We sat down at Resourcing Tomorrow with Estelle Levin-Nally, CEO and Founder of Levin Sources, whose two decades of work have shaped responsible minerals value chains across more than 80 countries. Drawing on her experience advising governments, companies, investors, and global institutions, Estelle reflects on what makes gold fundamentally different from other minerals – as a financial instrument, a cultural anchor, and a source of livelihood for millions.

Estelle, you’ve helped shape responsible sourcing across many minerals. What makes gold unique – socially, culturally, or environmentally – compared to other supply chains you work in?

In many ways, gold is unique because it is a financial instrument. That alone profoundly shapes who gets involved in gold, how they engage with it, and how it is used. This creates particular and unique risks when you are doing supply chain due diligence, because gold’s financial function links it very closely to illicit financial flows – something we’ve seen grow significantly in recent years. That relationship is not new, but it has become more pronounced.

Because gold is a financial instrument, it is also heavily regulated by financial authorities in a way that other minerals are not. You have an entire sector involved that is extraordinarily risk-averse and highly compliance-focused, for understandable reasons. Money sits at the core of capitalism and of our political economy. That creates a very strong compliance logic in how risk is managed in gold supply chains.

The challenge is that this compliance-first approach can get in the way of managing risk in a more agile and flexible way – one that actually drives sustainable development. It can become a barrier. Refiners, for example, are often held to account primarily by their banking clients, who are typically more material to them than jewellery or electronics clients. As a result, their responsible sourcing systems tend to be led by those interests.

When refiners look upstream and identify a province or supplier as higher risk, they are often more inclined to disengage than to engage and drive improvement. The focus becomes liability management rather than partnership. That is something that really sets gold apart.

At the same time, gold presents tremendous opportunities for artisanal and small-scale miners. Around half of the global ASM population – at least 20 million people, plus their dependents – relies on gold directly or indirectly for livelihoods. Gold is also used as a form of savings or financial security. People don’t do that with coltan or copper – they do it with gold.

There is something very beautiful about this. Gold is identity-building. In artisanal and small-scale mining communities where gold has been mined for centuries, it is historically and culturally emblematic. It is also emancipatory.

In West Africa, for example, a large proportion of artisanal gold miners are women, far more than in Latin America or Southern Africa. Many pan for gold or rework waste material from others’ mine sites. They do this collaboratively, alongside a range of other livelihoods. The gold they recover is often used to build financial independence, security, and safety.

I have met women who mine gold solely to build a dowry for their daughters. Others do it to create an escape route should something happen – because gold can be worn as jewellery or traded if needed. Other minerals simply don’t offer that, apart from gemstones; the differentiator is that it is common to find gold each day and luck to find one diamond a month. That makes gold very special.

So when we look at gold systems, we have to bring a compliance logic – but we also need a cultural and anthropological logic to understand what gold means to people, what it does for them, why it matters to them, and thus why they’ll fight to maintain their rights to mine and trade it.

You’ll soon be speaking at Mining Indaba on the question “Is a circular economy just?”. From your perspective, what does a truly just circular economy look like for gold-producing countries?

That’s a really important question, and one that deserves careful thought. When people talk about circularity, they often frame it in technical, engineering, or environmental terms. But all environmental harms typically have direct or indirect human rights impacts as well. When you implement circularity principles in how you design and deliver a mine or a refinery – essentially dematerialising production – you reduce environmental impacts, which is better for people as well as for nature.

In that sense, circularity is fundamentally just in principle, because it reduces the likelihood and severity of harm. But you have to be very nuanced in how you apply it in practice.

In this year’s panel at Mining Indaba, the discussion is often framed around recycling versus mining, and the potential for African countries to take a greater stake in recycling – particularly in batteries. Gold recycling is very different from battery or copper recycling, and there is a lot of contention around what “recycled gold” actually means.

Is it post-consumer waste, or is it post-industrial waste? Some argue that only post-consumer gold should count as recycled, while post-industrial material is more accurately described as repurposed or remanufactured. That distinction matters, because post-industrial recycling doesn’t necessarily deliver the same ecological benefit or fulfil the promise of circularity. It is not taking waste out of society; it is simply recapturing waste within a process that would happen anyway for commercial reasons – it’s not additive.

From a justice perspective, the key question is whether we are applying a justice lens when we define sustainability and recycling. We need to be very clear about what we mean when we say “recycled” and recognise that different recycling feedstocks come with very different social and environmental realities. Some will be more just than others. Again, it comes back to nuance.

As the energy and digital transitions accelerate, where do you believe responsibly sourced gold fits within the future of sustainable, low-carbon supply chains?

