Sourcing the raw materials needed for a modern-day car is a risky business.

The extraction and processing of many of the world’s critical minerals brings a wide range of human rights, environmental and climate risks, from corruption to deforestation to forced labor. In many countries, creeping authoritarianism is making it harder for human rights activists to share information about risks, especially with foreign organizations and companies. Meanwhile, as competition for minerals heats up, human rights are in danger of being sidelined in the name of mineral security.

Car companies are already devoting time and resources to analyzing and addressing these risks. In a recent study, Lead the Charge, a coalition of climate, human rights and investor groups, found that most major automakers now have human rights policies in place and are increasingly pursuing responsibly sourced minerals to manufacture their electric vehicles. Many are also investing in initiatives to map their supply chains and identify potentially risky geographies or suppliers.

There is still a big gap, however, between having the right policies on paper and carrying them out.

The work of Human Rights Watch and Climate Rights International, spanning the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, Indonesia and the Philippines, sheds light on practical steps car companies can take to mitigate human rights risks in their supply chains, including measures some automakers have already started to take.

First, car companies and their suppliers need to invest in deeper, on-the-ground engagement with affected communities and workers. In 2023, for example, Mercedes staff visited Guinea to meet directly with communities suffering the effects of mining bauxite, the ore needed to make aluminum. Mercedes has since brought together German carmakers and Guinean and international advocates, who work closely with affected communities, to address — and ideally remedy — the impact of mining on communities’ water sources.

Second, car companies should coordinate to maximize the industry’s leverage. No single car company can easily address the full range of complex human rights concerns across their supply chain. But safe and effective spaces for collaboration do exist — and they are necessary for addressing industrywide risks. 

Many of the world’s biggest car companies, from Ford Motor Co. to Tesla to Volkswagen, are members of the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance, a voluntary organization bringing together mining companies, purchasers, labor groups and civil society organizations (including Human Rights Watch) to try to build and implement strong social, environmental and human rights standards and audit protocols for the mining industry.

Audits have many flaws, but, if conducted rigorously, safely and independently, can provide automakers with useful information on mining companies’ practices. Several car companies are closely following an audit by the initiative of Tenke Fungurume, a massive copper-cobalt mine and processing facility in Congo. A recent study alleged harmful emissions of sulfur dioxide at the site and resulting negative health impacts for local communities. CMOC Group Limited, which operates the mine, disputed the allegations. The company should now make public its own air pollution data. Pollution, labor rights violations and corruption remain key risks across the industrial mining sector in Congo, the world’s leading cobalt producer.

There have been other promising examples of collaboration among carmakers to address human rights risks in specific contexts. In Indonesia, the world’s largest supplier of nickel, automakers have organized joint visits to nickel industrial parks to monitor conditions and have worked together to raise concerns with local authorities regarding the human and environmental impacts of nickel mining and processing.

Finally, it is increasingly clear that strong regulations are an effective tool for driving change, and it’s essential for carmakers to get behind them. A key finding of the Lead the Charge Leaderboard is that recent European Union regulations, such as the corporate due diligence directive and the battery regulations, are playing an important role in driving improved responsible sourcing practices by automakers within and outside of the EU’s borders.

Regulations such as these deserve carmakers’ support because they create a level playing field that ensures that all companies, wherever they are located, are legally required to tackle the human rights impact of their business. Volvo and Polestar set a positive example by publicly speaking out against delaying the implementation of the battery regulations. Yet, in 2025, when the European Commission bowed to pressure to weaken the due diligence directive, automotive companies did not speak up in support of the law.

For a multitrillion-dollar industry that sits at the top of some of the world’s most consequential supply chains, responsible sourcing is not just good risk management — it represents an opportunity for automakers to use their influence to drive positive human rights outcomes for the workers and communities at the other end of those supply chains. The question is no longer whether this is achievable, but whether the industry will rise to the challenge.

This article is co-written by Jim Wormington, Associate Director for Corporate Accountability at Human Rights Watch, and Krista Shennum, Senior Researcher at Climate Rights International.