The mining development of the country has been an important fact that no one can discuss, but this has been supported by an international study prepared by the Fraser Institute of Canada, in which Chile has leaded most of the surveys of the study. This matter does not surprise foreign investors, which implies a great impulse for the local mining development.

- Which are the main aspects of the study, prepared by the Fraser Institute:

“ This is the 6th edition of the mining survey, in which 158 companies participated, 27 senior companies and 131 junior companies.

The companies participating represent exploration budgets totaling US$737.9 million in 2001. They represent over 60 percent (US$191 million) of the total mineral exploration expenditure in Canada as estimated by Natural Resources Canada. They further represent 32 percent (US$56 million) of the total mineral exploration in the USA in 2001, and 37 percent (US$236.5 million) of the exploration expenditures in Latin America as estimated by the Metals Economics Group.

The companies were asked to rate the policies and mineral potential of 47 jurisdictions including 12 provinces in Canada, 14 states in the USA, and 21 other countries including:
In Latin America, for example: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, México, Perú and Venezuela; and for the others continents , countries as Australia, China, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Russia, South Africa and Zimbabwe

We ask about both the Mineral Potential and Policy Potential of these areas. We ask about Mineral Potential twice, first asking to rate mineral potential assuming current regulation, and then again asking respondents to assume no land use restrictions in place. The goal is to get a sense of the true perceived mineral wealth of each region without the bias imposed by unattractive regulations.

We ask about the Policy Potential of each region in ten different areas. These include:
Uncertainty concerning the administration, interpretation, and enforcement of regulations
Environmental regulations

Regulatory duplication and inconsistencies (including federal/provincial and federal/state and interdepartmental overlap)

Uncertainty concerning what areas will be protected as wilderness or parks. Uncertainty concerning native land claims; Taxation. Infrastructure, Labour regulation, Political stability and Socioeconomic agreements”, said Fredricksen .

- Why is the rising of Chile's best position?

“ Chile has always performed well on the survey. We began including Chile in 1998, when it finished 3rd overall. In 1999/2000 Chile was 3rd again, in 2000/2001 Chile was 2nd, in 2001/2002 Chile was 4th, and this year (2002/2003) Chile finally made it to 1st position”.

- What's the main lack of Chile in mining politicals matters?

“ Chile’s first place finish is the result of performing well in ALL the policy areas we explore. However, there is some room for improvement in the areas of Socioeconomic Agreements where Chile finished 20th out of 47 jurisdictions, Political Stability, where Chile finished 24th out of 47 jurisdictions, and Infrastructure, where Chile finished 20th out of 47 jurisdictions. However, Chile received fewer than 10 percent negative responses in each of these areas, so there is not a lot of room for improvement. It is just that many countries perform well in these areas”.

- Main advantages and unadvantages of mining in Southamerica?

“ South America has a long mining tradition and is interested in attracting foreign investment including mineral exploration investment in its efforts to become economically more successful. This attitude which has resulted in mining friendly policies, combined with impressive mineral potential, encourages mining companies to explore and invest in South America. There is some perception within the mining community of political instability and shortcomings in South America’s infrastructure and ability to support mining, but it is not significant, as demonstrated by Chile’s number one finish”.

- What are main surprises in this study ( main rising and falling) and Why?

“ There have been few surprises in the study this year. The jurisdictions which generally perform well have continued to so, and the jurisdictions which generally perform poorly have continued to do so. One surprise is that, despite concerns and uncertainties surrounding the Mineral Development Bill passes in South Africa this year, the country’s policy rating was not affected. It placed 28th on the Policy Potential Index for a second year”.