By Beatriz Adas; Eleanor Mensah; Leo Johnson

Going Global: A Legal Podcast for Today’s Global Challenges is a collaborative Podcast series between Newcastle Law School and São Paulo State University (Unesp). It is dedicated to discussing contemporary legal issues related to global transformations and the challenges faced by the international (and post national) community. This series comprises three episodes that will explore Extractivism as a global issue. This is Episode 3 ‘Mining in Africa: traceability and global companies’.

Mineral resources play an important role in the global economy, but their extraction often raises complex legal, political, and social questions. This episode of the Going Global podcast explored these issues through the case of Angola’s mining sector with Professor Afonso ‘Mosquito’ Garrido, whose expertise spans governance, technology, compliance, and sustainability. The discussion examined topics including conflict (blood) diamonds, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, the Lobito Corridor, and the challenges of regulating global mineral supply chains. Through these themes, both the strengths and limitations of international legal frameworks were examined in addressing issues of conflict, governance, and economic development. The episode primarily explored questions related to international law and environmental governance, highlighting the growing importance of legal mechanisms designed to promote transparency, accountability, and sustainable development within the mining sector.

This episode was developed and presented by Beatriz Adas from São Paulo State University (Unesp) and Newcastle University Global Law students Eleanor Mensah and Leo Johnson. The subject is particularly relevant because mineral resources are essential for global industries, including technology, energy, and infrastructure. However, mining benefits are often accompanied by concerns regarding governance, corruption, environmental degradation, and social inequality. Understanding how legal mechanisms address these challenges helps to explain the broader relationship between natural resources, development, and international justice.

One of the first topics explored was the Lobito Corridor, a major railway and infrastructure project that connects mining regions in Central Africa to the Angolan coast. This project was compared to Brazil’s Grande Carajás Programme, another large-scale mining enterprise . This comparison raised an important question: do these projects promote genuine development for local communities, or do they mainly serve international markets? Professor Garrido explained that while infrastructure can create economic growth, its success depends on how effectively governments ensure that local populations benefit from those investments.

The discussion then moved to the issue of conflict diamonds, often referred to as ‘blood diamonds.’ Using the example of Sierra Leone’s civil war, the ways in which diamonds were used to fund armed groups and prolong conflict were analysed. This led to a wider discussion about the role of international organisations and whether stronger or earlier intervention could have reduced the human cost of the conflict.

A significant part of the episode focused on the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), which was created to prevent the trade of diamonds linked to armed conflict. While the scheme has helped reduce the circulation of conflict diamonds, Professor Garrido discussed some of its limitations. In particular, the Kimberley Process focuses mainly on diamonds that fund rebel groups and may not adequately address issues such as corruption, inequality, or harmful practices carried out by governments and corporations. This raises questions about whether international legal frameworks always reflect the realities faced by local communities.

Finally, Angola’s recent efforts to improve diamond traceability were explored. By tracking the origin of diamonds throughout the supply chain, governments and businesses hope to increase transparency and reduce illegal activity. However, the discussion highlighted that traceability alone cannot solve every governance challenge and must be supported by strong institutions and effective regulation.

Overall, this episode demonstrated that mineral extraction is not only an economic issue but also a legal and governance challenge. The discussion encouraged listeners to think critically about the role of international law in balancing economic development with justice, accountability, and sustainability.

By Aliya Khan; Daniel Nobre Fernandes da Silva; Emma Bickers; Raquel Freitas Colaço

Going Global: A Legal Podcast for Today’s Global Challenges is a collaborative podcast series between Newcastle Law School and São Paulo State University (Unesp). It is dedicated on discussing contemporary legal issues related to global transformations and the challenges faced by international (and post national) community. This series comprehend three episodes that will explore Extractivism as a global issue. This is episode 2 ‘Posthumanism as a new standard for responsible extractivism?’. It was hosted by Emma Bickers and Aliya Khan (Newcastle Univerisity), and Raquel Freitas Colaço and Daniel Nobre Fernandes da Silva (Unesp).

Introduction

How can a legal system built on human mastery and resource extraction solve a global ecological crisis? In this episode, we come together to critically evaluate the boundaries of public international law in the face of climate breakdown. Our discussion challenges orthodox environmental frameworks and explores radical alternatives to shift how the law conceptualizes the natural world.

The Speaker

Our guest for this episode is Dr. Emily Jones, a NUAcT Fellow at Newcastle Law School. Dr. Jones is a renowned scholar specializied in Public International Law, Environmental Law, and critical Legal theories, specifically pioneering feminist, queer, and post humanist approaches to jurisprudence. Her groundbreaking work re-examines foundational concepts of sovereignty, exploitation, and legal personhood.

