Article Contents
As chair of the Group of 20 (G20) nations this year, South Africa wants to secure agreement for more local processing of the metals and minerals critical to the clean energy transition, with many mined in large quantities in the Global South – but it will first need to win support from dominant player China.
According to the G20 website, South Africa plans to work with other governments in the international economic forum “to ensure that the countries and local communities endowed with these resources are the ones to benefit the most” – especially as mineral extraction and refining accelerates to supply growing electrification and renewable power production worldwide.
At the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said that countries rich in these minerals – which include lithium, cobalt, copper and nickel – should be the ones to gain most from their exploitation.
“Another of South Africa’s priorities for its G20 presidency is to harness critical minerals for inclusive growth and development,” Ramaphosa said, calling for a G20 framework on green industrialisation and investment aimed at delivering a grand bargain “that promotes value addition to critical minerals particularly close to the source of extraction”.
This, according to Ramaphosa, will result in “an additive rather than an extractive relationship” and reverse the historical trend by which resource-rich countries, many of them in Africa, lose out “because the benefit flows out of their own countries to other locals in the world”.
Valentine’s Day a costlier affair as rising heat hits West Africa cocoa production
Interest in processing minerals close to their source – known as “beneficiation” – has increased in recent years amid rising demand for the metals and minerals that are essential to produce clean technologies such as renewable energy infrastructure, electric vehicles and batteries.
Last December, during former US leader Joe Biden’s first and only visit to Africa, President Felix Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) said, “it is imperative that the wealth contained in our [Africa’s] ground contribute directly to the well-being of our peoples”.
This view is in line with recent efforts by some developing countries – including Indonesia, Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Namibia – to ban or curb exports of these raw materials and build processing and manufacturing facilities as a way to grow their economies and develop sustainably.
Why is China’s co-operation essential?
During India’s G20 presidency in 2023, its officials pushed for the group to develop a shared vision on critical minerals. India’s renewable energy secretary Bhupinder Singh Bhalla spoke of the need “for a cost-effective and risk-proof scale-up of clean energy through diversified supply chains and distributive expansion of [the] manufacturing base”.
But the plan fell through after it was opposed by China, meaning that the aim to have “critical minerals and materials beneficiated at source” received only a brief mention in the final G20 declaration that year.
China dominates the global critical minerals supply chain. The Asian powerhouse refines 68% of nickel globally, 40% of copper, 59% of lithium, and 73% of cobalt, according to research by the Brookings Institution and Results for Development. Another report from Southern Transitions shows that China – with the largest global manufacturing capacity for key renewable energy technologies – was the destination for more than half of Africa’s critical mineral ore exports in 2023.
That is a global advantage China will not easily concede, said Olimpia Pilch, chief strategy officer at The Critical Minerals Africa Group (CMAG). “It is not in China’s interest” for other developing countries to gain more value from critical mineral refining, as this would “threaten China’s leverage” with rival super powers, she said.
What’s more, breaking into the complex space of making products from critical minerals will be “very difficult”, she added, as China is increasingly banning exports of processing equipment and closely guarding its intellectual property and operational know-how.
Africa’s lack of reliable energy supplies and infrastructure
China is not the only obstacle to boosting beneficiation across the Global South. Pilch said many countries that have deposits of critical minerals, including in Africa, lack “almost all of the key ingredients to enable profitable processing and refining”.
Barriers include limited supplies of cheap and reliable energy to convert ore into usable materials and metals; inadequate transport infrastructure; insufficient domestic consumer demand to spur manufacturing; and constrained access to cheap finance due to the high investment risk associated with many African nations.
Thando Lukuko, Climate Action Network’s director for South Africa, said South Africa would struggle to advance its G20 beneficiation plan because resource-rich poorer countries generate a large share of their income from mineral exports and lack the infrastructure needed to process raw materials. “Where’s the money going to come from for that?” he asked.
The rules of the global economic game work against those countries, preventing them from moving away from their status as simple raw material exporters, according to Anabella Rosemberg, senior advisor on just transition at Climate Action Network International.
DRC’s huge Green Corridor project lacks buy-in from forest communities
For example, the World Trade Organisation generally considers domestic content requirements – which mandate companies to purchase or use a certain percentage of locally produced goods – “as a violation of free trade principles and [they] are therefore prohibited”.
Another problem is clauses embedded in bilateral trade agreements that can prevent countries from introducing policies that retroactively ask foreign investors to add value to the minerals they are extracting, Rosemberg noted, calling for more “openness” from developed countries on value addition.
She welcomed South Africa’s willingness to take on the topic in the G20 negotiations, adding that it could create more awareness on how these barriers intersect with prosperity in the Global South.
