As the urgency of responding to climate change intensifies, the global transition to a low-carbon economy continues to drive unprecedented investment in renewable energy and the transition minerals essential to power it. The energy transition must be just and equitable to be both fast and sustainable. When projects are not grounded in these principles, public trust erodes and opposition grows, including in the form of litigation, leading to project delays and sustained social conflict, with negative consequences for communities, companies and the pace of the transition.
On this page...
To mitigate these risks, companies across the whole renewable energy value chain must adopt a rights-based approach anchored in shared prosperity, fair negotiations, and a duty of care for the human and environmental rights of those impacted by their activities. The growing use of litigation illustrates the consequences of failing to meet these expectations. Indeed, affected communities and workers are increasingly challenging the unfair “distribution of benefits and burdens” of the energy transition through human rights-based claims, as shown by cases featured in the Just Transition Litigation Tracking Tool. In some cases, courts have imposed fines, awarded substantial damages, or – most significantly – halted projects on a temporary or permanent basis.
This year we tracked 30 cases of just transition litigation, bringing the global total to 125 cases. These lawsuits, which target companies and states, span the whole renewable energy value chain, from transition mineral mining (bauxite, copper, cobalt, iron ore, lithium, manganese, nickel, rare earth minerals and zinc) to renewable energy projects (solar, wind and hydropower) – painting a picture of growing resistance to abuse which threatens the energy transition as a whole.
Rights holders’ experience of similar harms at both ends of the renewable energy value chain has implications for the speed and sustainability of the energy transition. Despite concerning trends of abuse in the renewable energy sector, though, mining continues to stand out as a hotspot for value chain abuse. As a result, resistance to poor practice is escalating far more rapidly in mining than in renewable energy operations. Moreover, not all minerals are used for energy transition needs: the AI-driven expansion of data centres and expanding national investments in the defence industry are also intensifying these pressures by increasing demand for energy and many of the same minerals required for low carbon energy systems.
Read our full methodology here.
Key findings based on 125 lawsuits include:
- Transition mineral mining continues to stand out as the sector associated with the highest numbers of reported abuses and subsequent litigation, accounting for 71% (89 cases) of all cases tracked globally. By comparison, renewable energy projects account for 29% (36 cases).
- Rights holders directly affected by projects are the people leading litigation efforts across the renewable energy value chain. Nearly half the cases (59) we have recorded were filed by Indigenous Peoples, with 38 (30%) filed by other local communities. Women are uniquely impacted by mining activities and disproportionately affected by violence near extractive sites, and were involved in initiating 14% (18) of the cases tracked (with 16 cases relating to the mining sector). Workers represented 11% (14) of the plaintiffs, with all cases arising in the transition minerals sector.
- Latin America and the Caribbean was home to more lawsuits than any other region, with 49 cases recorded (38 mining cases and 11 renewable energy cases).
- Ten cases were filed outside the country of alleged abuse. In these cases, rights holders in Latin America and Africa brought cases before European and North American courts to seek accountability for serious human rights abuses linked to transnational companies headquartered there.
- Transition mineral projects are most frequently associated with reported harms linked to the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment (59 cases or 66%) and communities’ livelihoods (45 or 51%). Access to water was an issue in 37 (42%) mining lawsuits, and rightsholders claimed that they were not adequately consulted about a transition mineral project in 36 cases (40%).
- Renewable energy projects impacted the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment in 26 cases (72%). Just over two thirds (24) of lawsuits related to renewable energy projects, rights holders alleged inadequate or insufficient consultation, and impact on communities’ livelihoods in over half (20) of the renewable energy cases tracked globally.
- In 62% (78) of all cases in the Tracking Tool (47 cases related to transition minerals and 31 cases linked to renewable energy projects), rights holders sought to stop the project. In 41% (32) of these cases (in 18 cases related to transition minerals and in 14 cases linked to renewable energies), the court at some point temporarily or permanently stopped the project or revoked the licence. This reflects material financial risk to mining and renewable energy companies, their investors, and the speed and sustainability of the transition as a whole.
Legal battle over community impacts of manganese mining in Chiatura, Georgia
Communities in Georgia’s Chiatura municipality have increasingly borne the social, environmental and health burdens of manganese mining. These impacts reached a critical point when a mining licence was issued allowing Georgian Manganese to conduct open-cast manganese extraction directly within village territory, including residents’ yards. In response, a local resident filed a lawsuit in February 2024 against the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture of Georgia seeking the partial annulment of the decision granting the mineral extraction licence, specifically challenging the provisions authorising open-cast mining in the village due to health and environmental impact of the mine. The case reflects broader community concerns about pollution, land degradation and the destabilisation of residential areas caused by extractive operations conducted in close proximity to homes.
