EITI HubOverviewWhat it isStakeholdersDebatesContractsLatestSources
Evidence

Sources & method

The whole point of this hub is that claims are only as strong as the independent evidence behind them. Here is how claims are rated, the full reference set grouped by type, and an honest account of what could not be verified.

1How claims are rated

Every material claim carries a corroboration badge. It is not editorial confidence; it is a reading of the number, diversity and reliability of the independent sources that confirm it. Even an authoritative official source counts, on its own, as a single source. A figure becomes strong when independent actors of different types agree.

Well corroborated

Three or more independent sources of different types (e.g. official, watchdog, press) agree.

Corroborated

Two independent sources, or one authoritative official source plus corroboration.

Single source

One source only, or trade-press-only. Reported, but treat with caution until confirmed.

Contested

Credible sources disagree, or the figure is a party’s own un-audited estimate.

Source types

GOVofficial / governmentNGOwatchdog / civil societyIFIinternational financial institutionPRESSreportingLEGALlegal / academic
An interface for local stakeholders. Beyond organising and rating, a core objective of Nashiriki is to give local stakeholders, civil society, researchers and communities, a way both to access the information in this hub and to contribute to it, so the EITI record is shaped by those closest to the extractives it describes.

2Reference set

The sources the hub draws on, by type. The set widens as the crawl does; the newest developments, and the sources behind each, sit in the Latest feed.

Official / governmentGOV

  1. EITI · eiti.org
  2. ITIE-RDC · itierdc.net
  3. DRC Ministry of Mines · mines.gouv.cd
  4. US Department of State · state.gov
  5. US Treasury (OFAC) · home.treasury.gov

International financial institutionsIFI

  1. IMF · imf.org
  2. World Bank · worldbank.org

Watchdogs / civil societyNGO

  1. NRGI · resourcegovernance.org
  2. The Carter Center · cartercenter.org
  3. Global Witness · globalwitness.org
  4. RAID · raid-uk.org
  5. AFREWATCH · afrewatch.org
  6. Resource Matters · resourcematters.org
  7. CNPAV / Congo Is Not For Sale · corruptiontue.org
  8. PPLAAF · pplaaf.org
  9. Public Citizen · citizen.org
  10. Oakland Institute · oaklandinstitute.org
  11. Business & Human Rights Resource Centre · business-humanrights.org

Contract repositoriesGOV

  1. ResourceContracts · resourcecontracts.org
  2. congomines · congomines.org
  3. CAMI · cami.cd

ReportingPRESS

  1. Reuters · reuters.com
  2. Bloomberg · bloomberg.com
  3. Mining Weekly · miningweekly.com
  4. Mining.com · mining.com
  5. Mining Technology · mining-technology.com
  6. Benchmark Mineral Intelligence · benchmarkminerals.com
  7. Fastmarkets · fastmarkets.com
  8. S&P Global · spglobal.com
  9. Africanews · africanews.com
  10. Al Jazeera · aljazeera.com
  11. Mongabay · news.mongabay.com
  12. The Africa Report · theafricareport.com
  13. Financial Afrik · financialafrik.com
  14. China-Global South Project · chinaglobalsouth.com
  15. openDemocracy · opendemocracy.net
  16. Ecofin Agency · ecofinagency.com

3Handling uncertainty

Nashiriki does not keep a separate “unverified” list. Any claim that could not be fully confirmed carries a Single source or Contested badge wherever it appears, and the Latest feed can be filtered by rating to surface them.

4Two standing caveats

Transparent is not queryable. EITI’s machine-readable data lags the PDF reports by several years, so disclosure existing and disclosure being usable are different claims.

The evidence base is ageing where it matters most. The foundational findings on missing revenues are from 2017–2019; they remain the reference base, but the live commercial action has since moved into amendments and side-agreements, precisely the least-disclosed layer.