index.php

This paper explores the global landscape of civil resistance to mineral extraction and its implications for the political sustainability of the energy transition. As global demand for critical minerals accelerates in association with the energy transition, there is a growing imperative to secure mineral access while improving environmental and social outcomes. However, mining activities face significant resistance worldwide, posing major challenges to the justice and viability of the energy transition. Using an original dataset derived from the GDELT Project between 2015 and 2022, we provide the first systematic global mapping of conflict and cooperation in mining regions, spanning diverse socio-political contexts and offering novel insights into the economic, environmental, and justice-related drivers of these dynamics. Our findings reveal that resistance to mineral extraction is not confined to poorer, emerging economies but is instead widespread, occurring wherever mineral deposits are found, regardless of a country’s income level. This resistance frequently reaches high levels of polarisation, often leading to costly delays and project cancellations. Although cooperation sometimes accompanies conflict, high-commitment cooperative actions are limited and less frequent in highly polarised situations. These insights highlight the need to move beyond traditional Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) approaches and existing public participation efforts within Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). A just, sustainable, and democratic transition requires a deeper democratisation of investment decisions through inclusive governance frameworks that tackle the several injustices associated with mineral resource extraction.

Abstract

Non-Technical Summary

The global energy transition relies heavily on minerals such as copper, lithium, and nickel, essential for technologies like electric vehicles, solar panels, and battery storage. Yet, while demand for these critical minerals is expected to rise dramatically—potentially fourfold by 2040—the extraction of these minerals frequently sparks social and environmental conflicts. Our research addresses a crucial question: What happens if local populations say “no” to expanded mineral extraction? What would widespread resistance mean for the feasibility of a just and democratic energy transition?

To provide robust insights into these issues, we built an original global database of mining-related conflicts and cooperative events using the GDELT Project, which systematically compiles data from news reports worldwide. Our dataset covers events occurring between 2015 and 2022. By doing so, we identified 36,017 conflict events related to mining activities across 4,293 locations around the world. This number of documented conflicts is approximately six to seven times greater than the cases previously identified by widely cited global mapping initiatives, significantly broadening our understanding of the prevalence of these conflicts.

One of our key findings is that opposition to mining activities is far more geographically widespread than commonly thought. Conflicts are not confined to poorer, less institutionally robust countries; rather, they emerge in all types of countries, including economically prosperous and institutionally mature democracies such as Australia, Canada, and the United States. In other words, conflict occurs practically everywhere significant mineral deposits are found, regardless of national income or governance quality. This challenges the common assumption that strong institutions alone are sufficient to prevent or mitigate conflict over resource extraction.

Additionally, our analysis shows that these conflicts are often highly polarised. Specifically, we classified events according to their intensity and found that 62% of all conflict events involve moderate to high polarisation—meaning they often entail substantial protests, legal challenges, confrontations, or even violence. Our data also reveal that once conflicts reach these heightened levels, resolution becomes much more difficult, frequently leading to prolonged delays, cancellations, or suspensions of mining projects. Real-world cases illustrate this clearly: conflicts in Chile, Argentina, and Peru, among other places, have led to massive financial costs, prolonged uncertainty, and the abandonment of several high-profile mining initiatives.

Interestingly, our data show that cooperative events—efforts by communities, governments, and companies to negotiate or reach agreements—occur even more frequently (63,867 events) than conflicts. At first glance, this might indicate promising paths toward resolution. However, deeper analysis reveals a critical caveat: most cooperation events are relatively superficial, involving low-commitment actions such as general expressions of willingness to engage or public relations announcements. Only about 21% of cooperative events entail high-commitment actions, such as substantial policy reforms, significant redistribution of benefits, or binding agreements that address fundamental community grievances.

This gap between superficial and meaningful cooperation has profound implications. While cooperation frequently coexists with conflict, our findings suggest that meaningful cooperation becomes considerably less likely once disputes escalate into highly polarised conflicts. Trust, once broken, is notoriously difficult to rebuild. Therefore, if conflicts are not adequately addressed early through genuine and meaningful participation, the opportunities for deep and transformative cooperation significantly diminish.

Our research also sheds light on what narratives lie behind these mining-related disputes. While environmental concerns—particularly water scarcity and contamination—are often cited, newspaper articles frequently record issues related to dissatisfaction about economic inequality, inadequate governance, lack of transparent decision-making processes, and insufficient sharing of economic benefits from mining operations. These underlying issues underscore the need for a more comprehensive approach than traditional Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs or late-stage Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). Instead, we argue for stronger frameworks of economic democracy, which provide a better balance of decision-making power and equitable benefit-sharing arrangements for local communities.

Finally, our findings pose important implications for policy. If widespread local resistance to mineral extraction persists or intensifies, the viability of securing sufficient mineral resources to sustain the global energy transition may be at risk. Moreover, without working to improve local acceptance, countries may resort to undemocratic practices or face increasing political tensions. Alternatively, integrating local communities from the outset—by ensuring transparency, meaningful consent, and fair economic participation—could support a transition that is not only environmentally sustainable but also socially just and politically robust.

Our comprehensive mapping of global mining conflicts underscores the urgency of rethinking how mineral resources are governed and highlights the critical need for inclusive decision-making to secure both the legitimacy and feasibility of a just energy transition.

Read the Working Paper

Gabriel Palazzo

Guest Author

View profile

Anabel Marin

Guest Author

View profile

Marin, A; Palazzo, G (2025) Centre for Inclusive Trade Policy, Working Paper 021