Africa risks repeating some of its longstanding mine closure challenges as investment in critical minerals accelerates, unless governments and mining companies strengthen the governance, rehabilitation and community transition arrangements needed to manage the eventual end of mining operations, Dr. Kgomotso Tshaka has warned.
Speaking at a webinar organised by the African Centre for Energy Transition (ACCET) on Friday, November 6, 2026, under the theme “Rethinking Africa’s Mining Legacy: From Mine Closure to Community Regeneration,” Dr. Tshaka cautioned that the growing demand for minerals needed for the global energy transition must not lead to another cycle of extraction without adequate preparation for the consequences.
Dr. Tshaka, a mining and sustainability executive, researcher and author whose work spans critical minerals, mine closure, environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues and resource governance, argued that the pace and scale of mineral extraction must be matched by corresponding efforts to rehabilitate mining sites and prepare host communities for life beyond mining.
Her concern is that the urgency to develop critical mineral resources could overshadow the long-term responsibilities that come with extraction. While new mining projects may create investment opportunities and economic activity, the environmental and social obligations associated with those operations can continue long after production has stopped.
Drawing on experiences across the continent, she highlighted challenges in Zambia, South Africa, Namibia and Ghana that demonstrate the difficulties countries face in managing the aftermath of mining.
In Zambia, she pointed to cases of social abandonment and inadequate government support and training following mine closure. South Africa, despite having relatively strong mine closure legislation, continues to face challenges arising from fragmented institutional responsibilities, reliance on state budgets and the presence of derelict and ownerless mines.
She also identified regulatory gaps in Namibia, while noting that in Ghana, physical rehabilitation has progressed further than socioeconomic closure, contributing to tensions in mining communities.
These experiences raise concerns about whether existing governance and financial arrangements are sufficiently prepared to manage the next phase of mineral development.
For Dr. Tshaka, the expansion of critical minerals extraction makes it particularly important to address these weaknesses before new mining projects reach the end of their operating lives. She argued that rehabilitation and community transition must be considered throughout the life of a mine, rather than treated as obligations to be addressed when closure becomes imminent.
This requires companies to undertake progressive rehabilitation, make adequate financial provision for closure and work with governments and host communities to develop alternative economic activities while mining operations are still active.
Water management is another important part of this preparation. Poorly managed mining legacies can leave communities facing water-related challenges that constrain agriculture, ecological restoration and other economic activities after extraction ends.
The challenge also extends to institutional accountability. Where responsibilities for environmental rehabilitation and community transition are fragmented or inadequately funded, the burden can eventually shift to governments and the communities themselves.
As Africa seeks to attract investment into its critical minerals sector, Dr. Tshaka’s warning points to the need to consider not only the economic returns from extraction but also the systems that will manage its eventual consequences.
Without that preparation, the continent risks creating a new generation of mining liabilities while still grappling with the legacy of its older operations.