Can South Africa seal a G20 deal on critical minerals?
In Davos, Ramaphosa said there is a need to reform the WTO and global financial institutions to be more representative and responsive to citizens’ needs. He promised that South Africa “will use this G20 to champion the use of critical minerals through a programme of green industrialisation and as an engine for growth and development in Africa, and the rest of the Global South”.
Mahendra Shunmoogam, South Africa’s director of foreign trade policy, told Climate Home that a key focus of the G20 this year will be to work out how to “bring about better outcomes for global trade” and make it more inclusive.
He said progress is being made, adding that South Africa has the full backing of the G77+China group of developing countries, with all members of the bloc agreeing to push for beneficiation of critical minerals at source during the 2024 Third South Summit.
A strong carbon tax on shipping can give hope to climate-vulnerable communities
The summit’s outcome document references it only briefly, however, calling “for a coherent set of policy actions at the national, regional and international levels to support the need for developing countries rich in critical minerals to add value to their supply chains as a way of contributing to their economic structural transformation, creating decent employment, increasing export revenues, and participating in the process of economic development”.
Shunmoogam, who is part of the G20 trade and investment working group, said so far there have been no objections to talks on beneficiation from member countries – which are still at an early stage – and he therefore expects them to co-operate on securing a positive result.
The text of a framework on green industralisation that will support the creation of value chains in developing countries will be negotiated this year during South Africa’s presidency, he added.
He suggested that resource-rich countries, such as those in Africa, should develop a regional approach – for example, minerals mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo could be refined in Botswana and assembled elsewhere on the continent. “We do want the minerals from the Global South to add value in the Global South,” he emphasised.
Rosemberg said that South Africa, as G20 president, will need to work with recommendations outlined in a recent report from the UN Secretary-General’s panel of experts on value addition. It states that beneficiation of minerals can spur industrialisation and economic development, therefore “all countries, in particular developing countries, should have an equitable opportunity to harness technological innovation, participate in global mineral value chains and to benefit from these”.
Shunmoogam noted that there are different resolutions by a range of multilateral organisations supporting the processing of minerals at their source, and South Africa aims to collate these as a basis for further discussion at the G20.
Pilch of the CMAG said, however, that for beneficiation to be achieved in Africa and other mineral-rich parts of the developing world, “collective action would need to be taken by G20 to tackle China’s monopoly and invest in growth to boost demand outside of China”.
The post South Africa’s G20 push for local processing of transition minerals faces barriers appeared first on Climate Home News.
South Africa’s G20 push for local processing of transition minerals faces barriers
Continue Reading
An older teaching about land acknowledgement
As I have come to understand the spirit and intention of land acknowledgement, I often return to fond memories of my grandmother and her words of wisdom. She taught that the health of the places we call home comes first, because the wellbeing of the people depends on it.
In her teaching, land acknowledgement began with the land. Long before it became a paragraph read at the start of a meeting, it was a way of recognizing a homeland: its waters, its species, its seasons, and the spirit that revealed whether the place was well.
Her teaching echoes a practice found across many Indigenous Nations. Haudenosaunee gatherings, for example, have long opened with the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen, the Thanksgiving Address, often translated as “the words that come before all else.” The speaker greets and gives thanks to the people, the earth, the waters, the plants, the animals, the winds, the sun, the moon and the stars. Only after everything that sustains life has been acknowledged does the gathering turn to its own business.
That order changes what an acknowledgement is for. Its purpose was to share the story of a place with neighbours and to draw them into the work of tending it. People entered the story second, as the ones responsible for what had just been named.
Understood this way, an acknowledgement does more than open a meeting. It asks us to reconsider where we stand, and what we owe the ground beneath us.
Nations among nations
In her teaching, people are one nation among many. The salmon are a nation. So are the cedars, the bison, the medicine plants, and the pollinators. Each belongs to a place, carries its own responsibilities, and offers gifts no other nation can give.
This idea of kinship runs through many Indigenous philosophies. The phrase “all my relations,” heard in ceremonies and gatherings across Turtle Island, is a reminder that family extends beyond people to the animals, plants, waters and lands that make life possible. Some Indigenous languages carry the same understanding in their grammar, speaking of many plants, animals and natural forces as living beings rather than objects.
Sovereignty, understood through this relationship, is a kind of standing more than a form of control. Each nation belongs fully to its place and carries its share of that place’s life. No nation thrives alone, and none thrives by taking over the whole.
The land is also the source of instruction. Over generations, people watched how a river valley or a stretch of prairie kept itself well: who arrived when, who fed whom, and how much could be taken before the giving stopped. In my grandmother’s telling, those observations became instructions, and those instructions helped shape law and protocol. They guided when to harvest, where to camp, how to enter a neighbour’s territory, and what was owed in return.
