As Zambia Expands Critical Minerals Mining, Can New Regulations Balance Investment and Environmental Protection?

Zambia has set an ambitious target of raising copper production to three million metric tons a year by 2031. With global demand for transition minerals growing, the mining sector presents a significant opportunity to support the country’s economic transformation. However, as mining activity expands, so does the need to manage environmental and social risks, including deforestation, water and soil contamination, biodiversity loss and health risks to communities.   In January 2026, the government enacted the Environmental Management (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations, Statutory Instrument No. 3 of 2026, replacing the 1997 EIA Regulations (SI No. 28) and aligning the EIA framework with the Environmental Management Act No. 12 of 2011, as amended in 2023.   These reforms could make EIA processes more predictable, timely, and proportionate to project risks. The question is whether Zambia can make environmental regulation more efficient without making the approval process less rigorous.

What has changed under the new EIA regulations?

The 2026 Regulations expand and refine the 1997 classification system, grouping projects into five categories according to their expected environmental and social impacts, ranging from Class I (high to very high impacts) to Class V (minimal impacts).   Assessments are therefore based on risk. Higher-risk projects require more detailed assessment and consultation, while lower-risk activities face simpler requirements or exemptions.   EIA review fees follow the same logic. Under the 1997 regulations, fees were based primarily on project cost. The 2026 regulations instead base fees on impact classification, so a project with greater potential impacts pays more regardless of its investment value. Overall fees have also fallen substantially.   The 2026 Regulations give greater recognition to social impacts, shifting from “Environmental Impact Assessments” under the 1997 Regulations to “Environmental and Social Impact Assessments.” While they clarify public participation requirements they shorten review timelines and notification periods for public hearings.   The new rules further professionalize EIA practice by requiring the registration of environmental assessment experts and strengthening ZEMA’s oversight, while introducing stronger penalties for non-compliance.

An opportunity for a more focused and efficient system 

Taken together, these changes could make Zambia’s EIA more focused, efficient and professionalized. Risk-based classification lets ZEMA concentrate limited resources on the projects that pose the greatest risks, so the depth of scrutiny reflects a project’s potential impacts, not its price tag. Lower fees and simpler requirements for low-risk activities also reduce unnecessary costs for developers, while shorter timelines help reduce bureaucratic delays and improve regulatory certainty. 

Where the reforms could fall short

The same changes that could make the system more efficient also carry risks, especially as mining investment grows. Mining is inherently associated with environmental risks and potential impacts that require careful assessment and management. Shorter review timelines are only an improvement if regulators have sufficient time, expertise, and resources to scrutinize risks.  This will become increasingly challenging as Zambia expands mining investment: ZEMA reported steadily rising EIA applications between 2016 and 2022, and the drive to produce three million tons of copper annually is likely to add further pressure.

Source: ZEMA Press Statement (2023) https://www.zema.org.zm/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Scanned-press-statement-Final.pdf

Source: ZEMA Press Statement (2023) https://www.zema.org.zm/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Scanned-press-statement-Final.pdf

This pressure comes when ZEMA is already operating below its approved staffing establishment. Its 2024 Annual Report recorded 142 employees against an approved 246— 58 percent of staffing. Shorter timelines and rising application volumes could therefore strain the depth of assessments, site verification and public consultation. In 2025, ZEMA’s new board considered a backlog of 325 projects in four days—illustrating both the drive for greater efficiency and the challenge of balancing faster approvals with adequate scrutiny.

The challenge of balancing investment facilitation with environmental and social safeguards is also visible in ZEMA’s public messaging. In 2023, the Agency highlighted that it had approved more than US$5 billion in project investments in 2022, while in 2025 it announced that its new Board had “greenlit various projects of national interest.” Such messaging reflects ZEMA’s dual role in enabling timely investment while safeguarding environmental and social standards.

Priorities for making the reforms work

In September 2026, NRGI, in partnership with the Centre for Trade Policy and Development (CTPD), convened a one-day workshop in Lusaka for civil society organizations, media and other oversight actors to explore the new EIA framework and practical opportunities to strengthen transparency, public participation, monitoring and accountability. Discussions highlighted several steps that could help the reforms deliver:  

1. Effective implementation requires transparency and community participation

ZEMA cannot provide effective oversight alone. The new regulations allow the public to inspect EIA documents and obtain access to ZEMA's project register, albeit subject to ZEMA’s terms and conditions. But making information technically available is not enough. People need to be able to find, understand, and use it.   ZEMA could strengthen implementation by making project-level environmental information more easily accessible through a searchable online platform. While ZEMA has taken progressive steps to establish an online repository, it could be strengthened by ensuring all EIA documents, approval decisions and conditions, monitoring reports and relevant compliance or enforcement actions are available as opposed to only selected EIA reports. This would enable communities, journalists, civil society organizations, and other oversight actors to monitor whether environmental commitments are being met.   Community participation is equally important. Affected communities should have enough information and time to understand proposed projects, raise concerns, and influence decisions.  

2. ZEMA needs the resources and systems to deliver

The government must ensure that ZEMA has adequate staffing, technical expertise and financing, so that shorter timelines and rising applications do not come at the expense of thorough review, monitoring, and enforcement. ZEMA’s 2024 report puts its headcount at 142 employees against an approved establishment of 246. While this statistic is not evidence of compromised EIA reviews, it does suggest a capacity constraint.  Closing that gap would be a practical first step.   

3. Regulators need to work together

Effective implementation will require coordination across government. Mining projects require approvals from multiple institutions. In addition to ZEMA, the Minerals Regulation Commission (MRC) and the Water Resources Management Authority (WARMA) have important responsibilities.   Improved alignment of regulatory approvals, stronger inter-agency information sharing, and clearer communication to project developers could help prevent the erroneous interpretation of a single institutional authorization as constituting full approval to commence operations.    Improved coordination could reduce unnecessary duplication for investors while strengthening government oversight.

Implementation will determine whether the reforms succeed

While the new EIA regulations contain promising reforms, their benefits are not automatic.  Zambia should not have to choose between attracting mining investment and protecting its people and the environment. As mining expands, effective implementation of the new EIA regulations will be essential to ensuring that economic opportunities do not come at the expense of communities and the environment.