential information”, which often does not include the contract itself;
• Confidentiality clauses are not always absolute and may be waived through mutual agreement, government requirements, investor demands, or stock exchange listing regulations;⁵ 
• Some clauses are time-bound, meaning confidentiality is temporary.

Publishing redacted or summarised contracts does not meet Requirement 2.4. Full-text publication is crucial to avoid misunderstanding, misrepresentation and mistrust that may arise from incomplete or inaccurate summaries.

Effective contract disclosure is essential for ensuring transparency in the management of extractive resources and fostering public trust. By making contracts publicly available, governments and companies can demonstrate their commitment to accountability and compliance.

The MSG could consider the following steps:

1. Agree on a method for disclosure: Although the EITI Standard does not prescribe a method for contract disclosure, public access in an open format is recommended. Countries can use dedicated platforms such as resourcecontracts.org or government or company websites.
   
   When selecting a method for disclosure, the MSG could consider:

• Systematic disclosure via government websites as default practice, which enables efficient information-sharing across agencies and supports implementation of a contract disclosure policy.
• Interim publication through EITI Reports, EITI websites or independent contract portals when transitioning to systematic disclosure.
• Linking contracts to other project-level data (e.g. payments, production data or cadasters) to make it easier for stakeholders to use the information.
• Ensuring contracts and documents are freely accessible in machine-readable formats. Fees may be imposed initially but should not be prohibitive, with plans for free access in the long term. Machine-readable formats allow users to search key terms easily.
   

2. Develop and update the contracts database. This involves:
    

• Assigning responsibility for tracking and publishing new contracts (signed from 1 January 2021) and amendments (including those executed before this date);
• Periodic reviews of the comprehensiveness of disclosed contracts;
• Agreeing on a disclosure timeline for new or amended contracts where no government policy exists;
• Ensuring machine-readable formats for all documents for easier access;
• Collating documents from different agencies into a single platform for easy access;
• Organising documents (contracts, annexes, amendments and riders) according to the legal framework or project, ensuring ease of use and analysis.
   

3. Ensure comprehensive disclosure: Full texts of contracts, including annexes, addenda and riders, as well as any exploration contracts agreed upon by the MSG, must be disclosed without redactions. The MSG can verify the completeness of disclosures by seeking confirmation of the contracting parties and conducting spot checks comparing published documents with originals.
   
4. Enhance comprehensibility: The MSG could consider adding annotations or explanations for complex contract stipulations or providing summaries of key provisions. Links to related permits could also improve accessibility for users.

License regimes

In countries with standardised licenses, the MSG should evaluate whether any deviations from standard terms exist. If there are no deviations, only model contracts need to be published. However, the MSG’s evaluation of deviations should be done regularly. If deviations exist, the MSG should disclose individual contracts. This process should be documented, ensuring transparency in non-disclosure.⁶ 

Contract transparency can enhance public understanding, debate and reform. Disclosures can be used to monitor compliance, track changes in the legal framework, and scrutinise the distribution of risk and reward to anticipate future scenarios. To maximise these benefits, the MSG should work to communicate contract disclosures to citizens and relevant stakeholders, and facilitate capacity-building activities to ensure their use.

Use by government

Informing revenue projections

Natural resource deals often come with expectations of significant economic contributions. Disclosing the fiscal terms of contracts, including anticipated revenues at various stages of the project, could shed light on whether these expectations are realistic. This may inform decisions on whether fiscal terms should be revisited.

The MSG could undertake financial modelling using contract stipulations to forecast expected revenues from projects over a given period, helping governments make informed decisions.

Strengthening domestic resource mobilisation

Contract disclosures provide key terms that can be used to model extractive projects and forecast expected payments to government. When combined with data on reserves estimates, operating and capital expenditures, and commodity prices, contracts form the basis for financial models. These models, while not wholly accurate, can provide valuable insight into the impact of different scenarios (e.g. reserves estimates, price changes or investments shifts) on government revenues. Financial models can also be compared with actual project-level payments disclosed through EITI reporting, helping identify discrepancies and areas for further investigation to enhance domestic resource mobilisation.

Linking contract transparency with other national reforms

Contract disclosure complements broader reforms in the extractive sector, such as anti-corruption measures, beneficial ownership transparency and energy transition. The energy transition could challenge the assumptions underpinning contract fiscal terms and production timeframes.⁷ Contract disclosure could help governments assess transition risks, such as the possibility that fossil fuel extractive may become more expensive than clean alternatives. This analysis could support governments in mitigating risks as they pursue energy transition reforms.

Use by civil society

Improving revenue collection

In some countries, agencies responsible for revenue collection lack knowledge of the legal and contractual basis for payments, making it difficult to assess tax liabilities. Contract disclosure helps reduce this information gap by providing communities with valuable information on how revenues from resources flow to regional or local governments. Contracts can be analysed to help citizens monitor whether companies are fulfilling obligations, such as making social payments, providing local employment or adhering to environmental protections. Civil society could play an important role in raising awareness and improving understanding by analysing contract terms, conducting studies and engaging with government.

