Revealing a new asset class
L-VaR™
Legitimacy risk, measured and priced. The risk that strands projects, impairs balance sheets and sterilises orebodies — finally on the spreadsheet.
Stranding isn’t the exception — it’s the pattern now.
Hundreds of projects are stalled, impaired or sterilised. The issues that strand them have grown more organised, more legally armed and more connected — and the development model hasn’t kept up.
Now it’s on the spreadsheetWe make what was invisible visible — and show what becomes possible once you can see it: legitimacy enabling faster, more durable critical-minerals supply chains.
Legitimacy-free value across the 50-project portfolio
Average L-VaR™ haircut the market never itemised
Genuinely bankable once legitimacy is priced
NPV overstatement — hidden inside the rate
Legitimacy is the line everything else stands on.
Get it wrong and schedule, budget and market case all rest on a foundation that was never rated to hold. Legitimacy exists in the judgment of the conferrer — a government can issue a permit, but the community’s judgment is a separate conferral. It does not delegate.
Every instrument orbits the risk. None of them prices it.
Traditional measures don’t see the risk — and don’t cost it. None of them prices what losing legitimacy will actually cost this project.
Disclosure, not experience
Measure what companies disclose — not what communities experience.
The past, at country level
Not what happens next, at project level.
Error bars hide it
Consent risk hides inside the error bar.
A heat map of yesterday
Can’t say when, how long, or what it costs.
NPV doesn’t ignore legitimacy risk. It smears it into the discount rate.
A WACC premium or blanket sector discount is a mood, not a measurement. BPV strips every legitimacy cost out of the base, then applies L-VaR™ as a transparent, calibrated discount on top. One opaque rate becomes three honest numbers.
The same project, resolved two ways — only one of them holds.
The architecture is stronger for being challenged than for being protected. Force the project through and the value erodes to nothing; resolve it through consent and the value holds — and compounds. L-VaR™ prices the distance between the two paths before you commit.
Conditions authored with community, capital and government at once — the outcome holds for all three.
Fastest on paper. Grievance stores, each shock lands one rung higher — delay, impairment, sterilisation.
The dollar distance between the two paths — measured, priced, and recoverable.
From evidence to a costed consequence, in six steps.
Intake
A ten-vantage-point intelligence intake, graded into one Fact Base.
Diagnostic
Six anchored domains, 107 aspects, scored one by one — testable, never opinion.
Mechanisms
Scores set pressure, amplification, clocks and shelter. Issues couple — and compound.
Simulation
Semi-Markov Monte Carlo: thousands of thirty-year histories, month by month.
Reads
Value at risk · sterilisation · delay · drivers — a distribution with named causes.
Decisions
Every option and scenario priced the same way, simulated as its own future.
Six domains. 107 anchored aspects. One number.
Risk Source
Community risk & outrage — the hazard the project itself creates.
Company Behaviour Amplification
How the company’s own conduct amplifies the issues.
Social Maturity Scorecard
Issue maturity — how developed and organised each grievance is.
Activist Sophistication Index
Opposition capability — legal, media and network strength.
Government Accommodation Scorecard
How far the state will bend — and where it won’t.
Societal Antagonism
The complex interactions between all actors in the system.
Issues don’t add — they couple, compound, then magnify. Consent doesn’t calm the vortex. It defunds it.
Lucia — every project we hold, priced and mapped.
Our internal engine — a 5- and 30-year score on every asset, with diagnostic, portfolio and AI review built in.
Projects tracked
L-VaR on every asset
Six options, each costed — and simulated as its own future.
DbC — Success
All stakeholders — activists included — aligned to consent conditions across engineering, legal, financial, environmental and social terms.
DbC — Community
Community carried through to legal embedding — but without the activists on side.
Engagement
Deeper consultation and benefit-sharing on social terms — no change to the engineering, no transfer of control.
Compliance
Meet obligations, nothing more; the do-the-minimum baseline.
Re-Licence
Re-open the permit on new terms; buys authority but raises antagonism.
Decree
Force it through on formal powers; fastest — and the most likely to sterilise.
Consent recovers value → force sterilises it
Two projects through the engine. Both carry grievances never resolved.
Case 1 · Llurimagua
Intag, EcuadorThe state is tendering an asset it already had a licence revoked on — stranded by consent, not geology.
5-year L-VaR™
30-year L-VaR™
Sterilisation probability
On a consent-led path
A 400-strong police-and-military operation forced entry in 2014. Its own courts killed it; six companies were driven out of Intag — and now the same state invites a seventh operator onto the same unresolved grievance. The engine reproduced 6 of its 6 past shocks first. Better conduct moves nothing; only re-architecture — authoring development with Intag, not over them — changes the destination.
