Mining’s top ten ESG trends for 2026 – Canadian Mining Journal

A volatile global order, intensifying climate extremes, and the race for critical minerals are reshaping mining in 2026. Geopolitics, investor expectations, and social tensions are converging on mines and supply chains worldwide. Regardless of political debates around ESG in some jurisdictions, the fundamentals—risk management, regulation, capital access, community trust, and competitiveness—remain decisive. The question is not whether ESG matters, but how mining leaders focus on what truly moves the dial.

1) Geopolitics becomes a primary driver of mining risk

Conflicts, sanctions, and shifting alliances are altering trade routes, raising costs, and complicating project delivery. Governments increasingly treat critical minerals as strategic assets, using export controls, investment screening, stockpiles, and “friend-shoring.” This elevates governance and human rights risks across jurisdictions. Boards should treat geopolitics as core enterprise risk: diversify supply chains, scenario‑plan for conflict and sanctions, and embed geopolitical risk assessment into due diligence and strategy.

2) ESG politics push companies toward materiality and value

ESG and DEI remain flashpoints in political debates, particularly in parts of the U.S., but most miners are refining—not abandoning—their approaches. Global capital markets still expect credible climate and social risk management as part of competitiveness. Companies that thrive will ditch slogans, focus on the most material issues for their business, and communicate how ESG strengthens resilience, lowers cost of capital, and supports long‑term value.

3) AI emerges as both ESG accelerator and governance liability

AI, automation, and digital twins are improving safety, productivity, and environmental performance—think real‑time water and tailings monitoring, air emissions tracking, predictive maintenance, satellite land‑use surveillance, and automated Scope 3 estimation. Yet AI brings heavy energy use, data and labor concerns, bias and explainability challenges, and cyber risks. Many organizations still lack enforceable guardrails or “kill switches.” Robust AI governance—policies, controls, testing, and accountability—is becoming essential to avoid new ESG liabilities.

4) Tailings governance becomes an enterprise risk imperative

Progress toward the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) is advancing, but uneven. Court rulings underscore that failing to meet recognized standards can constitute negligence across jurisdictions. With forecasts pointing to continued catastrophic failure risks, expect lenders and regulators to intensify scrutiny: conformance for non‑compliant facilities, climate‑stress scenario analyses (e.g., extreme rainfall, seismicity, permafrost thaw), third‑party assurance, and tighter integration of tailings risk into capital allocation and financing.

5) The critical minerals rush heightens social and security pressures

Soaring demand for transition and defense minerals is colliding with land, water, labor, and security concerns. Allegations of human rights abuses, threats to defenders, and disproportionate impacts on Indigenous Peoples are persistent. Criminal and conflict-linked activity in artisanal mining compounds risks. Court decisions in multiple jurisdictions are embedding stronger consultation duties into permitting. The sector must secure strategic minerals without repeating past patterns of inequality, environmental harm, and corruption—requiring credible social performance, shared benefits, and diligent security practices.

6) Climate impacts disrupt operations; transition plans move to execution

Fires, floods, cyclones, heat, and water stress are already causing production losses and higher maintenance costs. Meanwhile, climate-related financial disclosures are expanding across major economies under converging standards. Investors and insurers now expect site‑level adaptation: engineered defenses, water stewardship, heat management, and resilient logistics. Transition strategies must include costed, time‑bound actions, with board oversight and clear links to capital planning and permitting.

7) Nature and water become hard screening criteria

Biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation are increasingly seen as systemic financial risks. Nature-related reporting frameworks are scaling quickly, while sector-specific guidance is raising the bar on water use, land disturbance, and biodiversity. From 2026, GRI 14: Mining Sector requires more granular disclosures. Companies lacking coherent nature and water strategies—baseline data, mitigation hierarchies, net‑gain or nature‑positive pathways, watershed collaboration, and mine closure plans—will face tougher approvals and tighter capital access.

8) Boards are expected to demonstrate ESG competence

Shareholder activism and scrutiny of capital allocation, climate strategy, and governance are intensifying. Boards can no longer assume automatic backing for ESG‑material decisions and must be ready to defend strategic risk choices amid polarized political environments. Directors need demonstrable ESG literacy, clear committee structures, transparent oversight of material risks and opportunities, and proactive investor engagement to preempt credibility gaps and liability exposure.

9) Value chain due diligence is moving from policy to proof

Regulators are shifting from guidance to enforcement on forced labor, child labor, and broader human rights and environmental risks. New and strengthened laws in key mining jurisdictions and markets demand evidence of effective identification, prioritization, and remediation across supply chains. Expect deeper scrutiny of recruitment practices, contractor oversight, artisanal and small‑scale mining interfaces, forced migration risks, and Indigenous rights. Companies will need robust grievance mechanisms, traceability, corrective action tracking, and board visibility.

10) Disclosure converges; credible data beats glossy narratives

Reporting is consolidating around internationally recognized standards such as IFRS S1/S2, CSRD/ESRS in the EU, and sector-specific requirements like GRI 14 for mining. Limited assurance is expanding, and regulators in multiple countries are actively policing greenwashing. The result: fewer grand claims, more pressure for decision‑useful, comparable, assured data. Some firms may “greenhush,” but expectations won’t recede. Those who align metrics, controls, and assurance to converging standards will gain trust with lenders, investors, communities, and regulators.

Bottom line for 2026

Success this year hinges on disciplined execution: navigate geopolitics, strengthen climate and nature resilience, manage the social fallout of the minerals rush, clean up value chains, and deliver reliable, comparable data. This is less about virtue signaling and more about protecting and creating value—reducing downside risk, securing scarce capital, winning permits and offtakes, and maintaining the trust of workers, communities, and governments. Leaders will integrate ESG into strategy, focus on material issues, manage trade‑offs transparently, and adapt pragmatically to complex local and global conditions.