August 17, 2026

Mining triggers 34 times more forest loss across Africa, Nature study finds

Every hectare cleared for mining in sub-Saharan Africa triggers 34 more hectares of forest loss up to 20km away, a Nature study of 16,627 mines shows.

Open-pit mine bordered by cleared tropical forest in sub-Saharan Africa - mining deforestation in Africa

Photo by Vlad Chețan on Pexels

Mining deforestation in Africa reaches far beyond the pits themselves. A study published in “Nature” on June 30, 2026 found that every hectare of forest cleared for a mine in sub-Saharan Africa triggers an additional 34 hectares of forest loss in the surrounding region, with the damage extending up to 20 kilometres from the mine and persisting for more than a decade. The researchers used satellite data to track 16,627 mining areas between 2001 and 2020.

The work was led by conservation scientists Oscar Morton of the University of Sheffield and Chris Bousfield of the University of Cambridge. They report that mines directly cleared 187,000 hectares of forest over the two decades, an area roughly the size of Mauritius, but that the wider, indirect footprint is far larger and has been mostly left out of environmental rules.

How mining deforestation in Africa spreads

The direct mine footprint covers the pit, waste rock and tailings ponds. The wider loss comes from what a mine pulls in around it: access roads, new settlements, an influx of workers and farmland cleared to feed them. The authors compared land around active mines with similar areas that were not yet mined but later would be, which let them separate the deforestation caused by a mine from other drivers.

The headline figures set out the scale of that ripple effect.

Measure Finding
Forest cleared for mine footprints (2001-2020) 187,000 hectares
Extra forest lost per hectare mined 34 hectares
Highest multiplier (DR Congo cobalt belt) up to 58 hectares
Rise in local deforestation rate within 1km +8 percentage points
Distance elevated forest loss reaches up to 20 kilometres
Mining areas tracked by satellite 16,627

Source: Morton and Bousfield et al., “Nature” (June 30, 2026), as summarised by the authors in The Conversation.

Within one kilometre of a new mine, the local deforestation rate rose by an average of eight percentage points compared with land that had no mine. The effect did not fade quickly. Forest loss stayed elevated up to 20 kilometres out and continued for over ten years after operations began, as pits expanded to follow ore and long-term communities grew up around them.

How a mine triggers forest loss far beyond its own footprint The mining ripple effect 1. Mine footprint pit, waste rock, tailings ponds 187,000 ha cleared 2. Mine draws in roads, settlements, workers, new farmland 3. Wider forest loss up to 20km away, for over a decade +34 ha per ha mined Each hectare cleared for the mine itself triggers 34 more hectares of forest loss nearby. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the cobalt heartland, the multiplier reaches 58.
The indirect deforestation pathway around mines, from Morton and Bousfield et al., “Nature” (June 30, 2026).

Why critical minerals put forests at risk

The pressure on these forests is tied to the shift to clean energy. Lithium, copper, cobalt and similar metals go into electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines and solar panels, and demand for transition minerals such as copper and cobalt is projected by the International Energy Agency to grow up to 40-fold by 2040. Sub-Saharan Africa holds about 30% of the world’s proven critical-mineral reserves by volume, and much of it sits beneath biodiverse forest.

The region’s share of specific metals is higher still, which concentrates the risk in a handful of forested countries.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s share of world reserves for four critical minerals Sub-Saharan Africa’s share of world mineral reserves (%) 0 25 50 75 100 Platinum 92% Cobalt 56% Manganese 54% Chromium 36% Reserve shares concentrate transition-mineral demand on a few forested African countries.
Sub-Saharan Africa’s share of proven world reserves, from IMF estimates cited by The Conversation (June 30, 2026).

Not all mines do equal damage. Cobalt and copper operations, both central to the energy transition, triggered the highest rates of extra forest loss, while iron ore mines had the widest reach, pushing deforestation out to the full 20-kilometre range. The tension is direct: the metals meant to cut emissions are eating into forests that store carbon and host wildlife. The same trade-off shapes the case for electric vehicles are better for the environment, where the climate gain depends on how the materials and the power behind them are sourced.

What the researchers say should change

The authors argue the fix starts with environmental impact assessments, which often stop at the mine boundary. In some countries the assessment reaches only one kilometre out, and in Côte d’Ivoire as little as a few hundred metres, while Botswana covers much larger areas. They call for a consistent minimum standard that forecasts roads, worker settlements and farm expansion before a mine is approved, especially near protected areas or Indigenous land.

They also press for traceable supply chains, modelled on the zero-deforestation rules used in farming and meat, so that carmakers and technology firms audit the forest impact of the mines they buy from. A further point is recycling: a share of demand could be met by recovering metals already in circulation rather than digging new pits, the logic behind circular economy strategies. Battery chemistries that use less cobalt, such as iron-air batteries for long-duration storage, could also ease pressure on the worst-affected supply chains.

A large share of the mines studied were unregistered, small-scale or artisanal sites that bypass environmental rules entirely, which the authors say global supply chains can no longer ignore. The push for cleaner power, set out in the future of green energy, now has to account for where its raw materials come from.

Background

Industrial mining has long been linked to forest loss beyond its lease boundaries, but most assessments measured only the cleared pit. Earlier pan-tropical work found mining can drive deforestation far from the lease, including studies in the Brazilian Amazon that traced forest loss tens of kilometres past mining permits. The new “Nature” study applies a quasi-experimental method across sub-Saharan Africa, comparing mined and not-yet-mined land to estimate the deforestation a mine causes rather than what merely happens nearby.

Its scope, 16,627 mining areas over 20 years, makes it one of the broadest measurements of the region’s indirect mining footprint to date. The finding lands as demand for transition minerals climbs and as African governments weigh new mining against forest protection. The authors frame the result not as an argument against the energy transition, but as a case for counting its full land cost, so that supply chains, environmental laws and recycling keep the shift to clean energy from clearing the forests it is meant to protect.


Sources: Nature; The Conversation

Featured image: photo by Vlad Chețan on Pexels (free Pexels license).


Become a Sponsor

Our website is the heart of the mission of WINSS – it’s where we share updates, publish research, highlight community impact, and connect with supporters around the world. To keep this essential platform running, updated, and accessible, we rely on the generosity of you, who believe in our work.

We offer the option to sponsor monthly, or just once choosing the amount of your choice. If you run a company, please contact us via info@winssolutions.org.

Select a Donation Option (USD)

Enter Donation Amount (USD)

What do you feel about this?