Mining: A Sector Littered With Sustainability Landmines

SOStainabilityWeekly

Edited by Oke Epia, E-mail: sostainability01@gmail.com  | WhatsApp: +234 8034000706

Washing and hushing

Nigeria’s renewed push to diversify its economy has placed mining and solid minerals back at the centre of national policy conversations. From gold and lithium to aggregates and industrial minerals, the sector is increasingly framed as a pathway to revenue growth, job creation, and reduced dependence on oil. Yet mining is also one of the most environmentally disruptive economic activities, with long-term consequences for land use, water systems, biodiversity, host communities, and carbon emissions.

In a world where climate risk and sustainability governance now shape investment flows and regulatory credibility, how mining companies communicate their responsibilities matters as much as what they do operationally. In this week’s SOStainability Weekly edition, we apply the Sustainability Visibility Scan to mining and solid mineral companies operating in Nigeria to examine whether the sector is publicly prepared for a climate-constrained future.

Sustainability gaps in a high-impact sector

Globally, mining companies are under growing pressure to demonstrate how they manage environmental damage, community relations, emissions, and post-extraction rehabilitation. This pressure is not driven by activism alone but by financial institutions, insurers, downstream buyers, and governments seeking to de-risk supply chains. In Nigeria, however, the mining sector remains largely absent from sustainability conversations, despite its clear relevance to climate adaptation, environmental protection, and social stability. The gap is not about technical capacity alone. It is about governance maturity and the willingness to publicly articulate responsibility. When a sector that reshapes landscapes and livelihoods says little about sustainability, it raises questions about readiness, oversight, and long-term national risk.

How the Sustainability Visibility Scan was applied

The Sustainability Visibility Scan is designed to assess what companies make publicly visible about their climate and sustainability responsibilities. It does not judge intent, internal activities, or regulatory filings that are not publicly accessible. Instead, it focuses on four core dimensions that form the baseline of accountability under Nigeria’s Climate Change Act: climate policy visibility, climate reporting visibility, target visibility, and governance visibility. Each company is assessed strictly based on information published on its official website. Social media claims, interviews, and third-party references are excluded because visibility is a prerequisite for verification, investor confidence, and regulatory alignment.

For this assessment, ten mining and solid mineral companies operating in Nigeria were reviewed. These include Eta-Zuma Group, Japaul Gold & Ventures Plc, Segilola Resources Operating Limited, Multiverse Mining & Exploration Plc, Goldwater Mining Limited, AG Vision Mining Ltd, Prowell Mining Nigeria Limited, Continental Lithium, Goldlin Dimensions Limited, and Neveah Limited. Together, these firms represent a cross-section of Nigeria’s mining landscape, spanning local operators and international-linked entities, precious metals, and transition minerals.

What the patterns reveal across companies

The most striking outcome of the scan is not variation but uniformity. Most companies assessed fall into a clear zero-visibility category. Eta-Zuma Group, Goldwater Mining Limited, AG Vision Mining Ltd, Prowell Mining Nigeria Limited, Goldlin Dimensions Limited, and Neveah Limited show no publicly visible climate policies, sustainability reports, measurable targets, or governance structures. Their websites are functional from a commercial or corporate perspective but silent on environmental or climate responsibility.

A second group shows limited awareness without structural depth. Japaul Gold & Ventures Plc, Segilola Resources Operating Limited, and Continental Lithium reference environmental stewardship or sustainability in broad language. These statements signal awareness but stop short of formal policy, reporting, targets, or governance. Without structure, such language remains aspirational rather than accountable.

Only one company, Multiverse Mining & Exploration Plc, demonstrates partial structural visibility through published policy documents, including health, safety, and environment and mine waste management policies. However, even here, climate reporting, measurable targets, and governance disclosure are absent. No company assessed reaches a level where sustainability appears institutionalised rather than incidental.

