The global race to transition to a low-carbon economy is driving an unprecedented demand for critical minerals like lithium, cobalt, and copper. These materials are the backbone of technologies like electric vehicles and renewable energy systems. On paper, mining these resources seems straightforward: identify deposits of minerals, extract, process, and deploy them to power the green revolution. But reality tells a more complicated story.
Across the world, mining projects are increasingly met with resistance. Communities are raising their voices against extraction projects they see as threatening their environment, livelihoods, and rights. While the existence of such resistance is no surprise, its true scale, distribution, and complexity have been largely underestimated—until now.
Our research set out to uncover this hidden landscape of conflict. Using data from the Global Database of Events, Language and Tone (GDELT) Project, a vast global database of news events, we mapped mining-related resistance and cooperation on a global scale, covering the years 2015 to 2022. What we found was both striking and urgent.
Resistance everywhere: A global phenomenon
We documented 36,017 mining-related conflict events across 4,293 locations worldwide—a figure six to seven times higher than previously recorded by databases like the Environmental Justice Atlas. This tells us that the true scope of resistance has been vastly underestimated, and with it, the challenges facing the energy transition.
The first thing we discovered is that resistance to mining is not confined to any one region or income group. It’s everywhere. Whether in Chile’s Atacama Desert, the forests of Papua New Guinea, or even the mineral-rich landscapes of Canada and Australia, conflict follows wherever mining happens.
This challenges a common assumption that mining resistance is mostly a problem in low- and middle-income countries. Our data revealed that conflicts are just as prevalent in wealthier nations. In fact, the presence of mineral deposits, not a country’s level of development, is the key factor in predicting where resistance occurs.
The cost of polarisation
Perhaps even more alarming is the level of polarisation we found. Over 60% of conflicts involved moderate to high levels of polarisation, meaning they weren’t just debates but deeply entrenched disputes involving protests, blockades, and even violence.
This polarisation has a direct impact on trust. Once trust is broken between communities, governments, and companies, it becomes incredibly hard to restore. Polarised conflicts often result in project delays or outright cancellations. For instance, in Argentina, roughly half of all mining projects face such severe opposition that many never proceed. In Chile, community resistance has delayed or suspended $25 billion worth of mining investments.
The implications for the energy transition are clear: these conflicts are not just isolated disruptions—they are systemic barriers that threaten global efforts to secure the minerals needed for clean energy.
Cooperation: A glimmer of hope
But it’s not all bad news. Alongside the conflicts, we also uncovered 63,867 cooperation events, where communities, companies, and governments worked together to address concerns. These events represent opportunities to transform mining practices into something more sustainable and equitable.
However, the depth of these cooperative efforts varies. While many involve low-commitment actions like public statements or symbolic gestures, about 21% reflect high-commitment actions, such as policy changes or binding agreements. These higher levels of cooperation often result in meaningful changes, like the adoption of desalination plants in Chile to reduce the mining industry’s strain on freshwater resources.
Crucially, our research found that polarisation significantly reduces the likelihood of meaningful cooperation. This underscores the importance of proactive trust-building and inclusive governance to prevent conflicts from escalating in the first place.
New insights, new directions
So, what makes our research different? Beyond mapping conflicts, we systematically recorded cooperation events, offering a more complete picture of the dynamics in mining regions. Our use of GDELT’s global dataset allowed us to go beyond the regional biases of previous efforts, such as the Environmental Justice Atlas, to create a truly global view of mining resistance and cooperation.
We’ve also provided fresh evidence on the underlying drivers of these events. While environmental and social justice concerns are often highlighted, we found that economic issues remain central to mining resistance. Labour concerns, local infrastructure needs, and taxation are at the heart of many disputes, reminding us that addressing economic justice is as critical as tackling environmental and social injustices.
A call for change
The energy transition is often framed as a technological challenge: how do we produce enough clean energy to power the world? But our findings show that it is also a political and social challenge. Without addressing the systemic issues driving mining conflicts—exclusion from decision-making, inequitable distribution of benefits, and environmental degradation—the energy transition risks stalling.
We argue that a shift in governance is urgently needed. Companies and governments must move beyond token gestures like late-stage consultations or superficial CSR programmes. Instead, they need to embrace inclusive, democratic governance frameworks that give affected communities a real voice in decision-making.
Conclusion
Resistance to mining is more widespread and impactful than ever, and ignoring it comes at a steep cost. The energy transition cannot succeed without addressing the injustices at the heart of these conflicts. Our research provides the evidence needed to reframe how we think about mining governance and to spark a broader conversation about what a just energy transition truly requires.
For more insights and a deeper dive into our findings, read our full paper: Civic Power in Mining Conflicts: Barrier or Catalyst for a Just Energy Transition?