Gold is used in technology in very small quantities, but cumulatively those quantities are not immaterial. It plays a role. And as a financial instrument, gold also sits within the investment portfolios that underpin digital and technological transitions.

Beyond that, I see gold’s relevance to digitisation particularly through traceability, blockchain, and tokenisation. These technologies can be used to track gold, create product passports, and build a market of verified, responsibly sourced gold. The LBMA, for example, is developing the Gold Bar Integrity Programme, which aims to provide blockchain-assured confidence in responsible gold.

Because I live in Guernsey, which is positioning itself as a hub for digitisation and tokenisation within the financial sector, I find this especially interesting. Small island economies need light industries, and quaternary services within financial services offer real opportunity.

That said, there are serious risks. At a recent conference on illicit financial flows, it became clear that digitisation and tokenisation of gold can also create new pathways for illicit finance to move through the system undetected. These tools can facilitate crime if they are not designed carefully.

So those developing digital and tokenised solutions for gold need to be extremely intentional about preventing their systems from being exploited by bad actors. Technology can be transformative – but only if it is built with safeguards at its core.

You’ve advised governments, companies, and investors around the world. In your view, what single change would most accelerate responsible practice in the gold sector?

Getting banks to be willing to work with imperfection. Refiners cannot move away from a protect-yourself, risk-first posture unless banks allow them to. Banks need to be willing to grow their risk appetite in partnership with refiners, so that together they can drive systemic change. I know that is a huge ask, and I’m not even sure the financial system is currently structured to allow it. But that is the conversation we need to be having. Otherwise, we remain stuck in a model that polices supply chains rather than partnering with weaker actors to improve and professionalise over time.

There have been some conversations around this, but I am not aware of any major institutions really sitting down to confront this barrier head-on. Maybe they believe it’s impossible. But I think it’s one of the most important discussions we need to have.

There are a few other critical levers as well. One is restoring transparency in recycled gold value chains. Downstream of refiners, many actors don’t really know what is in their recycled gold. That means they may unknowingly be connected to harm, which creates serious reputational risk.

Another is making it easier for refiners to source from artisanal and small-scale miners, or from alternative producers such as re-mining projects, where regulatory environments may still be fragile. We need to build bridges.

There is a contradiction I hear often: people say we must work with ASM, but only if it is fully legal. That simply doesn’t make sense. Who takes ASM actors on the journey to legality? Overseas development assistance has largely disappeared. The private sector has to step in, and that requires actors with leverage and appetite. Organisations like the Swiss Better Gold Association, Fairtrade, and the Alliance for Responsible Mining are doing crucial work, but they are under-scaled and often isolated.

That is why initiatives like the new Global Coalition on Responsible Artisanal and Small-scale Gold Mining, involving the World Bank, the World Gold Council, and the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining and Metals, are so exciting. They aim to build a tapestry of actors capable of scaling impact.

The LBMA’s ASM Working Group is also trying to increase the proportion of ASM feedstock entering LBMA refiners. But again, fundamental barriers – especially banking – remain.

You’re a strong advocate for gender equity in mining. What inspiring examples have you seen of women shaping gold supply chains, and what would help unlock more leadership opportunities for them?

One of the things I have consistently pushed for is greater support for women-in-mining associations. These organisations are often volunteer-led, yet they play a vital role in building pathways for women to enter, progress, and lead within the sector. Supporting them delivers greater justice and inclusion – and ultimately stronger economic development.

People who feel they belong, who feel supported, and who are properly compensated are more productive. Diverse decision-making also protects businesses.

I see incredible work happening. The International Women in Mining Alliance, under Barbara Dischinger’s leadership, has been instrumental in gender-mainstreaming standards. The Femina Collective in Canada is supporting women on the emotional and psychological challenges of working in a highly masculinised industry.

The Intergovernmental Forum for Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development is producing critical data on where inequalities exist and how to address them and doing meaningful capacity building and policy work around the world. The Women, Rights and Mining Collective is advancing gender-responsive due diligence, particularly in artisanal mining contexts.

I would love to see precious metals refiners explicitly adopt gender-responsive due diligence in their upstream risk management. That would be transformational.

I also want to recognise Iris Maria Alexis Van der Veken’s work at the Watch & Jewellery Initiative 2030, where inclusion is a core pillar and where the UN Women’s Empowerment Principles have been championed within jewellery and gold value chains.

What is still missing is leadership from many of the major gold institutions. Apart from those explicitly dedicated to gender equality, I don’t often see this treated as a strategic priority.

This is where something like the Gold Network could play a vital role – convening actors, building the business and impact case for gender equality, and helping each part of the gold ecosystem push further, faster. There is significant room for stronger, more visible leadership.