Visibility failure is a governance problem

The absence of sustainability visibility in Nigeria’s mining sector is often dismissed as a communication gap. That framing is misleading. Visibility is not about public relations; it is about governance signals. When companies publish climate policies, reports, targets, and leadership structures, they signal that risks are identified, responsibilities assigned, and performance monitored. When they do not, it suggests that climate and environmental risk remain peripheral to strategic decision-making.

This has concrete implications. Regulators struggle to align sector activity with national climate plans without company-level disclosure. Financial institutions increasingly interpret the absence of ESG visibility as a proxy for unmanaged risk. Communities affected by mining operations lack information needed to hold operators accountable. At a national level, Nigeria’s ambition to position solid minerals as a sustainable growth pillar is weakened when operators cannot demonstrate alignment with evolving global norms.

The cost of inaction for Nigeria’s mining future

Nigeria stands at a critical juncture. Global demand for transition minerals is rising, and countries that can credibly demonstrate responsible extraction will shape future supply chains. Sustainability visibility is fast becoming a market access requirement, not a voluntary add-on. Mining jurisdictions that fail to enforce transparency risk attracting only short-term, high-risk capital while being excluded from long-term investment partnerships.

The findings from this scan suggest that Nigeria’s mining sector is not yet prepared for this reality. The issue is not a lack of opportunity but a lack of institutional signalling. Until mining companies begin to publicly articulate how they manage climate risk, environmental impact, and governance responsibility, sustainability will remain peripheral to sector growth. For a country seeking to diversify its economy responsibly, that is a risk Nigeria can no longer afford to ignore.

Trends and threads

Extractive Industries: Accountability Blind Spots as Nigeria Nears Another Global Validation

For decades, Nigeria’s extractive sector has been both a lifeline and a puzzle: rich in resources but often thin on trust, accountability, and improvements in the lives and living conditions of citizens. These corruption-related pain points have refused to go away. The media recently reported that the presidency authorized the cancellation of $1.42 billion and ₦5.57 trillion in legacy debts owed to the federation by the state-owned Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL).

This debt forgiveness raises critical governance questions that directly relate to the themes of transparency, accountability, and revenue integrity that have consistently dogged the extractive sector, especially oil and gas. Annual audits by the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) and the reports of the Office of the Auditor General of the Federation (OAuGF) have almost always flagged the NNPCL for one violation or another. It is concerning that a commercialized company would still get such a unilateral and hefty bailout when it has not demonstrated transparency and accountability in the receipt, management, and remittance of petroleum revenues. Should such a decision with significant fiscal impact for all three tiers of government not be subject to robust stakeholder consultation and legislative oversight?

This development highlightsseveral accountability blind spots as Nigeria gears up for another round of validation by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), the global transparency watchdog to which Nigeria subscribes. The EITI standards are the mirrors for self-assessment and global validation of resource governance for countries and companies. For Nigeria, a key issue has always been the timely, accessible, and transparent publication of data to enable citizens to hold leaders accountable.

The Weight of the Last Validation

In 2023, Nigeria underwent a comprehensive EITI validation on how effectively the country implemented the EITI Standards between March 2019 and December 2022. This process examined three pillars: Outcomes and Impact, Stakeholder Engagement, and Transparency. These pillars are not abstract concepts;they measure whether Nigeria is genuinely providing user-friendly data, inviting diverse voices into policy conversations, and using accountability to drive reforms. Nigeria scored 72 out of 100, a result categorized as meaningful progress but with clear areas needing improvement.  This score was not just a number; it was a mirror reflecting how far Nigeria has come and how far it still must go. In three core areas of assessment: Outcomes and Impact, Transparency, and Stakeholder Engagement, the country’s performance varied, scoring 92, 71, and 52 points, respectively. The key issues flagged were delays in reconstituting the National Stakeholders Working Group (NEITI Board), poor industry participation at meetings, and constrained civil society participation. To address these problems, the EITI recommended specific corrective actions, including strengthening civil society participation,and making license and contract information more systematic and accessible. Since the 2023 Validation, NEITI has made efforts to address identified gaps and reposition Nigeria for a better outcome in subsequent validations, the next being in about six months. The ball is now squarely in the court of the recently appointed NEITI Executive Secretary, Musa Sarkin Adar, to ensure Nigeria improves in rating. This is why NEITI secured donor support to convene a dialogue for stakeholders, bringing together government officials, civil society, industry representatives, subnational actors, media, and development partners in Abuja recently. The dialogue examined where Nigeria stands, what it must fix, and how to rise to the expectations of the next validation exercise. What emerged from this intensive engagement was not only a clearer sense of direction but also a shared recognition that NEITI’s success requires all sectors pulling in the same direction. The country must demonstrate not just compliance with rules, but real change in resource governance. Specifically, Nigeria must deepen stakeholder engagement by ensuring that government, industry, and civil society are not just present but actively shaping the transparency process. The meeting also harped on expandingsystematic disclosures by making data on licenses, contracts, revenues, subnational flows, and state participation available in realtime and accessible to citizens. Participants also emphasized the need to show tangible policy impact by linking EITI reporting with concrete reforms in fiscal management, anti-leakage strategies, and public financial accountability.