Identifying risks of corruption

Publication of the full text of contracts and licenses enables public review of the key terms of extractive agreements and comparison with model contract templates and the applicable legal framework and fiscal regime. Where concluded contracts and licenses include terms that differ significantly from the terms of other extractive agreements (including in subsidies, tax incentives and requirements for social and environmental contributions), the model agreement template or the prevailing legal framework and fiscal regime, this can potentially reflect corrupt practices. Consistent analysis of published contracts and licenses enables civil society to assess the consistency of terms of different extractive agreements. Civil society can play a key role in analysing the terms of different contracts, identifying potential irregularities in the terms of specific agreements, and raising public awareness about significant differences in contract terms. Robust public scrutiny of concluded extractive agreements can help deter corruption during contract negotiations.

Use by industry

Explaining contract terms to the public

The absence of public access to contracts can raise concerns about the fairness of their terms. Some clauses might be perceived as one-sided due to the technical nature of extractive contracts. Contract disclosure allows industry to explain the rationale behind fiscal terms, why deviations from model contracts are necessary, and why tax exemptions are granted.

• EITI (2024). Beyond the fine print: Disclosing petroleum contracts to manage risks and opportunities in the energy transition. Retrieved from https://eiti.org/documents/beyond-fine-print.
• Publish What You Pay (2024). Contract transparency digital tracker. Retrieved from https://pwyp.org/contract-transparency-digital-tracker/.
• NRGI & Open Contracting Partnership (2018). Open Contracting for Oil, Gas and Mineral Rights: Shining a Light on Good Practice. Retrieved from https://resourcegovernance.org/analysis-tools/publications/open-contracting-oil-gas-and-mineral-rights.
• World Bank (2017). Oil, Gas, and Mining: A Sourcebook for Understanding the Extractive Industries. Retrieved from https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/222451496911224999/oil-gas-and-mining-a-sourcebook-for-understanding-the-extractive-industries.
• ILSP, NRGI, OpenOil & VCC (2014). Mining Contracts: How to read and understand them. Retrieved from https://eiti.org/document/mining-contract-how-to-read-understand-them.
• Allen & Overy (2013). Guide to Extractive Industries Documents – Oil & Gas. Retrieved from https://www.resourcedata.org/dataset/rgi-guide-to-extractive-industries-documents-oil-gas/resource/df2595ba-d1a1-4fd5-9f4e-eabfb71e7579/proxy.
• OpenOil (2012). Oil Contracts. Retrieved from https://openoil.net/portfolio/oil-contracts/.
• NRGI (n.d.). Covering Extractives: What’s in the deal: The ins and outs of oil, gas and mining contracts. Retrieved from https://coveringextractives.org/handbook/chapter-4/. 

1. Agree on objectives and an action plan for contract disclosure

• Discuss key challenges in the extractive sector that contract transparency could help address.
• Define clear objectives for contract disclosure.
• Identify capacity gaps and necessary trainings or resources to address them.

2. Engage key stakeholders and build capacity

• Initiate dialogue with relevant government agencies and companies.
• Identify champions for contract transparency from both government and industry.
• Develop targeted messaging for different stakeholder groups on the important of contract transparency.
• Review best practices and resources from EITI countries, companies, international organisations and academic institutions.
• Conduct peer learning with countries showing strong commitment to contract transparency; consider joining the EITI’s Contract Transparency Network.
• Engage supportive companies to share lessons and recommendations on overcoming disclosure challenges.
• Survey MSG members and compare concerns with experience in other countries; facilitate discussions on addressing them.
• Conduct trust-building activities, discuss key concerns and responses, and address apprehensions regarding misinterpretation of contractual stipulations.
• Engage experts on confidentiality and commercial sensitivity issues.
• Consult civil society and key user groups to identify, document and communicate citizen demands for contract transparency.
• Conduct workshops and training on contract analysis, financial modelling and revenue projection.

3. Publish a list of all active contracts

• Conduct a scoping review of all active extractive contracts in the country.
• Map out agreements between extractive companies and the government that may alter the exploitation rights, including project-specific agreements and any contract for associated projects signed in parallel with or after the original agreement. Include plans and assessments submitted by companies that describe their obligations and implementation, as well as the process for contract amendments or alterations.
• Provide a description and rationale for which agreements and documents the MSG included for disclosure under Requirement 2.4(d) and 2.4(e).
• Consult government entities, companies and civil society to agree and document what should be considered an annexe, addendum or rider.
• Identify ongoing and future bids and contract negotiations.
• Compile and publish a comprehensive list of all active contracts and licenses.

4. Understand the current state of contract disclosure and develop a plan to address barriers

• Conduct a scoping exercise of contract disclosures on government and company websites (could be done by a consultant or the national secretariat).
• Encourage companies to voluntarily disclose contracts.
• Commission a legal review of model agreements to identify legal barriers and facilitators of disclosure.
• Review previously disclosed agreements and father lessons learned from interviews with companies and government actors.
• Provide capacity-building activities for MSG members on promoting contract transparency and addressing arguments against it. 

