Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The global demand for lithium and other critical minerals has reconfigured the politics of extraction in Africa, intensifying pressures on states to deliver both development and decarbonisation. Yet the governance of this new extractive frontier increasingly depends on the interplay between multiple actors, including states, corporations, financiers, and civil society. Drawing from literature review and semi-structured interviews, this paper examines how African civil society organisations (CSOs) contribute to multi-actor governance of lithium through mechanisms of social accountability. By referring to the three cases of Ghana, South Africa and Zimbabwe, we argue that CSOs are not merely reactive watchdogs but constitute a vital counterweight in shaping the legitimacy and direction of critical mineral development. Their capacity to play this role, which ranges from litigation and advocacy to community mobilisation and transnational campaigning, influences whether critical mineral development reinforces extractive inequality or enables more responsible and inclusive resource governance that can create wider societal benefits. Drawing on lessons from the three case studies the paper concludes by providing recommendations for enhancing the participation of CSO in the governance of critical minerals and outlines some directions for future research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matanzima et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: