A UN report highlights the impact of critical mineral extraction on the health of the most vulnerable

A highly significant study with extensive photographic documentation that highlights the social and environmental impacts—primarily on the Global South—resulting from the extraction of strategic raw materials for the energy transition, the circular economy, and decarbonization driven by countries in the Global North.

The growing demand for critical minerals to meet the commitments of the Paris Agreement is shifting a substantial portion of the environmental and social costs to supplier countries, most of which are developing economies. The study indicates that these countries are, for the most part, less developed nations where safe working conditions and safety standards for the extraction of precious metals are not guaranteed. Furthermore, in many cases, the scarcity of drinking water exacerbates the population’s problems when these minerals are extracted, as it contaminates surface waters, reducing the population’s access to water.

The document provides objective data that underscores the need for harmonized international regulation establishing environmental, health, and social criteria that are enforceable on a global scale. While in many countries in the Northern Hemisphere there is high social awareness of the risks associated with mining—including the blocking of extractive projects due to public opposition—in various African and Latin American countries (such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Bolivia, Togo, South Africa, and Uganda), extractive activities continue with limited oversight and documented consequences for public health and ecosystems. Thus, just as we apply these principles in Spain, the document warns of the need to ensure that our actions do not contribute to this situation existing anywhere else on the planet.

The report is highly significant in that it contributes to the body of literature that critically examines the dynamics of the ongoing energy and digital transitions. In particular, it aligns with perspectives that warn that the increased demand for critical minerals needed for the transition reproduces colonial patterns that exacerbate social, economic, and environmental inequality and injustice between extraction zones—generally located in the Global South—and industrialized countries, generally located in the Global North.

However, one aspect that could be strengthened is its analytical framework of accountability, as it says little about the specific corporate actors and economic groups that directly benefit from this model. In this sense, accountability appears diluted when attributed to broad geopolitical categories, rather than examining the role of transnational corporations and the dynamics of capital accumulation that sustain it. The use of the Global North/Global South dichotomy risks homogenizing highly diverse territories, obscuring internal inequalities, power asymmetries, and the differentiated roles of states, local elites, and communities. This is evident in the case of lithium, where mention of Argentina is marginal, despite the fact that it is a central actor in global production. There, extraction is in the hands of multinational corporations, regulated primarily by provincial governments, and recent regulatory changes—such as the Incentive Regime for Large Investments (RIGI) and amendments to the Glacier Law—have further expanded the benefits for these companies. The report does mention Bolivia, where large-scale extraction has not yet materialized, and Chile, which faces severe socio-environmental impacts resulting from lithium exploitation. However, it fails to acknowledge the efforts both countries—where production is heavily regulated by the state—are making to implement direct lithium extraction technologies aimed at reducing impacts, particularly on water consumption.

Finally, while the report’s concluding section proposes a series of actions directed at the various stakeholders involved, it would be important to emphasize the need to move toward more structural transformations: reversing growth-based economic models that drive demand for critical minerals in the Global North, promoting the extraction of these minerals in the industrialized territories that demand them and where environmental and human rights standards are more stringent, and implementing decisive policies to ensure that companies invest in battery recycling.”

This report confirms and expands upon information that was already partially known regarding the major Achilles’ heel of the energy transition: excessive dependence on minerals and the environmental impacts associated with their extraction and refining. The energy transition is necessary and urgent, but today, the extractivist model prioritizes obtaining raw materials at the lowest possible cost, which has resulted in “sacrifice zones,” generally in the Global South.

It is urgent that the countries that consume the largest quantities of the final products using these raw materials play a role in implementing solutions to make resource extraction more socially and environmentally sustainable. This requires incorporating Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) perspectives into products, so that the impacts at the beginning of the production chain are reflected in the final price (in the form of taxes, for example, which can then be used to compensate affected communities). In Europe, the Ecodesign Regulation for Sustainable Products (ESPR) moves in this direction, though it is not sufficient.

Another discussion that must take place at the societal level is where to open mines. In Europe, there are deposits of certain critical minerals, such as spodumene (a lithium-containing mineral) in Spain. Extracting these resources would help reduce global environmental and social impacts (European environmental legislation is generally stricter than that of countries in the Global South) and gain strategic independence in supply chains, but it would entail significant social and environmental costs for the continent.