Energy transition minerals and their intersection with land-connected peoples

Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land

UNDRIP and UNDROP aim to protect land-connected groups generally located in the least industrialized regions of the world or where land is essential to upholding universal human rights. These groups are typically connected to land, territory and surrounding natural resources; are non-dominant, minority or face discrimination; and have distinctive social and political systems, culture and language. UNDRIP and UNDROP affirm the right of these groups to make key decisions about development on their lands and territories. Extracting more ETMs to advance the energy transition will extend the global mining land footprint presenting significant threats to social and environmental sustainability. Processes of self-determination tend to see Indigenous peoples prioritize cultural and ecological values over indiscriminate industrial development²². Increases in global demand for ETMs is likely to impose unprecedented pressure on these rights-holding groups. Indigenous peoples’ and peasant lands are at the forefront of competing sustainability objectives where the location and likely social and environmental trade-offs associated with resource development have not previously been established.

Mapping the global inventory of ETMs indicates that a high proportion of ETM projects are in geographies covered by these two UN instruments (Fig. 1a). Across the sample of 5,097 ETM projects, 54% of projects are located on or nearby Indigenous peoples’ lands, with 29% of these projects on or near lands over which Indigenous peoples are recognized as managing or exercising some form of control or influence over land for the purposes of conservation¹⁹. These geographies are most relevant to UNDRIP. For UNDROP, the spatial analysis reveals that 33% of projects are located on or nearby peasant land. Combined, 69% of ETM projects are on or near land that qualifies as Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land. Considering the potential for overlapping identities across these two demographic groups, we tested for co-occurrence of land type. Approximately 1 in 5 (18%) projects in our sample qualify as being located on or near both Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land.

**Fig. 1: Distribution of ETMs by Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land.**

Differentiating the bundle of ETMs by individual commodities reveals the types of source conditions associated with the energy transition and the competing sustainability objectives we have identified. We find that the commodities with the highest proportion of reserves and resources on or near Indigenous peoples’ land are lithium (85%) and manganese (75%) (Fig. 1b, and Supplementary Table 1 for results of all ETMs and Supplementary Fig. 1 for regional maps). For land occupied by peasant populations, the commodities with the highest proportion of reserves and resources are graphite (83%) and platinum (82%). Manganese (63%), platinum (46%) and rare earth elements (42%) overlap both types of territory. Given the critical nature of these individual commodities for decarbonizing the global energy system, identifying the overlap between ETMs and territorial rights to understand land pressures and to test alignment across sustainability objectives is needed.

Low-carbon energy technologies use different combinations of ETMs. The source locations of specific technologies are presented in Fig. 1b. For instance, lithium-ion batteries are the dominant energy storage technology for electric vehicles⁸. These batteries require five key ETMs: graphite, nickel, manganese, cobalt and lithium². Renewable technologies require different combination of ETMs that have different locations, giving contrasting sustainability profiles. The vast majority of graphite resources are located on or near peasant land; lithium resources are primarily on or near Indigenous peoples’ land; manganese has the highest proportion of resources on lands that overlap both types of land; and nickel and cobalt suggest similarly complex landscape interactions. Solar photovoltaic power, by contrast, is dominated by aluminium, copper and silver². Aluminium, a refined product derived from bauxite, has the highest proportion of resources overlapping one or both geographies of interest, while copper and silver resources offer a relatively diverse mix of source locations, with a predominance of Indigenous peoples’ territories.

Our results show regional variation in the intersectionality between ETMs and Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land (Fig. 1a). The Middle East shows the highest proportion of projects located on or near Indigenous peoples’ land (82%), although this region has a relatively small number of disclosed ETM projects. Otherwise, the Latin America and Caribbean region has the highest proportion of projects located on or near Indigenous peoples lands (73%). Africa has the highest proportion of projects located on or near land that meets the criteria for peasant land (77%). Reflecting the rich and complex history of settlement, conflict and displacement in Africa, this region has the highest proportion of projects located on or near both Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land (33%). The United States and Canada region and parts of the Asia-Pacific region (for example, Australia) have significant Indigenous populations but due to their development status were excluded from the analysis for peasant populations (Methods). In summary, the results describe the regional application of UNDRIP and UNDROP in the context of mineral extraction for ETMs.

Local context vulnerability and ETMs

Multiple international policy objectives, even those stemming from single institutions such as the UN and multi-lateral development banks, promote goals that raise compatibility questions with respect to climate change and the spread of industrialization. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) outline 17 thematic targets with the collective objective of addressing climate change, water and food crises, systemic poverty, conflict, well-being and inequality¹⁶. For example, Goal 2 “End hunger, achieve food security”, requires markedly improved access and security of tenure over land for small-scale food producers, including Indigenous peoples and peasants. The focus of Goal 6 is the availability and sustainable management of water with the outcome being universal equitable access to affordable drinking water. Goal 16 promotes peaceful and inclusive societies by reducing causes of violence and protecting fundamental freedoms.

