For too long Rio Tinto has made claims about its social and environmental performance, and published glossy reports that do not reflect the reality for communities living on the ground around their mines.
Investors need to “Mind the Gap” between what Rio Tinto is telling them and local lived experience. This gap represents significant legal, financial and reputation risks for investors. These risks can only increase as Rio Tinto expands its production in response to a growing demand for so-called “critical minerals.” The pattern shown also undermines Rio Tinto’s claims to support a “just energy transition,” respect for human rights, good governance and regulatory compliance in host countries.
A culture of self-reporting, internal evaluation and a lack of independent external scrutiny has allowed Rio Tinto to assert its own narrative and minimise or ignore the voices and complaints of communities affected by their operations. This is especially concerning in host countries where governance is weak.
Process over actions and remedy
Local communities, traditional owners and civil society organisations have been pressing Rio Tinto to address issues related to water and related human rights, food security and livelihoods issues. These include water contamination, tailings dam failures and tailings management issues around multiple existing, legacy and projected Rio Tinto mine operations. Rio Tinto has repeatedly undermined these concerns, silenced voices, ignored research findings, refused community and civil society demands and insisted upon its own frequently unsubstantiated technical and ESG claims.
Instead of tangible, timely and appropriate actions, community, civil society representatives and human rights advocates report they are “dialogued to death.” Recent engagements with the Australasia Centre for Corporate Accountability confirm the company’s concerning inclination for a “process-heavy” approach, warning that without tangible outcomes this threatens to “weaken(s) the company’s ability to address serious risks in a timely and appropriate manner.”
Communities living around Rio Tinto mines can provide examples of how the company keeps failing them in this way, including: failing to communicate, to provide information, to engage openly and equitably, to listen to their concerns, to clean up, to adequately compensate for their mining impacts, to ensure remedy. Rio Tinto fails to meet the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark for safe engagement for human rights defenders, further underscoring a poor capacity for appropriate levels of response.
Community activists, NGO advocacy groups and environmental defenders
Opportunities to understand the reality for mine affected communities are not always readily available to all investors. To rectify this gap, national and international groups are able to provide much needed insight and amplification of community realities and asks. In response, the mining industry and its supporters tend to denounce these activists, characterising them as part of the problem.
We ask investors and the general public to be cautious of these accusations, and become more open and willing to hear the amplified voices from affected communities that are brought to them and shared by many engaged organisations, NGOs and advocacy groups from around the world.
We invite investors to engage with campaigners and community representatives concerning “gaps” in the following case studies:
Case studies: Rio Tinto versus Reality
Resolution Copper Mine, USA
Oak Flat is an ecological, sacred, and recreational haven on public land in the Tonto National Forest, in Arizona, an hour east of Phoenix, Arizona. Resolution Copper, wholly owned by the world’s two largest mining companies, Rio Tinto and BHP, is proposing a huge underground copper mine that would create immense damage to the surrounding water resources and to a local cultural heritage site. The mine would also permanently destroy about 6,000 hectares of public land, state trust land, and private land.
Water is so scarce in Arizona that there is not enough available to support this proposed project and for local communities and the environment. Resolution Copper would take billions of gallons of water while Arizona is in the middle of the worst drought in 1,200 years that is projected to get even worse. Rio Tinto claims they have plenty of water banked and would not further impact the drought. Rio Tinto claims they will use “the latest technology” and will “actively explore other ways to further reduce our water use.”
In reality, the water Rio Tinto claims to have “banked” is nowhere near the area where they plan to pump groundwater for the proposed mine. In reality the well fields planned for the mine are in the middle of a planned city of more than a million people.
In reality, Rio Tinto’s mining plan has not changed in more than a decade and the plan underestimates the proposed mine’s water consumption by more than three times. Rio Tinto would like us to believe that the proposed Resolution Copper mine can magically use far less water than any other Arizona mine by using the same techniques.
