People living in the path of planned new mines desperately want to avoid the land grabs and environmental damage that have been routine in the industry’s past. Some communities have begun organizing to demand a fairer deal, and they are asking for support from the industry’s major buyers—including global automakers—to ensure mining companies take a truly rights-based approach that centers community agency in decision-making. This represents an important opportunity for car companies to use their leverage to advance human rights and address environmental and social risks in their aluminum supply chain.
Expectations of communities at risk
Guinea’s oldest mining company—Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée (CBG), a joint venture of Rio Tinto, Alcoa, Dadco and the Guinean government—is currently looking to expand its mining operation to areas north of the Cogon River in Guinea’s Boké region. The area south of the river has been heavily strip mined for decades, devastating the landscape and displacing thousands of people.
Now, land-connected communities to the north, so far insulated from the most extreme impacts of mining, are at serious risk. With the support of civil society and their neighbors to the south, who have for many years been advocating for remedy and compensation for harms they have already suffered, communities in CBG’s anticipated expansion zone are beginning to organize. The residents of several communities in the north have begun speaking out about how they want the company to engage with them before any mining proceeds on their land, and what they would expect in return if it does.
“If CBG destroys our land, streams and rivers like they have done on the other side of the river—we are as good as dead.” — Boubacar Bah, a resident of Teliwora, one of the towns that lies in the path of new mining.
A recent report, “I Will Do Anything to Stay Here”: What a Just Energy Transition Means to Communities at Risk from Bauxite Mining in Guinea, co-published by Inclusive Development International, Action Mines-Guinea, CECIDE and ADREMGUI, presents perspectives from these communities and a list of specific requests for CBG and its shareholders, lenders and buyers. These requests include:
- Mining should proceed only once there has been a true dialogue and affected communities have provided consent to the terms on which the project can proceed.
- There should be a fully transparent census process and participatory impact assessment and CBG and the communities should reach agreement on plans to avoid or mitigate negative impacts and the benefits that communities will receive.
- Fair compensation should be provided, including for losses due to the exploration activities currently underway, before any land-taking occurs.
- Communities should have access to technical and legal advisers to support them in these processes.
“This land is ours. We inherited it from our fathers. We want to pass it on to our sons. We should decide what happens to this land.” — Kadiatou Bah, a grandmother of 15 who lives in Horé Lari village, north of the Cogon River in northwestern Guinea
Responsibilities of CBG’s business partners
Companies that use CBG bauxite in their products—including the car companies Audi, BMW, Ford, GM, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and Toyota—have a role to play supporting at-risk communities in the proposed agreement-making process. They can do this by meeting with community members to understand their perspectives, by engaging directly with CBG and instituting material consequences if the company fails to respect its responsibilities or agreements with local communities, by providing pooled resources to support communities’ access to technical and legal advisers, and by enabling or contributing to remedy if harms occur.
Several automakers, particularly Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Audi, have set positive examples through their engagements with CBG and affected communities south of the Cogon River. For example, Mercedes-Benz has conducted site visits to CBG mines, met directly with affected communities to discuss mining impacts, and has engaged with civil society and with the company regarding these communities’ needs. This is in comparison with companies such as GM and Ford, which use CBG-sourced aluminum in their supply chains but have done little to follow up on the human rights issues brought to their attention.
While much more is needed, the positive engagements from select automakers are an important step toward ensuring that communities already affected by CBG’s operations receive the remedy they deserve. They can also serve as a foundation for continued engagement with CBG and other stakeholders to ensure that the rights of communities north of the Cogon River are respected. If CBG and its business partners meet the expectations of these communities it will help them avoid conflict, complaints and costs in the future and result in better outcomes for all parties.
A truly just energy transition is not possible unless the people whose land and resources are affected by transition mineral mining have agency in decision making about whether and how that mining happens.
For a guide to what this would take in practice, this policy proposal—endorsed by more than sixty human rights, environmental justice and Indigenous Peoples’ organizations—lays out a rights-based approach to community participation in decision-making about extractive and other investment projects that impact their land and lives. We urge mining companies, as well as their investors and customers, including car companies and other end-users of the minerals, to adopt the six measures outlined in the proposal to advance a just transition for project-affected communities.
