The risk of neocolonial exploitation in the global rush for critical minerals must be addressed by the government as it formulates its official supply chain strategy, say civil society campaigners.

They have said the scrabble for access is being greenwashed as wealthier economies around the world attempt to line up a host of minerals that are essential to the manufacture of hi-tech products, including cobalt, lithium and nickel.

While the importance of such minerals to the green transition is often touted, with many crucial to the manufacture of turbines, solar panels and other low carbon energy sources, campaigners point out that much of the demand comes from the arms and consumer tech industries.

“To have a chance at success, the green transition cannot be built on the exploitation of poorer countries by unaccountable corporations,” said Cleodie Rickard, the policy manager at Global Justice Now.

“That’s why the UK government must seize the opportunity to set out a new approach in its upcoming critical minerals strategy. That starts with delineating which minerals are really critical for what end, and prioritising those needed for public goods of a green future – not the likes of arms companies’ profits.”

By 2040, the world is expected to need four times as many critical minerals as it does today, and while the US deal with Ukraine for access to its mineral wealth has hit the headlines, deals have also been struck more quietly around the world, away from public attention.

The UK government has already signed non-binding agreements with Saudi Arabia, Australia, Kazakhstan and Zambia in an effort to corner their mineral resources, and is this year poised to publish a 10-year critical minerals strategy to support the “industries of tomorrow”.

But in a joint briefing released on Thursday, 17 organisations, including the Trade Justice Movement, Global Justice Now, Corporate Justice Coalition and Friends of the Earth say that without safeguards, the UK and other powerful nations risk perpetuating a system of neocolonial exploitation that “sacrifices justice for the sake of convenience”.

The increased levels of mining needed to extract minerals risks disrupting ecosystems and creating water scarcity, as well as workers’ rights abuses, violation of Indigenous rights and occupational safety and health issues.

The new strategy, they say, must clearly differentiate between minerals needed for the energy transition, and commit to limiting extraction and the principles of the circular economy. It must also ensure that bilateral agreements with producer countries respect core UN and International Labour Organization human rights and labour rights conventions, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Paris agreement on climate change.

Tom Wills, the director of the Trade Justice Movement, said: “The UK’s approach to securing critical minerals must not repeat the mistakes of the past, where the drive for resource extraction left behind a trail of environmental degradation and human suffering.

“The UK has a responsibility to lead a sustainable and fair global transition to clean energy which prioritises both environmental protection and human rights. We cannot afford to perpetuate a system that sacrifices justice for the sake of convenience.”

The Department for Business and Trade, which is responsible for the UK’s critical minerals strategy, has been contacted for comment.