Europe’s Mining Dilemma – Aligning Mineral Needs with Environmental and Social Imperatives

4 SESSION BRIEF

Europe faces a critical challenge in balancing its urgent need for domestic mineral supplies—essential for the green transition and defence industries—with strong local opposition driven by environmental concerns and distrust. 

The session moderated by Filipa Marques Da Silva Vicente, Partner, ERM, held on 21 October 2025 in Lisbon at the MINEX Europe Forum, addressed the complex challenge faced by the continent: Aligning Mineral Needs with Environmental and Social Imperatives.

Europe requires a surge in critical raw materials (CRM) for its green transition and defence industries, yet domestic mining projects are consistently met with strong local opposition due to environmental concerns and a deep lack of public trust. The session explored this dilemma, focusing on policy, voluntary standards, and strategies to build community acceptance.

🇪🇺 The Need for a European Mining Renaissance

Dr. James Watson (Director General, Eurometaux) highlighted the political drivers, noting that the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) was a reaction to Europe’s outsourcing of its economic world and its dependency on China.

CRMA Targets: The EU aims to have 10% of its strategic raw materials mined domestically by 2030.

Progress Gap: To meet this target, Eurometaux estimates 10 new mines for CRMs are needed by 2030. Currently, zero have been built in the last two years, alongside zero new processing or recycling facilities.

Investment Challenge: While 47 Strategic Projects exist, representing an overall capital investment of $22.5$ billion, only $2$ billion in public money is currently available, hindering the ability to attract sufficient private investment.

Regulatory Burden: Projects face excessive red tape. Dr. Watson cited the example of the Finnish Sokli mine, a responsible nickel and copper project that is still not built despite good local engagement, often due to local authorities overriding national strategic priority. He contrasted this with the speed of LNG terminal construction in Germany, suggesting a need to drastically speed up permitting (ideally to 2-3 years) for strategic mineral projects.

Challenges to Social License to Operate (SLO)

Marcos Gallego (Partner, ERM) focused on the challenges to securing a Social License to Operate (SLO), particularly in Southern Europe.

Global Delay Trend: A study of 260 projects globally showed that 64% were delayed, with permitting being the most significant factor, often due to environmental and social claims. Delays typically occur early in the project life cycle.

European Context: Europe, particularly Southern Europe, has the highest rate of delays. Key contributing factors include:

- Lack of recent mining culture leading to regulatory and public unfamiliarity.

- Competition for land use, especially from industries like tourism which have a better public image.

- A significant gap of knowledge among regulators regarding the realities and impacts of modern mining.

Mindset Change: He stressed that the industry must reconsider its approach:

- Interlocutors: The sector should push to be covered by EU legislation that would allow for a single regulatory interlocutor for permitting, rather than multiple authorities (e.g., local mayors) who can block projects.

- Stronger Regulation: The industry should advocate for more stringent regulation on mine closure and land reclamation (similar to Australia or Canada) to address the public’s fear of abandoned legacy sites.

- Early Planning: Projects must stop being overconfident and instead embed social and environmental requirements from the very earliest stages.

- Value Proposition: The sector needs to better communicate its business value to the wider society, linking locally produced minerals (like lithium or copper) directly to Europe’s strategic transition goals, thereby broadening the dialogue beyond just regulators, NGOs, and miners.

Co-Creation and Public Support

Rebecca Burton (Deputy Director, IRMA) and Vitor Correia (Secretary General, International Raw Materials Observatory) presented mechanisms to build trust and transform opposition into genuine public support.

Co-Creation through IRMA

Rebecca Burton explained the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA), a system for assessing best practices in mining built through co-creation by six houses of stakeholders (NGOs, communities, workers, purchasers, investors, and the mining industry itself).

Trust Building: Because all stakeholders have equal power (including a ‘no’ vote mechanism), the resulting audit report is trusted by everyone involved.

Shared Definition: IRMA provides a shared, credible definition of responsible mining that goes beyond corporate self-assessment.

Stakeholder Value:

- Customers (Auto, Tech, Jewellery): It fundamentally de-risks their supply chains.

- Finance/Investors: It addresses systemic risks within the mining and associated tech/construction sectors.

- Communities/Workers: It gives them a tangible way to have their voices heard and find information and remediation paths.

Transforming Opposition into Support

Vitor Correia focused on tackling the issue that 85% of CRM deposits in Europe are located within or near environmentally protected areas.

Root of Opposition: Most environmental NGOs are not against mining per se but are against the capitalist/extractivist development model.

Trust Deficit: A key finding of the SIRAN project is that people across Europe (North and South) do not trust national government or Brussels, viewing strategic projects with suspicion.

Path to Acceptance: Communities will support mining if three conditions are met:

1. The metal is really needed (e.g., for European development, not gold mining).
2. The operation promises zero negative environmental impacts (e.g., preferring underground over open-pit mining in sensitive areas).
3. The community has a stake and receives a clear benefit.

Solution: Community Development Agreements (CDAs): He proposed reviving tools like the World Bank’s CDAs, which are legally binding contracts between the local authority, the community, and the mining company. These contracts detail promises and include a dispute resolution mechanism, side-stepping the need for complex legislative changes and building trust through a local, agreed-upon framework.

The Curse or Opportunity of Mineral Wealth

Dragan Milosevic (President, Geological and Mining Association of Serbia) provided a case study on Serbia, which holds significant deposits of copper, gold, borates, and lithium (the Jadar project).

Paralysis: Serbia’s resource wealth has become a “frustrating paradox”—a treasure that remains locked due to mismanagement, politicisation, and a lack of strong institutions.

The Jadar Case: The Jadar lithium project, discovered in 2004, was stopped in 2022 by political decision just before an election, despite the government having previously adopted its spatial plan. Even after the court reinstated the plan, subsequent environmental impact assessment procedures attracted over 8,000 appeals from NGOs and local people.

Lost Opportunity: This political instability and anti-mining activism, which often uses false information to sway public opinion, has caused Serbia to lose years of potential revenue and miss global market opportunities while competitor nations advance their projects.

Conclusion: The presence of mineral wealth is a curse if it is locked, but an opportunity if the political will and public support can be found to unlock its value responsibly.

Europe’s mining future depends on aligning strategic needs with participatory governance. Without urgent action, reliance on external suppliers will deepen, undermining climate and security goals. The session concluded with a suggestion from a participant to revive the Global Mining Initiative, a project that brought together the mining industry and NOS’s to address social aspects of mining. The proposal was met with enthusiasm, and the speakers were encouraged to consider leading this initiative.