After Rio Tinto blew up the Juukan Gorge caves, it promised it would “never again” destroy sacred sites. In Arizona, the Resolution Copper mine is set to do precisely that by creating a crater 3,200 metres wide and 300 metres deep at Oak Flat due to surface subsidence right in the middle of a Native American sacred site. In numerous court documents and testimony, Native Americans have stated passionately that they cannot practise their religion unless Oak Flat is intact.
See also following independent studies: Projected Consumption of Electricity and Water; “The Proposed Resolution Copper Mine and Arizona’s Water Future”; “Potential Impact of Geothermal Water on the Financial Success of the Resolution Copper Mine, Arizona.”
Oyu Tolgoi, Mongolia
Rio Tinto claims that it is compliant with the industry standards on tailings and water management and that it is the leader in respecting and reporting on human rights performance compatible with the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights. Rio Tinto’s Sustainability Statement commits to “being transparent with our stakeholders about our tailings facilities and how we manage them.”
The Oyu Tolgoi (OT) mine, a vast copper-gold operation in Mongolia’s South Gobi Desert, has faced long-standing criticism for its severe impacts on local herders and the environment since it began operations. For over a decade, herders have sought remedies for disrupted access to water and pasture caused by the mine and its sprawling infrastructure.
Adding to these challenges, in 2015 OT’s tailings storage facility (TSF) emerged as a significant environmental threat. In November 2021, OT formally identified an environmental incident at the TSF related to seepage collection and only in October 2023, its lenders IFC and EBRD’s auditor classified the leakage of the first tailing cell (TC1) as an environmental incident. This leakage has become a serious concern shared by herders whose livelihoods are tightly connected to the quality of pasture and fresh water in the extreme harsh condition of the South Gobi, both of which are negatively impacted by the leakage. Seepage from the TSF has exacerbated the degradation of grazing lands and posed substantial health and environmental risks, undermining the fragile ecosystem on which herders depend.
To date, OT has not disclosed an official record of what substances are found in the water which is leaking out and how it has impacted the soil. There is no communicated plan to conduct medical checkups for herders and their animals who are using the water sources below the mine. Herders have little to no knowledge of the extent and potential long-term impacts of the seepage on herders and animals. OT has now begun operating their newly constructed second tailings cell (TC2), while remediation is still incomplete for the harm caused by seepage from TC1.
In response Rio Tinto simply continues to state that it follows its group tailings management procedure”,also following industry standards such as the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM). In its 2024 Annual Report it claims that the Sustainability Committee “Received updates on the Group’s implementation of GISTM, and engaged with Accountable Executives in line with the Standard’s requirements.”
Rio Tinto reports on important ESG topics rather than on its actual performance, which explains the glaring gaps between its statements and reality on the ground.
Recommendations for actions to address and remediate seepage:
a. Immediately disclose the independent study assessing the impact of the seepage, to understand how far it has travelled offsite, what chemicals or metals are present, and what impact it has had on the local environment, animals and people.
b. Develop a plan for facilitating access to health check-ups for herders to ensure any potential harm from the contamination is detected and addressed in a timely manner.
c. Begin planning specific means to achieve compliance with the intended 64% solid content design of the TC1 (e.g. by purchasing a third thickener), and bring the entire TSF operations to comply with international standards (e.g. by improving the water reclaim pond system).
d. Urgently implement the key recommendations made in the Water Efficiency Workshop in September 2024 to reduce water loss in the South Gobi Desert.
Rio Tinto has promised, but failed to deliver.
QIT Minerals Madagascar (QMM), Madagascar
In Madagascar Rio Tinto promised to deliver a green and sustainable mineral sands mine, which would lift the region out of poverty. However, rural communities affected by the mine report a 47% loss of their income since QMM began its operations and 94% report negative impacts from the mine from loss of the natural resources and water quality on which they depend for livelihoods, food security and their survival.