Indigenous legal scholars today often describe this as law that comes from the land itself, learned by watching how living systems sustain one another. A plainer name for it is knowing how to live somewhere.
The host and the guest
One of the clearest teachings in this understanding of the world is the relationship between host and guest. My grandmother invited us to recognize that relationship in the lives of plants and animals.
A host prepares the place before anyone arrives. A beaver family dams a stream, and the pond becomes a home for fish, frogs, birds and plants. A fallen tree becomes a nurse log, feeding the next generation of seedlings as it returns to the soil.
A host offers first. A flowering plant sets out nectar. A berry bush ripens fruit. These provisions come in their own season, not whenever a visitor happens to want them.
A host also makes its presence known. Birdsong, scent and the marks left along a trail tell newcomers that a place is already inhabited. The visitor does not arrive in an empty world.
The guest has responsibilities too. A guest attends to the season and to what the place can offer. A guest does not assume that everything within reach is theirs to take. A guest leaves something that helps sustain the relationship.
A bee takes nectar and carries pollen. Read through this teaching, that exchange offers an image of visiting well: receiving a gift while helping the host continue its life.
Many Indigenous harvesting protocols carry the same ethic into daily practice: ask before taking, take only what is needed, offer thanks, and leave enough for others and for the plant or animal to recover.
None of this suggests that every relationship in nature is peaceful or generous. These are ways of seeing responsibilities that people can learn to carry.
Everyone is both
No being is only a host or only a guest.
A tree makes room for other life while depending on soil, water, sunlight, fungi, and relationships beyond itself. People, too, may welcome others into their homes while remaining dependent on the larger homeland that sustains them.
The distinction between host and guest is therefore about roles, not ranks. Everyone receives. Everyone has something to give.
The question is whether the exchange sustains the place.
A visitor who takes without restraint leaves less for those who come next. A host who neglects the place has less to offer. Both have responsibilities, and neither can fulfil them alone.
This is the heart of reciprocity, a principle found across Indigenous philosophies: relationships stay healthy when gifts move in both directions. The Haudenosaunee teaching of the seventh generation extends that exchange across time, asking that decisions made today leave the place well for those not yet born.
Mutual benefit begins here, with the recognition that different beings carry different gifts and obligations.
What people carry forward
My grandmother’s teaching connects these relationships to the ways people meet their neighbours.
The host prepares a place, offers food and rest, and explains where the visitor has arrived. The guest makes themselves known, explains why they have come, listens to the terms of the visit, and brings something in return. The gift may be material. It may also be labour, knowledge, news, or a commitment to help.
Nations around the Great Lakes carried this ethic into treaty. The Dish with One Spoon, an agreement among the Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe and allied Nations, describes shared hunting grounds as a single dish. Everyone eats from it with one spoon, takes only what they need, leaves enough for others, and keeps the dish clean. The Two Row Wampum, between the Haudenosaunee and European newcomers, shows two vessels travelling side by side on the same river, each keeping its own ways and neither steering the other.
In this understanding, acknowledgement is more than naming the people associated with a territory. It is learning enough about a homeland to behave responsibly within it.
Whose home is this? What sustains it? What laws and agreements guide our presence? What can we receive, and what must we return?
These questions make acknowledgement a relationship rather than a recital.
They also make it diplomatic. A guest who recognizes the host’s homeland recognizes that they have entered a place with its own relationships and responsibilities. A host who welcomes the guest makes room for an encounter governed by those relationships.
Neither arrives without standing. Neither arrives without obligations.
Beginning with place
I write from the shores of the Bay of Quinte. Here, the teaching asks me to begin with the water, the shoreline, and the life they sustain. Before I describe myself, I must attend to where I am.
That does not make people or history less important. It places them within the homeland that gives them meaning. The people, their laws, their agreements, and their responsibilities all belong to the place.
In a time of longer fire seasons, troubled waters, and uncertainty about what the next season will bring, this teaching asks something difficult and useful of us: pay attention before you speak.
An acknowledgement cannot tell the story of a place if the speaker has stopped noticing it.
The land came first. Beginning there again means learning to name what sustains us, and accepting that what sustains us also asks something of us.
By Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
Photo by Andrik Langfield on Unsplash
The post The Land Came First appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
This guest post is by:
- Dr Zeke Hausfather, Carbon Brief’s climate science contributor
- Prof Pierre Friedlingstein, chair of mathematical modelling of climate systems at the University of Exeter and part of the Global Carbon Project team.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
The 21st edition of the annual “global carbon budget” report, published today, says that this small decline is largely due to a 1.9% drop in emissions from oil and the energy shock triggered by the Iran conflict and the closure of the strait of Hormuz.