Litigation emerged as the only viable option for the affected community, explains Green Alternative, one of the NGOs supporting the claimant. While legal proceedings are often costly and lengthy, this administrative case has remained relatively affordable, with lower city court fees and free legal representation provided by NGOs supporting the plaintiff. This assistance has been essential in enabling a community member to assert his rights to ensure accountability in transition mineral projects, and that mineral extraction is not prioritised at the expense of the community and the environment. The community’s expectations are grounded in protection rather than compensation: Residents hope to halt mining activities that threaten to destroy their homes and living environment.
As the case progresses, additional needs have become clear. Scientific expertise documenting the environmental and health impacts of open-pit manganese mining near residential areas is seen as crucial to strengthening the plaintiffs’ legal arguments. Beyond the courtroom, communities and their advocates also emphasise the importance of raising international awareness around the case to ensure that local harms linked to resource extraction are acknowledged rather than overlooked.
Latin America and the Caribbean saw the highest number of cases (49 cases: 38 mining; 11 renewables), followed by Europe and Central Asia (24 cases: 13 mining; 11 renewables) and North America (23: 16 mining, seven renewables).
Litigation takes place domestically (in the same country as where the abuse took place) in more than 90% (113) of the cases tracked. The ten transnational cases tracked (those filed in a different country from the country of abuse) have been brought by rights holders in Latin America and Africa before courts in Europe and North America, mostly to seek accountability for serious human rights abuses against transnational companies headquartered there. One case was brought before the Inter-American Court for Human Rights, and one before the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce.
Peasant farmers' legal battle over health impact of Ventos de São Clemente, Brazil
The Ventos de São Clemente wind complex has operated in close proximity to peasant farming communities in Pernambuco, northeast Brazil, since 2016, with some turbines located as close as 150 metres from homes. Residents have reported serious health impacts linked to turbine noise, as well as effects on livestock production, affecting families’ income and food security.
In March 2026, after progress through engagement with the Pernambuco State Environmental Agency (CPRH) began to unravel, the pastoral organisation linked to the Catholic Church Comissão Pastoral da Terra (CPT), which has supported the affected communities since 2016, filed a public-interest civil lawsuit against CPRH, the operating company, and its former and current owners (Casa dos Ventos and Echoenergia, respectively). The lawsuit seeks compensation, the shutdown of turbines located within 500 metres of homes, and the suspension of any licence renewal until a participatory reparations plan is presented.
“Faced with this worsening situation, we concluded that dialogue alone was no longer sufficient,” explained Mariana Vidal from CPT. According to Vidal, CPRH had taken steps to address the communities’ concerns, including refusing to renew the complex’s operating licence in 2025. However, after the company brought legal proceedings against CPRH, the agency began adopting a more “conciliatory approach” towards the company. “Litigation became necessary to help level the playing field and seek effective protection of community rights,” she added.
João Victor Venâncio, Comissão Pastoral da Terra
Vidal says the communities hope the legal action will help bring an end to the suffering they have endured for more than ten years and lead to a lasting solution, whether through a court order or because “the company feels compelled to act to reduce the liabilities and risks associated with the litigation.”
For its part, Echoenergia has stated that it is committed to complying with Ventos de São Clemente environmental legal obligations and that it is already implementing a range of mitigation actions as a protective measure, since no damage has been attested.
João Victor Venâncio, Comissão Pastoral da Terra
For CPT, the struggle of communities affected by Ventos de São Clemente raises a broader question about how Brazil’s renewable energy expansion is being implemented and who benefits from it. The organisation notes that because Brazil’s electricity system already relies predominantly on renewable sources, the rapid expansion of wind and solar projects is not primarily driven by the country’s domestic energy needs or by the need to address its principal sources of greenhouse gas emissions (deforestation and an extractive model of land use). Rather, it says, this expansion serves the commercial interests of energy companies and investment funds, as well as growing demand from wealthier countries for energy-intensive products such as green hydrogen.
Many projects are being developed in territories occupied and stewarded by peasant farmers, Indigenous Peoples, Quilombolas and other traditional communities, whose lands often play an important role in environmental conservation and climate change mitigation. “What we see are the territories of peripheral countries having their territorial planning shaped to meet the needs of core countries, while bearing all the burdens of this,” the CPT said, referring to impacts on health, the environment, livelihoods, food security and the right to land.
Failure to adopt a project rights-based approach leads to project delays and cancellations
A failure by companies and investors to adequately address the rights of local communities prior to starting projects can lead to expensive and lengthy legal disputes that may delay or cancel them. Where violations of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, workers or the local community are alleged, courts may impose fines, award hefty damages awards, or most significantly, order projects to be stopped temporarily or permanently.
These cases demonstrate that failure to respect rights is not only a human rights issues but an increasingly material legal, operational and financial risk for companies and investors, including through project delays, licence revocations, increased costs, supply-chain disruption and reputational damage.