Rio Tinto promises transparent water stewardship at the QMM mine. However, QMM mine wastewater contains elevated levels of uranium, lead and other contaminants that pose serious environmental and health risks to approximately 15,000 people living downstream of the mine. Independent experts’ analyses of QMM’s water reports and external radiation study have highlighted significant data gaps and a lack of evidence to support the company’s assertions of ‘no health risks’ and ‘no environmental impact’ from QMM. Also, the company is currently facing legal action regarding the potential health impacts of QMM water contamination, specifically high levels of lead detected in the blood of community members living downstream of QMM.
Water quality issues, lost livelihoods, health concerns, inadequate compensation and human rights violations remain unresolved and have already led to multiple protests and roadblocks costing the company millions of dollars. The conflict has resulted in the criminalisation, arrest and detention of protestors, escalating to the apparent extrajudicial killing of three protestors in 2023 with no subsequent inquiry. The risks to communities and regional stability will likely multiply as QMM expands into further sites, unless outstanding human rights and environmental issues are urgently and transparently addressed.
Rio Tinto acknowledges that water risks are “high” at QMM, and that QMM’s original water management system was not working. However, QMM withholds critical information about its new treatment plant – in particular with regard to management of its toxic waste sludge. It has also failed to ensure an independent external evaluation of its tailings dam after multiple tailings dam failures. For all these reasons, and because of a failure to provide an equitable dialogue process, Malagasy civil society is demanding an independent environmental and human rights impact assessment of QMM (similar to the PMLIA at Bougainville). Engaging communities in an open and inclusive process to international standards would provide a credible pathway for Rio Tinto to move beyond the current high risk situation In Madagascar and align with its international commitments. See also: Briefing on QMM
Jadar, Serbia
The proposed “Jadar” mine is a large lithium and borates project situated in the agricultural and biodiverse valley of the Jadar River in western Serbia. The project has from the outset caused grievances about information transparency regarding social and Nature impacts, and the land acquisition campaign was perceived as divisive. The growing discontent and protests in the project area, supported by communities downstream and across the country, eventually led the government to “annul” it in January 2022. In July 2024, the High Court turned down the decision, and the project was reinstated, to great public discontent.
After the restart, the local subsidiary expressed a commitment to “radical transparency” and to the “highest standards of Serbia and the EU.” In September 2024, Rio Tinto submitted a scoping request for the EIA. It included, however, only the estimated impacts of a proposed underground mine, while the other parts of the operation: a processing plant – which would be within the perimeter – the water supply system from river Drina’s alluvial deposits, and tailing storage facilities, were barely mentioned. This approach has been called “salami slicing.” From the very start of the new process, despite the lofty promises, the company has chosen to minimise or avoid assessment of cumulative impacts.
The Biological Faculty in Belgrade, whose study has been used in the request for determining the scope of the EIA, has publicly distanced itself from the conclusions expressed in Rio Tinto’s submission, claiming that they are “contrary” to the ones reached in their final report. It is hard to see how this aligns with purported “highest” standards, especially considering the very high number of protected species and sensitive riverine habitats in the area. Furthermore, recent revelation concerning the issuing of Nature protection conditions, also puts in doubt the impartiality and willingness of relevant Serbian authorities to enforce “highest environmental standards.”
Even if the company claims to have “meaningful and sustained engagement” with the communities, and reports thousands of “formal engagements,” the reality is that they involve a very limited constituency. The company cannot claim a social license for the development of the project, neither is it close to obtaining such. Rio Tinto’s perceived aggressive approach to land acquisition and the uncertainties concerning different parts of the permitting process have broken the relations with the communities in Jadar and more widely. Mass opposition in the project area and across the country continues, with increased persecution of the activists. Rio Tinto and the public prosecutor have in recent months separately filed lawsuits against the environmental defenders, in an apparent attempt to silence the opposition.