Case 2 · Taca Taca
Salta, ArgentinaA community that bargains — until you touch its water.
Water / consultation-rights claim filed by year 5
Futures ending in permanent loss
Of value consumed by year 30
Under full consent
One in five dollars — US$989M — is already expected to be lost within five years. Resolve water and consent and the residual is 2.7%, with three in four futures ending healthy — a ~$950M penalty for staying on the current path. 0% of current futures reach consent. 78% could. The gap is two answers. Nothing cheaper than consent works in the runs.
Project legitimacy assessments — three services, two horizons.
Diagnostic
- Full ten-vantage intelligence intake
- Six-domain scorecard
- Most likely end state & headline $
- Recoverability triage · two horizons
Challenger
- Your own information simulated through L-VaR™
- Both cases argued, then ruled
- The Delta — how the number moves
- Hidden-grievance check
- Public report + confidential annex
Strategic Options
- Six management options, each priced
- Where the futures land · recovery sequence
- Willingness loop — your option, simulated
- Full report + live model · two horizons
Every “difficult” project is a legitimacy problem wearing a permitting label
01 L-VaR™ — price the risk on every asset, one method, same audit trail.
02 LCV — what each asset is really worth today, and the recoverable delta.
03 Strategic opportunity — savability-ranked: buy, resolve, partner, or walk past.
04 Supply — how much stranded tonnage consent could bring back, and when.
Where everyone else sees a problem, we see a recoverable asset
Difficult jurisdictions. Previously rejected projects. Contested, stranded assets. Value others have written off. Not the same assets everyone else wants — assets we can unlock with you, as co-developer, through L-VaR™ and Development by Consent.
Legitimacy, designed in — not defended after the fact.
Every developer manages legitimacy risk once it appears. Spektrum eliminates the conditions that create it — before a project is designed, not after. Development by Consent is where community, capital and government stop being managed separately: one process that decides project conditions with all three at once, so the outcome holds for all three at once.
A team built for the whole problem.
L-VaR™ and Development by Consent are the intellectual property of Spektrum Development — www.spektrumdevelopment.com
Katherine Teh
Strategy & social licence — 30 years, 100+ documented cases converting opposition into consent.
Anna Quillinan
Engineering — 28 years; led 1,100 engineers; legitimacy architecture built into mining development.
Daniel Abbas
Strategist and systems thinker - architecting Spektrum’s operating platform and technology.
Damian Pearson
Investment & capital strategy — 25+ years in global mining; ~US$42B in development, financing and M&A transactions.
Tim Bradfield
Finance — 25+ years across finance, commercial operations and capital markets; M&A, IPOs, capital and debt raises.
Mick Gooda
Gangulu man who helped negotiate the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples — advancing consent and wealth architecture.
James Fitzgerald
Legal — 30+ years in Indigenous rights, native title and major project agreements.
Louise Cherrie
Sustainability — full-lifecycle EHS; former board member, Tasmanian EPA.
Kara Hurry
Markets — translating critical-minerals development into credible market and commercial pathways.
Minna Grip
Nordics — 30+ years across industry, government and sustainability; senior roles at Metsä Group, Tapio and Neste; based in Finland.
Bonny Ibhawoh
Human rights — professor of global human rights; former Chair, UN Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development; Project Director of Participedia.
“What I observed was how effective the methods were. Katherine convinced management to address the issue openly with the community, and an economic abatement was developed that satisfied the community and the company. Her commitment to solving roadblocks to development remains.”Jerry Ellis, AOFormer Chairman of BHP
“Katherine Teh has an extensive track record of anticipating and resolving conflicts between communities and resource companies, and has in many cases turned communities into advocates for a project. She is the leading global expert in social licence. I endorse Katherine’s vision to bring a new approach to mining and social licence.”Dr Megan Clark, ACInaugural chair, Australian Space Agency · former board director, Rio Tinto · Chancellor, Monash University
Legitimacy, priced
L-VaR™
Put it on the spreadsheet.
Start with your list — then every contested asset in your universe, priced the same way.
Nothing in this material constitutes financial product advice or any other advice, or a recommendation to acquire, dispose of or hold any financial product. Spektrum Development Pty Ltd does not hold an Australian financial services licence and is not authorised to provide financial product advice. Recipients should obtain appropriate independent professional advice before making any investment or financial decision on the basis of this material.