(Dakar, May 27, 2026) — Serious environmental, rights, and climate risks of the Kon Kweni iron-ore mine project in Guinea identified in a new report mean that the Guinean authorities should withhold approval for the project until a binding and enforceable plan is adopted to address the concerns, Climate Rights International said today. Ivanhoe Atlantic, a United States-based company, has said it is preparing “for construction readiness” of the mine, which is approximately 80 kilometers from Nzérékoré and adjacent to the borders with Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia.

The report by the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) covers a 1,550-hectare zone (a 625-hectare concession and a 925-hectare mining perimeter) that was removed from the heart of the Mount Nimba UNESCO World Heritage Site by a 2010 decree. NCEA, which undertook an evaluation of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the project at the request of the Guinean government, found that “the ESIA’s compliance with regulatory requirements and international best practices is limited.” According to the report, the project in its current state “creates a major risk of non-compliance and irreversible impacts on biodiversity.” Mount Nimba, a site of Outstanding Universal Value, largely surrounds the mining concession.

“The eagerness to begin operations by Ivanhoe Atlantic stands in stark contrast to the limited attention it appears to have paid to potentially major negative environmental, human, and climate consequences revealed in this new study,” said Fabien Offner, researcher at Climate Rights International. “Similar concerns were raised in 2024 but went unaddressed, indicating that Ivanhoe is unable or unwilling to fully reckon with the project’s expected major impacts.”

Public consultations and the project’s grievance mechanism appear to have been wholly inadequate, according to the report. Although a consultation process was conducted in several phases between 2020 and 2025, the report notes that “the uneven quality of the records makes it impossible to clearly verify which contributions were taken into account.” Civil society consultation was reportedly limited to two organizations, “one of which is a service provider,” with no recognized environmental NGO involved. As for the grievance mechanism, “the essential elements needed to ensure its effective implementation remain at the level of intention,” while no evaluation has been carried out on the mechanism that has supposedly been active for several years.

From a climate perspective, the study says the project “does not account for the cumulative impacts arising from deforestation, climate change, and planned mining activities in the area,” and the greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy appears “limited.” According to the ESIA, of the net loss of 1,790 hectares of land, 485 hectares will be forest, including 70 hectares of montane and submontane primary forest, despite the fact that “halting deforestation by mainstreaming sustainable forest management and expanding the network of protected areas” is one of the key objectives Guinea set for itself in its 2025 Nationally Determined Contribution submitted to the United Nations.

Climate Rights International pointed out that Guinea recently voted in favor of a UN General Assembly resolution affirming the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision on state obligations with respect to climate change. The resolution called on all states to take all possible steps to avoid causing significant damage to the climate and environment, including emissions produced within their borders, and to follow through on their existing climate pledges under the Paris Agreement. The 2025 Guinean Constitution also enshrines among its core principles “the preservation of the environment and ecosystems.”

From a social standpoint, the assessment of social impacts presents “significant gaps,” according to the report. Beyond the fact that “no budget estimate for the closure [of the mine] is provided… a dedicated influx assessment is missing, which would allow for anticipating and quantifying migration induced beyond direct and indirect employees.”

The vulnerability of herders in the locality of Siakata “is acknowledged,” but “no concrete measures are proposed to mitigate the impacts related to pasture fragmentation, water access, or land-use tensions with farmers.”

As for biodiversity preservation, the “Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) mentioned in the Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP) is very succinct and does not meet the requirements” of the International Finance Corporation or UNESCO obligations to preserve the Outstanding Universal Value of the Nimba Mountains. The study indicates that the project “proposes no realistic solution” for restoration due to “the potential loss of chimpanzees and viviparous toads.” The presence of the vast majority of the world’s population of the Mount Nimba viviparous toad — an endemic species — within the mining concession “must be considered as potentially calling into question the feasibility of the project.”

Finally, the ESIA provides only a partial account of expected impacts, as it covers only the first phase of the Kon Kweni project, while phases 2 and 3 — already envisioned — are entirely absent from the assessment, according to the report. The ESIA also fails to specify “the total volumes of estimated resources or reserves, either for the Château deposit or for the concession as a whole, despite the fact that an extension to other deposits is being considered for later phases.”

The plan calls for Nimba iron ore to be transported to Yekepa, in Liberia, and then shipped by rail to the port of Buchanan on the Atlantic coast. In March 2026, Ivanhoe announced that the Government of Liberia had accepted another ESIA for use of Liberian transport and logistics infrastructure for the Kon Kweni project. Liberia was one of only eight states to vote against the United Nations General Assembly resolution supporting the International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion on climate change—a vote which has sparked outrage among Liberian environmental groups.

“As things currently stand, the Kon Kweni project, in which the Guinean government holds a 15% stake, demonstrates a lack of regard for the views of those affected or for the fate of an irreplaceable natural site of significant climatic importance and exceptional biodiversity,” said Offner. “Ivanhoe should immediately address the concerns raised in the study or drop the project. Guinean authorities should withhold approval for the project until a binding and enforceable plan is adopted.”