The company representatives have repeatedly said that, ultimately, “it is up to the people and the government” to decide on the project. Environmental movement thus demands Rio Tinto to respect the communities and leave jadarite in the ground.
Robe River Kuruma, Australia
The Pilbara region of Western Australia is home to unique ecosystems, culturally significant sites, and Traditional Owner (Aboriginal) communities whose livelihoods and heritage are intrinsically linked to the region’s natural resources, particularly water. As one of the largest mining operators in the Pilbara, Rio Tinto’s activities—including groundwater abstraction, surface water disruptions, and potential contamination—have profound impacts on the region’s fragile hydrological systems.
The Robe River Kuruma People opposed water extraction from the Bungaroo Aquifer, and the issue remains a source of ongoing tension between the parties. Extensive abstraction for mining operations is affecting aquifer levels, threatening both ecosystems and water availability.
The Bungaroo waterway and aquifer, located 35 km southeast of Pannawonica on Robe River Kuruma Country in Western Australia, supplies up to 10 GL (10 billion litres) of water annually under a licensing agreement between Rio Tinto and the State Government. Currently it provides water at the rate of around 7 GL per year. The water is supplied to the West Pilbara Water Supply Scheme (WPWSS), which supplies drinking and industrial water to Karratha, Wickham, Dampier, Roebourne, and Point Samson, including Rio Tinto’s mining operations at Cape Lambert and the Burrup Peninsula.
Rio Tinto have shared steps in their action and response plan including the Dampier Seawater Desalination Plant, expected to become operational in 2027. This plant aims to reduce Bungaroo abstraction to 3-4 GL annually (3-4 billion litres). Additionally, the company has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Western Australian Government to assess the feasibility of a second stage of the desalination plant, further reducing reliance on the Millstream Aquifer.
Rio Tinto claims that its water-saving initiatives are delivering positive results. However, the Coastal Water Supply Borefield Annual Management Report (January–December 2024), provided by Rio Tinto to the Robe River Kuruma Aboriginal Corporation, shows that all 10 monitoring bores near sensitive ecological and cultural sites are either below the levels that trigger concerns or at investigation levels. Independent investigations commissioned by the Robe River Kuruma Aboriginal Corporation, supported by expert hydrologists, have confirmed a significant decline in groundwater levels over ten years of water abstraction. Reports indicate that water levels have dropped from approximately five metres below the surface to closer to ten metres in many areas.
In response to significant water management challenges, Rio Tinto announced plans in 2023 to invest in a saltwater desalination plant, positioning it as a key component of their action and response plan to address the Robe River Kuruma People’s concerns over the cultural and environmental impacts of water abstraction from the Bungaroo Aquifer. The company also acknowledged the concerns of the Yindjibarndi People, who face similar issues due to water abstraction from the Millstream Aquifer.
Significantly scaling back or pausing abstraction during major rainfall events would maximise aquifer recharge, ensuring incoming water is retained rather than immediately withdrawn. To date Rio Tinto have refused to reduce or temporarily halt abstraction.
Robe River Kuruma Aboriginal Corporation has consistently called on Rio Tinto to clearly articulate a transparent and time-bound pathway to zero abstraction from the Bungaroo Aquifer. Despite ongoing discussions and repeated requests, this remains a critical commitment the company has never formally made. The State also remains silent despite also recognising the basis of concerns.
Any water infrastructure project must be guided by the inherent rights and knowledge of the Traditional Owners, backed by science, with the primary focus on restoring and safeguarding our Country – not securing water for industrial and domestic purposes.
Bungaroo is a spiritually and culturally significant place for the Robe River Kuruma People. It has supported the Robe River Kuruma People’s way of life for generations. Water, known as bawa, is intrinsic to the culture, Country, and heritage of Robe River Kuruma People.
Bawa is life. There is no life without bawa.
Read also: “Water crisis looms for thirsty Pilbara”
We demand immediate action to address and close these gaps!