5. Disclose contracts

• Agree on methods for disclosure.
• Survey current disclosure practices and platforms.
• Identify gaps in existing disclosure practices.
• Develop effective and efficient disclosure systems, building on existing structures.
• Identify resources needed to establish and maintain contract disclosure systems.
• Engage with relevant ministries that could host the contract disclosure site.
• Understand contracts execution and amendment processes.
• Identify the responsible agency and contact person for contract publication.
• Assess whether internal regulations or legal instruments are required from the host agency.
• Conduct peer learning with countries that have implemented or are working towards contract transparency.
• Consider publishing all agreements and documents in machine-readable formats, consolidating documents from different agencies.

Challenges in meeting Requirement 2.4

Validations of Requirement 2.4 have identified several recurring challenges. The most common issues include:

• Absence of a publicly codified policy: Many countries lack a clear government policy on contract and license disclosure in the extractive sector, which hinders comprehensive transparency efforts. Some MSGs have focused on reviewing legal and contractual provisions that prohibit disclosure, rather than on the government’s broader disclosure policy. In several countries, the codification of the government’s disclosure policy was key to overcoming confidentiality constraints.
• Focus on contracts over licenses: Several countries have prioritised disclosing contracts while neglecting the full disclosure of licenses, particularly exploration licenses.
• Publication of decrees, not full contracts and licenses: Some countries disclose government orders (e.g. decrees) awarding contracts and licenses, but omit the full text of the contracts or licenses themselves.
• Unverified claims of standardised contracts or licenses: Countries often assert that all contracts follow a model template but do not conduct a comprehensive review of all active contracts and licenses, thereby failing to confirm that they do not deviate from standardised terms.
• Missing inventory of contracts and licenses: A lack of publicly available inventories that track all active contracts and licenses, along with their annexes, amendments and riders, reduces the ability to review the comprehensiveness of disclosures. Such an inventory is helpful for indicating which documents have been published and not (with specific links to published documents to enhance accessibility).

Frequently asked questions

1. Is redacted or summarised contract disclosure acceptable? 
   No. Summaries or redacted contracts do not meet Requirement 2.4. Full contract disclosure is essential to ensure transparency and avoid suspicion or misrepresentation. Where there are redactions or omissions due to commercial sensitivity or restrictions on confidentiality, the country will not meet Requirement 2.4 on full contract disclosure. 
   
2. Is a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) the same as a government policy on contract disclosure? 
   No. FOIAs are typically reactive (i.e. documents are only published upon request) and often with restrictions that deem certain documents confidential for national security reasons. Government policies on contract disclosure are proactive, requiring automatic publication of contracts and licenses. 
   
3. Is a license register the same as a public inventory of contracts and licenses? 
   No. A license register or cadastre (as required under Requirement 2.3.b) provides basic information, whereas an inventory must include all contracts and licenses, including their annexes, amendments and riders. The inventory must also identify whether each document has been published and where, highlighting any documents not yet publicly disclosed. 
   
4. Are commercial sensitivity concerns the same as legal confidentiality clauses? 
   No. Commercial sensitivity may not always be protected by law, whereas legal confidentiality clauses explicitly prevent the disclosure of specific contract details.  
   
5. Why is publishing a government policy on contract disclosure important? 
   Publication of a clear government policy sends a clear of intent to publish all contracts and agreements, fostering stakeholder confidence and supporting legal reforms to address confidentiality clauses. 
   
6. Is there a universal definition of what constitutes an annexe, amendment and rider? 
   There is no internationally agreed definition of what constitutes an annexe, amendment or rider for mining and petroleum contracts. As such, MSGs should agree on a definition for the purposes of public disclosure (see Step 3).

This framework distinguishes between agreements that are signed between the host government and the company (or any successor to the original company) and other documents including company generated plans and assessments. Any parallel or subsequent “agreement” signed by the parties to the original contract related to the original project, even if not formally labelled an amendment, must be disclosed as an “other agreement”, either as:

• An “addendum”, or
• A document “altering” the original terms, or
• One of the original documents.

Additionally, agreements for associated projects, such as transportation, processing and infrastructure, that may alter exploitation rights must also be disclosed.

This typology outlines agreements and documents that apply to the implementation of Requirement 2.4(d). It includes agreements signed by the government, and plans and assessments submitted to (and often approved by) the government. This typology does not include sector legislation or regulations, which are typically public documents, nor does it extend to routinely issued licenses and permits or regular reports submitted by companies.

Across different jurisdictions, certain documents that typically annexed to signed oil, gas and mining agreements. While the specifics vary, the following are common examples of annexes to contracts:

In many contracts, only a few annexes are included. However, in some cases, the contracting parties attach a broader range of documents. The examples below illustrate the importance of defining annexes, addenda and riders (in line with Requirement 2.4(d)(ii)) since these supplementary documents are included by mutual agreement between the parties.