Regulatory gaps and ghost indicators in Australian alumina production: The case for standardized sustainability reporting and policy reform

Abstract

Sustainability reporting in Australia’s alumina sector remains fragmented, failing to reflect the full scale of environmental and social impacts associated with production. While current frameworks emphasize carbon emissions, they systematically underreport critical issues such as biodiversity loss, land degradation, water resource depletion, and community health risks. These “ghost indicators” obscure the industry’s true footprint, delaying intervention and undermining accountability. This study employed a two-phase methodology, combining a systematic review of sustainability and governance literature with targeted analysis of regulatory and reporting frameworks. It identified major governance shortcomings, particularly the continued use of outdated State Agreements in Western Australia that allow producers to bypass key environmental regulations. In contrast, Queensland and New South Wales have implemented more robust frameworks, creating regulatory imbalance and selective compliance. To address these disparities, the study recommends a federally mandated sustainability reporting framework, requiring disclosure of material impacts, third-party verification, and structured stakeholder engagement. The Transition Broker Model is proposed as a governance mechanism to bridge institutional fragmentation, align policy with operational realities, and support consensus-driven reform. Strengthening sustainability reporting is not merely an administrative risk; it is essential to ensuring the alumina sector is accountable for its full footprint in a market demanding responsible production.