Radio ExpressTV
Live
The Critical Race for Minerals Endangers the Planet
Johanna Sidhu: Head of International Environmental Policy at the Heinrich Böll Foundation.
Nesama Chikwanza: National Director of “Publish What You Pay” in Zambia.
Daily, the environmental and human losses resulting from mineral extraction are becoming more evident — and increasingly alarming. In Ghana, nearly 60% of waterways are now severely polluted due to gold mining along riverbanks.
In Peru, many local communities have lost access to safe drinking water after environmental protections were weakened and regulatory controls suspended to facilitate new mining projects, leading to pollution even affecting the Rimac River, which supplies water to the capital, Lima.
These environmental crises are exacerbated by widening and deepening disparities, as well as social divisions in many mining-dependent countries. The Global Environmental Justice Atlas has documented over 900 mining-related conflicts worldwide, with around 85% involving the use or pollution of rivers, lakes, and groundwater.
Against this backdrop, major economies are rapidly reshaping the geopolitical landscape of resources. As the United States attempts to stabilize the global fossil fuel-based economy, it is also striving to secure the minerals necessary for manufacturing electric vehicles, producing renewable energy, weapon systems, building digital infrastructure, and construction, often relying on coercion and aggressive negotiation tactics. In its effort to reduce dependence on China, which dominates rare earth processing, the U.S. increasingly overlooks environmental and humanitarian considerations.
Similarly, Saudi Arabia is solidifying its position as an emerging power in the minerals sector as part of its efforts to diversify income sources away from oil. It is forging new partnerships — including with the United States — and hosting high-level mining conferences. At the same time, the Kingdom actively undermines achievements in other multilateral arenas, including this year’s United Nations climate conference in Brazil and ongoing negotiations led by the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA7).
In Europe, industry groups are pushing for further deregulation, as fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil, TotalEnergies, and Siemens employ misleading tactics aimed at undermining recently established mechanisms designed to protect local community rights in resource-producing areas. We should be concerned about the efforts of companies and countries that helped cause global warming and environmental degradation while violating human rights to dominate the minerals sector. Allowing them to do so would endanger humanity as a whole, not just vulnerable populations.
Governments must stop taking negative stances. They need to reclaim responsibility for driving the main engine of mining expansion: demand. Reducing material consumption, especially in developed nations, remains the most effective way to protect ecosystems and prevent the long-term damage inevitably caused by extraction activities.
However, despite the compelling evidence that intensified resource extraction is threatening water supplies and public safety, governments worldwide continue to weaken environmental protections in attempts to attract foreign investment, thereby endangering the ecosystems that sustain life on Earth. From an economic perspective, this approach is profoundly short-sighted.
In fact, recent research shows that responsible practices are not only morally right but also economically sound. A new report from the United Nations Development Programme, based on data from 235 multinational companies over five years, indicates that companies that enhance their human rights record tend to perform better in the long run. Thus, governments should be wary of industry claims that profitability necessitates rolling back environmental regulatory controls or ignoring human rights.
When people cannot trust the willingness of political leaders to protect their rights, it is much more likely that they will resist, resulting in social conflict that hampers investment. The violent backlash against Rio Tinto’s lithium mining project in Serbia serves as a prime example. Many Serbs believed their government prioritized corporate interests by advancing the project even though it failed to meet even basic sustainability standards. Public outrage led to the halting of development and left the company facing significant losses.
In reality, only strong legal frameworks, supported by effective enforcement, can create the conditions for stable development that respects rights. This means protecting Indigenous rights; ensuring free, prior, and informed consent from all affected communities; safeguarding water resources; spatial planning, and creating protected areas; and conducting transparent, independent, and participatory social and environmental impact assessments.
Given today’s rising geopolitical tensions, multilateral forums like the Conference of the Parties and the United Nations Environment Assembly are crucial to counter global fragmentation and advance common solutions. Mineral-rich countries should work together to raise their environmental standards, just as oil-producing nations jointly influence global prices. Through collective action, these nations can prevent a destructive race to the bottom and ensure local communities, especially Indigenous peoples and other rights-holders, are heard.
At a time when clean drinking water is becoming scarcer, glaciers are melting, and agriculture faces increasing threats, coordinated international action is no longer optional. The resolution presented by Colombia and Oman in December before the United Nations Environment Assembly, calling for a binding minerals treaty, is an important step towards fairer global standards.
The proposal, initiated by Colombia and co-sponsored by countries like Zambia, which is well aware of the costs associated with extractive industries, calls for cooperation across the entire mineral production chain to reduce environmental harm and protect the rights of Indigenous peoples and other affected communities. By placing responsibility on resource-consuming nations, the proposal aims to ensure that the burden of reform does not fall solely on mineral-producing economies. Importantly, it also addresses the dangers posed by tailings and other mining waste, which have led to devastating failures and hundreds of fatalities.
Overall, these measures present a rare opportunity to begin correcting the inequalities that have long characterized mineral extraction. Every country, especially those producing minerals that have historically been excluded from the negotiating table, should seize this opportunity. The United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA7) provides us a window for achieving resource justice.
