This initiative represents the mining industry’s latest attempt to self-regulate, rather than address the horrific human rights abuses that have long been associated with the industry. We cannot expect the companies causing destruction to write their own rules and credit themselves as following them. It’s a clear conflict of interest and a dangerous platform for greenwashing.
‘A dangerous platform for greenwashing’
The Consolidated Mining Standard Initiative (CMSI), led by industry bodies such as the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM), is developing a new voluntary standard for “responsible mining”. However, analysis shows that it will fall well short of existing international standards.
The standard is being developed without the meaningful participation of those who will be affected, such as workers,communities, and Indigenous peoples. Analysis by a broad range of civil society organizations also shows that they are too vague to allow for effective auditing and that they give mining companies too much control over the auditing process, making it likely that audits will not accurately capture a facility’s human rights and environmental impacts. As it stands, the Initiative itself would also create an illusion of multi-stakeholder governance, while in practice stacking the Board and its decision-making power in favor of corporate interests.
The new standard risks misleading automakers, as well as their customers and investors, that want to purchase responsible minerals but in reality are purchasing from mines that continue to perpetrate human rights abuses and environmental harms.
Urgent need for responsible mining
For real-world examples of such greenwashing risks, one has to look no further than the implementation of ICMM’s existing Performance Expectations. ICMM states that these represent a “comprehensive set of performance expectations on how [ICMM] members should be expected to manage a broad range of sustainability issues.” However, according to the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, ICMM member companies, whether through direct ownership or joint ventures, account for more than half of the firms responsible for the majority of alleged human-rights violations in critical minerals mining.
All members of ICMM are expected to validate their conformance with ICMM’s Performance Expectations on an annual basis, in theory providing assurance to downstream buyers (such as automakers) that the minerals they purchase from these companies are being extracted responsibly. However, behind this facade lie multiple examples of human rights abuses and environmental destruction caused by ICMM members, including:
- Grasberg Mine, a huge copper and gold mine in Indonesia owned by ICMM member Freeport McMoRan, hit the headlines in September 2025 after seven workers died when 800,000 metric tons of mud flooded one of the mines. As a result the mine was shut, contributing to a global squeeze on copper supplies that drove up prices. The mine won’t fully reopen until the end of 2027. This wasn’t the first such incident at the mine: in 2013, 21 workers died and in 2006 three workers died at the site. Run by Arizona-based Freeport McMoRan, the mine is also linked with contamination of the Ajkwa river system, its surrounding land and mangrove forests.
- Indonesia’s second largest copper and gold mine, IPT AMNT’s Batu Hijau mine, has been at the center of allegations of environmental destruction, destroyed traditional livelihoods, and violations of U.N. backed Indigenous rights of Free Information and Prior Consent. In 2025, the Cek Bocek Indigenous community filed a complaint with the Copper Mark accreditation scheme and took their case to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights. IPT AMNT is a subsidiary of USA-based ICMM member, Newmont Corporation.
- The Cerrejón coal mine in La Guarjira, Colombia, operated by ICMM member Glencore, is one of the largest open-air coal pits in the world. The mine is connected to the Hyundai supply chain through Vale’s iron pellet processing plant in Brazil. Reports indicate this mine is polluting the air, critical waterways, and adversely impacting the health of Indigenous people, the Wayúu, in the region. Additionally, reports allege Glencore took land away from Wayúu through fraudulent negotiations, threats, confinement and forced evictions. UN Special Rapperateur Dr David Boyd described the impacts of the mine on the local Indigenous community as, “a total calamity in terms of their quality of life and human rights.”
The Consolidated Mining Standard Initiative must meet basic standards of rigor
Voluntary standards like CMSI are not a replacement for strong laws and policies, but can be an important driver of better mining practices. The CMSI must meet minimum benchmarks to assure automakers, consumers, and governments of the ‘responsibility’ of mining projects.
- Voluntary standards must insure accountable decision making processes that give equal power to affected communities, and allow representatives to publicly disagree with the standard.
- They must implement culturally relevant, independently managed grievance mechanisms for affected communites.
- Audits must be informed by broad engagement from affected communities and conducted by firms independent from the mining company. Results of the audits and corrective action plans must be timebound, measurable, and public.
- Standards must require transparency of member companies. Mining companies must disclose project-level payments to governments; full contracts; and related documents including permitting documents, country-by-country tax reporting, and beneficial ownership.
There are other, more robust voluntary mining standards that undermine the need for weak standards like CMSI. A Lead the Charge assessment of eight accreditation schemes found that IRMA was “the strongest performer by a considerable margin”. Despite this the biggest mining companies are choosing to craft a system that will allow them to attempt to greenwash their actions, continue harming communities and exposing automakers to major risks.
As important stakeholders in mining supply chains, automakers can stand up to the attempted race to the bottom. The Leaderboard clearly shows some automakers are beginning to do things differently, they now need to make their voices louder and encourage others to get on board.