Energy Transitionand Why EITI Validation Matters to Nigeria

For ordinary Nigerians, the EITI validation might seem distant. But its implications are profoundly direct.Validation is a global quality assurance test that checks whether a country is living up to the commitments it made under the EITI standards. It asks not just whether data is published, but whether the information provided is meaningful, timely, accessible, and used to shape decisions that improve resource governance and service delivery to citizens.

A dimension of transparency that is rapidly gaining importance in the EITI framework is the energy transition. As countries around the world plan shifts from carbon-intensive fuels toward cleaner energy futures, Nigeria cannot be left on the sidelines. This challenge has particular resonance for a country whose economy depends heavily on oil and gas.The EITI 2023 standard encourages countries to incorporate transition-related disclosures such as environmental impacts, climate-related fiscal risk, and energy policy data into transparency reporting. For Nigeria, this is more than symbolism. It means that data on gas utilization, emissions, and compliance with environmental standards must be openly published; licenses and contracts linked to fossil fuel extraction and energy projects must be transparent; and fiscal planning must consider future energy scenarios and how revenue streams will evolve.Nigeria cannot succeed in the validation if transparency ends at revenue numbers alone; it must embrace transparency that reflects the realities of a global shift toward cleaner energy, and must extend to how climate, environmental, and transition risks are managed in the extractive sectors.

True readiness requires Nigeria to use the EITI process not just to report data, but to translate transparency into reform. That means ensuring that published figures actually influence policy choices, expose areas of leakage, and empower citizens to hold leaders accountable.

Spotlight

Amaeshi goes to UNILAG

For an accomplished academic, thought leader, and catalyst of African-focused entrepreneurial excellence, the news of an appointment to a professorial chair by a leading institution is worth celebrating. The University of Lagos (UNILAG) recently announced Professor Kenneth Amaeshi as the inaugural occupant of the Samuel Asabia/First Bank Professorial Chair of Business Ethics. According to a statement by the university, the role marks a new beginning in ethical leadership and academic excellence. The statement rightfully describes Amaeshi in superlative terms, outlining his accomplishments at several Ivory Towers across the world, including the European University Institute in Florence, Italy, and the University of Edinburgh in the United Kingdom. His work has helped shape global thinking on responsible business and good governance. He has also made a significant mark in entrepreneurship development, and in this regard, the evolutionary OKOBI (One Kindred One Business Initiative) is fast gaining national and global attention. This effort highlights Amaeshi’s impact beyond the walls of academic institutions: he has worked closely with governments, businesses, and international institutions to offer practical guidance on sustainable finance, governance, and policy reform.

According to the UNILAG statement, the Samuel Asabia Chair was created by First Bank in honor of Samuel Asabia, its first indigenous Managing Director, as a platform for advancing thoughtful research, teaching, and leadership in business ethics in Nigeria and beyond. The team at SOStainability heartily congratulates Prof. Amaeshi on this new feather to his cap of many colours.