Relatedly, the UNDRIP establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of Indigenous peoples and elaborates on existing human rights standards and fundamental freedoms. Adopted by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in 2007, the declaration requires participating states to provide redress when Indigenous peoples’ cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property is taken without their free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), or when there has been a violation of their laws, traditions or customs (Article 11.2). UNDRIP also requires FPIC before Indigenous peoples are displaced from their lands or territories (Article 10); when adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them (Article 19); and when hazardous materials are to be disposed of or stored on the lands or territories of Indigenous peoples (Article 29).

In 2018, following decades of grass-roots advocacy, the UN formally adopted UNDROP. According to Van der Ploeg’s²³ estimates over a decade ago, peasants constitute 40% of the world’s population. A recent report released by the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights found that peasants represent 80% of the world’s hungry and 70% of people living in extreme poverty. Mining activities heavily impact land and water, have a high association with conflict²⁴ and increasingly interface with rights holding groups represented by UNDRIP and UNDROP. Approximately a quarter (23%) of ETM projects on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land are located within 50 km of recent violent conflict, compared with 20% of ETM projects globally. The results show that 71% of projects on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land are in food insecure jurisdictions compared with 60% of ETM projects globally. Further, 62% of projects on or near Indigenous peoples’ and peasant land are in high water risk locations, compared with 53% of projects globally. These results indicate high context vulnerability surrounding the global stock of ETM commodities.

There is variation in context vulnerability across commodity groups (Fig. 2, Supplementary Table 2). The findings show that while many ETM projects in our geographies of interest (that is, the lands and territories of Indigenous peoples and peasants) are found in areas with generally high levels of water risk, some commodities are particularly exposed. Bauxite, the top ETM in terms of proportion of resources on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land, has a low exposure to water risk. The other four top ETMs, graphite, lithium, molybdenum, and platinum, are some of the most exposed commodities to water risk. For ETM projects on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land that are proximate to recorded conflict events²⁵, the highest proportion of resources is platinum (74%), followed by tin (48%), silver (42%) and graphite (37%). Broadening the definition of conflict to national level conditions through the Global Peace Index²⁶ increases scores for platinum to 99%, followed by molybdenum (88%) and tin (86%). Adding food security drastically increases the number of ETM commodities with high contextual risk factors. Based on these findings, more than a third of ETM projects on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land face a co-occurrence of water risk, conflict (local and national) and suboptimal food security conditions. Platinum has by far the highest co-occurrence of water risk, food insecurity and conflict conditions, with 91% of reserves and resources on or near Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land with these three contextual risks, followed by molybdenum (76%) and graphite (74%).

**Fig. 2: Distribution of energy transition minerals and metals by water risk, conflict and food insecurity.**

National measures for permitting, consultation and consent

Six mainstream national capacity measures for permitting, consultation and consent were applied to the 3,538 ETM projects located on or nearby Indigenous peoples’ or peasant land (Methods). These measures reflect the roles played by states in upholding UN-level sustainability objectives, and include (i) resource governance, (ii) regulatory quality, (iii) education, (iv) freedom of the press, (v) civil liberties and (iv) corruption. Taken together, these six national measures serve as proxy indicators for state processes of permitting, consultation and consent.

For this sample of ETM projects, 43% (1,516) are in jurisdictions that score above the medium risk threshold for resource governance, 37% (1,308) for regulatory quality, 53% (1,882) for education, 59% (2,091) for press freedom, 49% (1,744) for the civil liberties and 60% (2,110) for corruption. Overall, 60% of projects in the geographies of interest are in jurisdictions where the majority of measures contain scores above the medium threshold. Viewed by commodity, 99% of reserves and resources for platinum in the sample are in jurisdictions where the majority of measures exceed the medium threshold. This is followed by tin (97%), graphite (93%), rare earths (93%) and cobalt (83%) (Supplementary Table 3).

Combinations for permitting, consultation and consent were also examined against the contextual factors analysed above (that is, water, food and conflict). In total, 49% (1,724) of projects in this sample are in jurisdictions where the majority of measures for both permitting, consultation and consent, and water, food and conflict exceed the medium risk threshold. The top five countries that exceed the medium threshold in the majority of both sets of measures were China (311 projects), Mexico (212), Peru (186), South Africa (135) and Brazil (116) (Supplementary Tables 4, 5). Finally, the proportion of ETM reserves and resources for this sample with a majority of combined measures above the medium threshold is highest for platinum (91%), graphite (84%), bauxite (78%), molybdenum (78%) and tin (77%) (Supplementary Table 3).

Source link