Emissions from coal continue to increase slightly.
The Global Carbon Project’s projections for fossil fuel and cement CO2 emissions in 2026 are preliminary, with a range that spans a fall of -1.5% to a rise of +0.6%.
This means a small increase in emissions can not be ruled out.
Emissions from land-use change, such as deforestation, are projected to rise in 2026.
This is primarily driven by peat fires and forest degradation in south-east Asia and is linked to the development of a strong El Niño event this year.
As a result, total CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and land use are projected to reach a record high of 43.3GtCO2 in 2026 – marginally above 42.8GtCO2 in 2025.
Research published alongside the report by the same team in Nature Climate Change finds that the growth in solar, wind and electric vehicles (EVs) now offsets around two-thirds of the emissions that would otherwise come from rising energy demand.
However, the deployment of these technologies is not yet enough to push global emissions into a sustained decline, according to the study.
The 2026 global carbon budget report also estimates that:
- Fossil emissions are projected to fall in China (-0.9%), the US (-1.3%) and the EU (-1.5%) in 2026, but rise by 4.4% in India.
- Oil emissions are projected to fall in every major region, with the largest drop in China (-4.6%).
- Land-use emissions averaged 4.9GtCO2 per year over 2016-25, around 21% lower than the decade before.
- Total CO2 emissions (fossil and land-use) grew by an average 0.3% per year over the past decade (2016-25), compared with 1.7% per year over the decade before.
- The remaining carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5C is 150GtCO2, or less than four years of current emissions.
- The land sink in 2025 was the highest on record, rebounding after being weakened during the 2023-24 El Niño. The current El Niño is expected to weaken the land sink in 2027.
- The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is set to reach 427.7 parts per million (ppm) in 2026, 54% above pre-industrial levels.
(For more on previous editions of the Global Carbon Project’s annual report, see Carbon Brief’s coverage in 2025, 2024, 2023 and 2022.)
Total emissions edge up as land-use emissions rise
Total global CO2 emissions, which combines fossil fuels and land-use change, are projected to reach a record high of 43.3GtCO2 in 2026, up from 42.8GtCO2 in 2025.
The increase in 2026 comes entirely from a projected rise in land-use emissions, which are more challenging to estimate than fossil emissions.
(The global carbon budget groups emissions from fossil fuels and cement production as “fossil emissions”. Carbon Brief follows this convention throughout this piece.)
If land-use emissions had stayed at 2025 levels, total emissions would have fallen slightly in 2026 to around 42.6GtCO2.
Each edition of the global carbon budget updates the historical record as new data and methods become available. The chart below shows total emissions in this year’s budget compared with the five previous editions.
This year’s estimates of historical fossil emissions are around 0.3GtCO2 per year higher than in last year’s budget.
This is largely because the report now estimates a smaller “cement carbonation” sink in the wake of research published this year in Communications Sustainability. In other words, it estimates that cement is able to slowly reabsorb less CO2 over its lifetime than previously thought.
Estimates of land-use emissions have also been revised, including a spike in 2018 – visible in the chart above – linked to updated cropland data for Colombia.
The updated numbers show that total emissions have grown by 0.3% per year over the past decade (2016-25), compared with 1.7% per year over 2006-15.
Fossil emissions grew about 0.9% per year in the past decade, compared with 1.9% the decade before. Over the same period, land-use emissions have declined.
While the slowdown reflects real progress, a plateau in emissions is still a long way from the rapid declines needed to reach net-zero emissions and stabilise global temperatures.
With human-caused warming reaching 1.37C above pre-industrial levels (1850-1900) in 2025, the report estimates that the remaining carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5C, with a 50% chance, is 150GtCO2 from the start of 2027. That is less than four years of 2026 emissions.
Meanwhile, the budgets for 1.7C and 2C are 510GtCO2 and 1,035GtCO2, respectively – or around 12 and 24 years of current emissions.
Fossil emissions made up around 88% of total CO2 emissions over the past decade, with land-use change making up the remaining 12%.
This is a marked change from the first half of the 20th century, when land-use emissions were larger than those from fossil fuels.
The figure below shows global emissions, split into fossil and land-use components.
Global per-capita fossil emissions peaked in the early 2010s and have since slightly declined. At around 4.6 tonnes per person in 2026, they are about 4% below that peak.
It is worth noting that this global average hides very large differences between countries. For example, 2025 per-capita emissions in India are only 2.2 tonnes, compared with 14.5 tonnes in the US.
