About the projects
Ulanga District is a landscape of fertile valleys, wetlands, forests and agricultural land. Communities grow maize, rice, beans and vegetables, keep livestock and obtain food, materials and income from rivers and forests. Women have traditionally used locally available graphite in pottery, while bamboo supports weaving and other household crafts. The land also contains ancestral graves and sacred worship places known as ludewa.
Graphite is the principal material used in the anodes of most lithium-ion batteries. Its growing strategic importance is tied to electric vehicles, renewable-energy storage and digital technologies. Tanzania has consequently promoted its deposits as a route into global clean-technology supply chains.
-
Mahenge Graphite Project
The Mahenge Graphite Project is owned by Australian company Black Rock Mining and managed through Faru Graphite Corporation. Black Rock holds 84% of Faru, while the Tanzanian government has a 16% free-carried interest.
The proposed mine would produce up to 340,000 tonnes of graphite concentrate annually over more than 25 years. As of mid-2026, early earthworks, access-road compensation, grave relocation and preparation of the Mdindo stream-diversion channel were underway, but full construction and commercial production had not begun.
Faru’s resettlement plans include replacement housing at Idenke, public infrastructure and livelihood-restoration measures. Community testimony presents a more difficult picture. Some households received cash compensation without replacement farmland capable of sustaining them. Families were reportedly promised approximately two hectares of farmland, but not all received it, while residents relocated to Idenke describe its soil as drier and less productive than the fertile land they lost.
The Development Bank of Southern Africa approved approximately US$59.6 million for the project. The Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa, Tanzania’s CRDB Bank and POSCO International have also been associated with its financing or commercial development.
-
Mahenge Liandu Graphite Project
The Mahenge Liandu Project is controlled by London-listed Armadale Capital. It is planned as an open-pit mine producing approximately 60,000 tonnes of graphite concentrate annually over an initial operating life of about 17 years.
The project has completed feasibility and environmental work but has not entered production. Communities have raised concerns about the amount and quality of replacement land, the proximity of proposed resettlement areas to forest or conservation boundaries and whether compensation would allow farming households to restore their livelihoods. Public information on a completed financing package remains limited.
-
Epanko Graphite Project
The Epanko Graphite Project is owned by Australian company EcoGraf and would be operated through Duma TanzGraphite Limited. EcoGraf holds 84%, while the Tanzanian government holds the remaining 16%.
In March 2025, the government granted Epanko a 25-year special mining licence and expanded the project area from approximately 9.6 to 18.9 square kilometres. Its first stage is designed to produce approximately 73,000 tonnes of graphite concentrate annually. The project remains in pre-production, and discussions with families using land within the project area are continuing.
KfW IPEX-Bank has been mandated to arrange up to US$105 million in senior debt, potentially supported by Germany’s Untied Loan Guarantee programme. The European Union has also explored possible support as part of its effort to diversify critical-mineral supplies. These relationships should be distinguished from fully disbursed project finance.
Cumulative community impacts
Although the mines are at different stages, land acquisition and relocation are already altering community life. Residents experience the projects cumulatively because all require land, roads, water and infrastructure within the same district. Separate assessments can obscure their combined effects on farms, forests, wetlands and cultural sites.
Families report pressure to leave productive land before replacement houses and farms are ready. Cash payments may cover assessed crops, structures and individual plots without replacing the food and income generated over many years. Moving households onto dry or exhausted soil turns compensation into a temporary payment for the permanent loss of a livelihood.
Thirty-six affected families were reportedly promised rent and food assistance while awaiting permanent housing. According to community testimony, this support was withdrawn before the houses were completed, placing families at risk of eviction and food insecurity. Collective advocacy later secured its reinstatement.
Staggered relocation has also fragmented settlements and increased risks for those left behind. Children face longer journeys to schools and clinics, sometimes through increasingly deserted areas or places affected by seasonal flooding and wildlife.
Women lose livelihoods that formal valuation processes often overlook. Pottery, bamboo weaving, farming and gathering forest products provide income and some economic independence. The loss of graphite-decorated pottery is especially revealing: a mineral used within local culture is being converted into an internationally traded commodity while women lose access to the land and materials that sustained their use of it.
Communities are also concerned about future impacts on rivers, wetlands and groundwater. Because the mines are not yet in commercial production, anticipated pollution must be distinguished from impacts already associated with early works. Publicly accessible baseline studies are essential if future changes to water, air, soil and biodiversity are to be measured.
Cultural harm cannot be resolved simply by paying to move graves or structures. Ludewa are living places of worship and communication with ancestors. Traditional custodians should determine whether relocation is culturally permissible and how sensitive sites are recorded and protected.
Residents describe consultation as largely focused on compensation after mining has already been approved. Meetings may explain where families will move or how property will be valued without allowing them to influence the project’s footprint, timing or acceptability. The government’s position as regulator, promoter and minority shareholder in Mahenge and Epanko further complicates communities’ ability to obtain an independent hearing.
Local advocates also report arrests, detention and threats against people challenging mining plans or broken relocation commitments. More serious allegations involving violence or disappearances require independent investigation and should not be attributed to a particular company without further evidence. The resulting fear nevertheless undermines any claim that participation is free.
About the community-led struggle
Affected villagers organise with support from Ulanga Paralegals and the Justice and Empowerment Organization. Community paralegals provide accessible information about land, compensation, environmental obligations and administrative procedures. They help families document crops, trees, structures, customary land uses and promises made during meetings, creating records that can be compared with resettlement plans and compensation schedules.
Justice and Empowerment Organization supports legal awareness, documentation and collective advocacy across the three project areas. Women’s Action Towards Economic Development has also documented displacement, compensation and the loss of women’s livelihoods.
The campaign to restore rent and food assistance for the 36 displaced households showed the value of collective pressure. Residents and advocates raised the issue with district authorities, leading the district commissioner to intervene and support to resume. This did not provide permanent housing or productive land, but it prevented families from carrying the immediate cost of an incomplete relocation process.
Women have confronted officials publicly about promises that remain unfulfilled. Their advocacy has broadened the struggle beyond compensation paid to male household heads, drawing attention to food production, water, craft livelihoods, children’s education and extended family networks. Communities also use songs, poetry and public testimony alongside petitions and legal advocacy, enabling broader participation and expressing forms of loss that valuation documents cannot capture.
Their demands include complete environmental and resettlement information in Kiswahili; fertile replacement land; completed housing before displacement; continued food and rental assistance until livelihoods are restored; and recognition of forests, wetlands, sacred sites and informal land uses. Families want to relocate together rather than being dispersed, with safe access to water, schools, healthcare and markets.
Advocacy also targets the institutions enabling the projects. Communities want KfW IPEX-Bank, the Development Bank of Southern Africa and other financial or commercial partners to assess cumulative impacts and withhold support while resettlement and cultural harms remain unresolved.
Community alternatives are rooted in the existing rural economy. Residents want investment in farming, irrigation, storage, livestock, local markets, pottery and bamboo weaving. They have also proposed strengthening Musaragambo, a tradition of collective voluntary labour through which neighbours work together on farms, homes and community projects.
Community positions are not uniform. Some residents want projects stopped until violations are remedied, while others may accept mining under conditions of fair compensation, environmental protection and meaningful benefit-sharing. Both positions insist that communities must exercise real power over decisions affecting their land and future.
Further resources