Overview of the Field: Why It Matters

Traditional international environmental law operates within a deeply anthropocentric framework, viewing nature primarily as an inert ‘resource’ destined for human appropriation, property, and capital accumulation. Under this orthodox paradigm, well-established legal principles like permanent state sovereignty over natural resources and the ‘sustainable development’ model often act as legal shields that facilitate, rather than restrict, ecological destruction and global extractivism. Discussing critical jurisprudence is essential since it uncovers how international law historically enabled colonial plunder and continues to reproduce North-South structural inequalities. To confront issues like deep-sea mining or the corporate accountability gap in ecocide, the legal architecture must be destabilized from its core human-centered bias.

What is Discussed in the Episode

Throughout the episode, the conversation flows through three major conceptual pillars:Posthumanism and Critical Architecture: We dive into the definition of (a feminist) posthuman theory, exploring how it dismantles both the hierarchy between humans (along axes of race, gender, and class) and the dangerous split between humans and the non-human world. Dr. Jones answers hard-hitting questions about whether a fundamentally human-centred legal structure can ever genuinely safeguard global supply chains.

• The Rights of Nature vs. The Relational Approach: Moving beyond the ‘Universal Declaration of Mother Earth’, we evaluate the limits of standard legal transfers. Dr. Jones explains the vital need to shift away from granting nature human-like ‘rights’ – which can easily be co-opted by neoliberal interests – and instead adopt an indigenous-informed, relational approach centred on human kinship and reciprocal responsibilities to care for dynamic ecosystems. We also reflect on how the law is evolving following recent regional climate litigation, such as the Klimaseniorinnen case at the ECHR.
• Extractivism and Hope: Finally, we confront the stark realities of sustainable extractivism and international jurisdiction in unregulated areas like the deep seabed. Despite the overwhelming scale of global ecocide, the episode concludes with a profound reflection on ‘queer hope’ and political affirmation, rejecting paralysis to imagine incremental, transformative steps toward structural climate justice.

By Livia Porto; Luísa Sasaki; Ekaterina (Katherine) Iosifova; Candence Willis.

Going Global: A Legal Podcast for Today’s Global Challenges is a collaborative Podcast series between Newcastle Law School and São Paulo State University (Unesp). It is dedicated to discussing contemporary legal issues related to global transformations and the challenges faced by the international (and post national) community. This series comprises three episodes that will explore Extractivism as a global issue. This is Episode 1 ‘Introduction to Global issues: regulating extractivism in a divided world’. Itis hosted by Livia Porto and Luísa Sasaki (Unesp), and Ekaterina (Katherine) Iosifova and Candence Willis (Newcastle University).

In this episode, we welcome Professor Eduardo Saad-Diniz and João Victor Gianecchini to discuss the intersections between extractivism, global geopolitics, environmental governance, and international law. Professor Eduardo Saad-Diniz holds a Habilitation in Criminology and a PhD in Criminal Law from the University of São Paulo (USP) and is also affiliated with the ARC Foundation – Amazonia R&D Center in Manaus, Brazil. João Victor Gianecchini is a PhD candidate at the University of Frankfurt, Germany, supported by a scholarship from the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Foundation, and holds an LL.M. from USP.

The episode explores extractivism as a central issue in contemporary international debates. Extractivism as a concept surrounds the intensive exploitation of natural resources, especially in environmentally sensitive regions such as the Amazon rainforest. In a context marked by the worsening of environmental crises and the reorganization of international geopolitical relations, discussing extractivism becomes essential to understanding the economic, social, environmental, and legal impacts resulting from these activities.

The discussion examines how extractivist practices in the Amazon Rainforest are shaped by shifting global power dynamics and competing economic interests. The guests analyse the relationship between environmental degradation, resource exploitation, and contemporary geopolitical transformations, including the growing influence of BRICS countries and changing approaches to international cooperation. Particular attention is given to the implications of these developments for environmental governance through green criminology and the future of global responses to the climate crisis.

Another relevant issue discussed in the episode concerns environmental crimes and the limitations of domestic monitoring and investigative mechanisms in Brazil. In this context, the guests reflect on the possible role of international organizations and non-governmental organizations in overseeing extractivist activities and ensuring accountability for environmental harm at the local level and across borders. Furthermore, they discuss whether existing international institutions are sufficient to address such challenges or whether new global mechanisms for environmental protection should be created.

Finally, the episode turns its attention to the future of the Amazon rainforest and the urgent measures necessary to prevent the worsening of environmental degradation. The guests emphasize that the Amazon represents an issue of global relevance due to its environmental, social, economic, and climate impacts. By combining legal, geopolitical, and environmental perspectives, the episode offers a critical reflection on one of the most pressing debates of our time and highlights the importance of expanding international dialogue on sustainability, global governance, and environmental protection.