The Mining Indaba 2025 panel discussion we hosted on
Sustainable Mining in Africa: Balancing Critical Mineral Demand and Human Rights brought together industry leaders to tackle one of the most pressing challenges of our time—how to meet the rising global demand for critical minerals while upholding human rights and ensuring meaningful community engagement.
The conversation, featuring
Rohitesh Dhawan (ICMM), Maria Ramos (Oxfam), Marna Cloete (Ivanhoe Mines), Paula-Ann Novotny (Webber Wentzel), and Mfikeyi Makayi (KoBold Metals Africa), surfaced several important themes that define the evolving landscape of responsible mining in Africa. These themes are explored in depth below.
1. Africa is leading on Human Rights due diligence—But the gaps remain
Mining companies in Africa are making significant strides in
human rights due diligence (HRDD). The
International Council on Mining and Metal's (ICMM) global comparison indicates that its African members are often ahead of other regions in embedding HRDD principles into their operations. However, the reality remains that ICMM represents only
24 companies out of an estimated 25,000 mining entities worldwide. While top-tier companies are advancing, a vast portion of the industry lags behind.
The key challenge?
Scaling these best practices beyond ICMM members and major mining houses to the smaller and mid-sized companies that may lack the resources, knowledge, or incentives to implement robust HRDD frameworks. ICMM is working on a
global consolidated mining standard to address this gap—an initiative that will provide an
accessible, stepwise approach for companies to move from foundational practices to leading practice levels. The
industry needs to move from standard-setting to implementation on the ground.
With the legal and risk management landscape around Business and Human Rights (BHR) moving so quickly, most practitioners, consultants and companies are struggling to keep up. The international community is moving to legislate BHR practices such as human rights due diligence, supply chain due diligence, and import/export bans—with such legislation having an extraterritorial effect. But in Africa, where there are limited BHR-specific 'hard laws', we are seeing alternative obligations and risk profiles developing through contracts, industry association memberships, common law developing through the courts, and evolving corporate duties.
2. Beyond CSI—Embedding meaningful community engagement
Corporate Social Investment (CSI) projects are no longer sufficient. Companies must move beyond ad hoc community projects and
integrate social and economic upliftment into the core of their business models.
A standout case study from
Ivanhoe Mines illustrated this approach. Their
Kamoa-Kakula mine in the Democratic Republic of Congo, one of the world's largest copper operations, was developed with a
long-term economic vision, ensuring that community engagement began
before the first drill rig even arrived. A further case study from
KoBold Metals' Zambia operations is the launch of a travelling mining exhibit through Zambia's traditional copper belt towns, ensuring that local stakeholders – the people of Zambia – understand the stake that they have in mining. Key takeaways from this include:
-
Self-education on the scope and context of human rights likely to be impacted by a mine's operations is crucial.
-
Early, continuous and region-specific dialogue with communities is essential.
-
Transparency about job creation and procurement expectations is critical to managing unrealistic community expectations.
-
Supply chain integration and accountability should support local economic ecosystems.
-
Sector-wide collaboration is needed to tackle key industry challenges.
Generally, however, there is an expectation gap—communities often
perceive mining projects as instant economic booms without understanding the prolonged investment cycles and reinvestment periods before profits are realised. Managing this gap requires
clear, honest communication from day one, as well as an appreciation that embedding human rights practices into operational decision-making is an ongoing process of prioritisation—companies cannot go from A to Z overnight.
3. Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC)—A right, not a checkbox
The
debate over FPIC brought to light a key tension in mining development: how to ensure communities are genuinely included in project decision-making through agency while navigating
activism, opportunism, and regulatory gaps.
While
FPIC is a fundamental right of indigenous communities, some panellists argued for its broader application across all impacted communities. However, the below challenges remain:
- Some
communitymembers raise legitimate environmental or human rights concerns.
- Others, described as
opportunists, often try to extort mining companies and seek financial gain by
deliberately stalling projects.
-
Governments often lack the capacity to adjudicate disputes, leaving companies caught in a cycle of litigation or prolonged negotiations.
-
Regional policy and regulatory frameworks are complex in prescribing the forms and levels of community engagement.
One proposed solution?
Establishing independent governmental bodies that can
adjudicate FPIC disputes and
distinguish genuine concerns from opportunistic delays—a step that could prevent costly legal battles while ensuring legitimate grievances are addressed.
4. The supply chain dilemma: Human rights risks run deep
Human rights risks in mining extend
far beyond mine sites—they are embedded across complex global supply chains. These include:
-
Artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM), where child labour and unsafe conditions persist.
-
Security abuses, particularly where private or state security forces are involved.
-
Labour rights violations, including in subcontracted services such as transport and construction.
KoBold Metals' approach to tackling this issue offered a practical blueprint:
-
Supplier education to ensure that all partners understand human rights expectations.
-
Robust, transparent communication strategies so that violations are highlighted and addressed.
-
Voluntary disclosure and reporting, moving beyond compliance checklists to genuine accountability.
-
Cascading corporate commitments to suppliers and business partners.
5. Holding all stakeholders accountable—Not just mining companies
A strong call was made for
equal scrutiny of all actors in the mining value chain—not just mining companies but also
host governments, investors, and downstream buyers.
Two key accountability gaps were highlighted:
-
Government responsibility: While mining companies are held accountable for human rights, governments
must also be held accountable for how mining revenues (from in-country taxes and royalties paid by mining companies) are used. A company paying
40% of its profits in taxes is contributing to national development—but if those funds
do not translate into infrastructure, education, or public services, scrutiny should extend to
state governance and financial transparency.
-
Investor and buyer responsibility:OEMs and global automakers are increasingly signing
direct offtake agreements to secure responsibly sourced minerals. But are they doing enough to ensure their supply chains are free of human rights violations?
The takeaway?
Human rights due diligence must extend beyond mine sites to the entire economic value chain.
6. Is there a trade-off between critical mineral demand and human rights?
The final, provocative question raised whether we are
kidding ourselves—is there a genuine balance between
meeting critical mineral demand and protecting human rights, or is it a trade-off?
The consensus:
These are not opposing forces—they are inherently connected.
-
Critical minerals drive electrification, grid expansion, and sustainable energy—all of which contribute to human rights progress.
-
However, without responsible mining, the rush for minerals can fuel exploitation, conflict, and environmental harm.
The key challenge is ensuring that the future of mining does not repeat the mistakes of the past. This requires a new paradigm—one where:
-
Mining projects are designed with sustainability and social impact at their core.
-
Governments, investors, and buyers share the responsibility for ensuring ethical mineral sourcing.
-
Small-scale and artisanal miners are integrated into the formal economy rather than criminalised.
Conclusion: Mining with a greater purpose
The path forward requires a shift in mindset:
responsible mining is not just about mitigating harm—it is about actively creating shared value for people and the planet.
For Africa, this means:
-
Harnessing its young workforce to build the mines of the future.
-
Developing renewable-powered mining projects to avoid replicating the carbon-heavy industrialisation of the past.
-
Embedding human rights, transparency, and community development as core business imperatives.
Key areas requiring progress in the mining value chain include gender-focussed impact analysis, fiscal transparency, human rights capacity building and the protection of human rights defenders.
The world is watching, and
Africa has the opportunity to set the global benchmark for responsible mining in the 21st century.