Rights holders sought such stoppages in 62% (78) of all cases in the Tracking Tool (in 47 cases related to transition minerals and in 31 cases linked to renewable energy projects), and in 41% (32) of these cases, the courts ordered projects to be stopped either temporarily or permanently (in 18 cases related to transition minerals and in 14 cases linked to renewable energies). For example, in the US, the alleged failure to properly assess the environmental impact on a site of a cultural significance to Indigenous Peoples led to court decisions initially delaying the Big Sandy lithium mine project, and ultimately prompted Arizona Lithium to withdraw the project entirely. In India, the High Court of Rajasthan paused a solar energy project after a lawsuit alleged the project would destroy biodiverse land sacred to the local community. In northern Chile, alleged deficiencies in the consultation process with Indigenous Peoples for expansion of the Collahuasi copper mine have resulted in the project approval being annulled.
The data centre boom: a new challenge for a just energy transition
The litigation trends identified in this report may become even more significant as AI-driven growth in data centres increases demand for electricity, renewable energy infrastructure and transitional minerals. As major consumers of both power and mineral-intensive technologies, data centres are contributing to broader patterns of extractivism associated with the energy transition, thereby increasing pressure on lands, resources and the risk of conflict with communities. Without robust human rights and environmental safeguards, the pressures could intensify the community impacts, social conflicts and legal challenges already documented.
Data centres also rely on many of the same minerals required for renewable energy projects and wider electrification. As demand for these critical minerals grows, pressure on mining regions is increasing, particularly where Indigenous Peoples and other communities already face significant impact on their, environment, lands and livelihoods.
Without robust human rights and environmental due diligence, meaningful consultation and effective benefit sharing, new or expanded projects may face growing resistance from affected communities, including legal challenges.
Data centres themselves may also become sites of the same resistance. Emerging evidence suggests that Indigenous Peoples, vulnerable communities and local communities are raising concerns about their impact on land, water resources and climate. As with mining and renewable energy projects, inadequate consultations or weak impact assessment processes may increasingly result in legal challenges, project delays and growing community resistance.
Companies should:
Corporate duty of care for human rights
- Conduct robust human rights and environmental due diligence along the full value chain, paying particular attention to access to remedy by establishing effective operational-level grievance mechanisms for people directly impacted negatively by the project in the first place.
- Commit to a corporate duty of care for human rights and environmental due diligence beyond absent or insufficient national regulations.
- Renewable energy companies should adopt and implement a responsible mineral sourcing policy and engage with upstream suppliers to identify and address human rights risks in transition mineral supply chains.
Fair negotiations
- Engage in good-faith consultation with all affected rightsholders before, during, and after operations, including through full adherence to free, prior and informed consent for Indigenous Peoples regardless of legal requirements, prioritising those at heightened risk, and avoiding the dismissal of public opposition as uninformed.
- Adopt and implement a company-wide policy commitment to respect human rights defenders, to not tolerate or contribute to attacks and to work with defenders to create safe and enabling environments for engagement.
Shared prosperity
- Design and implement projects with a benefit-sharing approach, including through new models of co-management, ownership and cooperation, and that meaningfully include and empower Indigenous Peoples, frontline communities, workers and unions.
- Ensure these fair and equitable benefit sharing models are rights-based, addressing both procedural and substantive rights, adapted to local priorities and needs, and foster shared prosperity. A clear commitment to shared prosperity can help build trust, strengthen community support and lowers the risk of social conflict.
Investors should:
- Adopt stewardship and responsible investment policies and engage with investees in the mining and renewable energy sectors to close any gaps in human rights policies and practices.
- Commit to investment in renewable energy and transition mineral projects that respect human rights and the environment, including those favouring shared benefit outcomes for communities and workers, following a robust risk and impact assessment of investee companies.
- Publicly support human rights and environmental due diligence and corporate accountability legislation, as well as benefit-sharing frameworks.
For more detailed recommendations for investors and renewable energy companies, see our dedicated primers.
Authors and researchers: Elodie Aba, Laura Mont Castro, Charlotte Fanchon, Joon Nam, Thabata Pena Pereira and Lucas Schneider Veríssimo de Aquino.
Additional research support and contributions by BHRC’s international and regional teams.
Special thanks to the Catholic Church Comissão Pastoral da Terra (CPT) and Green Alternative for sharing their cases with us.
Find out more
Just transition litigation tracking tool
Explore the full database of cases
Transition Minerals Tracker
Tracking the human rights implications of the mineral boom powering the transition to low-carbon economies.
Raphael Pouget, Climate Visuals Countdown
Renewable Energy and Human Rights Benchmark 2025
A rights-respecting renewable energy sector is vital if we are to deliver a fast and fair energy transition. Our fourth global Renewable Energy and Human Rights Benchmark examines the human rights policies and practices of 35 of the largest wind and solar developers and manufacturers.