Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 Available online 7 May 2024 0301-4207/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by- nc-nd/4.0/). A systematic framework for compilation of critical raw material lists and their importance for South Africa Glen T. Nwaila a,*, Julie E. Bourdeau b, Steven E. Zhang b, Nelson Chipangamate a, Imraan Valodia c,d, Muhammad Ahsan Mahboob a, Thakaramahlaha Lehohla a, Mulundumina Shimaponda-Nawa a, Raymond J. Durrheim e, Yousef Ghorbani f a Wits Mining Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, 1 Jan Smuts Ave., Johannesburg, 2000, South Africa b 39 Kiewiet Street, Helikon Park, Randfontein, 1759, South Africa c Southern Centre for Inequality Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa d Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa e School of Geosciences, University of the Witwatersrand, 1 Jan Smuts Ave., Johannesburg, 2000, South Africa f College of Health and Science, School of Chemistry, University of Lincoln, Joseph Banks Laboratories, Green Lane, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, LN6 7DL, United Kingdom A R T I C L E I N F O Keywords: CRMs South Africa Ranking Circular economy Mineral resources Policy ESG A B S T R A C T Mineral resources are important contributors to the global economy and societal wellbeing. Directly, they pro- vide employment, revenue and taxes through the extraction, processing and sale of minerals. Indirectly, they are essential to all modern industries, including: energy, manufacturing, construction, biotic and abiotic resource extraction and agriculture. The principle that ‘one cannot understand the value of what they have until they measure it’ is particularly relevant with critical raw materials (CRMs). CRM is a concept that categorises select resources (mainly minerals and metals) as critical in the sense that, at a national level, they are essential and difficult to replace, and their supply is prone to disruption. It is becoming increasingly recognised that the continuity of civilisation and living standards as some have envisioned them in the future is constrained by the quality and quantity of various minerals. National-level strategic planning, including energy policy, foreign relations policy, geopolitical operations, national defence, education and infrastructure planning, among others, all require knowledge of the requirement and supply of raw materials towards a practical strategic imple- mentation. Hence, a national CRM framework is essential for a prosperous, productive and stable future. To effectively manage the supply and use of CRMs, it is important to comprehend both their formal (e.g., economic) and informal (e.g., social and environmental) values, and to measure and monitor these values effectively over time. This study examines international practices and methodologies as components of a comprehensive CRM framework. We then propose a prototype CRM framework for South Africa as such a framework is currently missing. All CRM frameworks feature one or more rating schemes to identify the degree of criticality of raw materials. The actual rating metrics are divided into dimensions (or factors), such as: socio-economic importance, tech- nological importance, environmental, social and governance risks. Such dimensions are important due to the following reasons. • Delineating criticality from non-criticality: by rank-ordering CRMs based on various factors, a country can identify which ones are the most important for its economy, industry and national security. This information can help policymakers prioritise the development of domestic produc- tion and secure a stable supply of CRMs. • Assessing resource sustainability and supply stability: by rating CRMs based on environmental, social and ethical factors, a country can assess the sustainability of its resource use and identify * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: glen.nwaila@wits.ac.za (G.T. Nwaila), bourdeau.julie.e@gmail.com (J.E. Bourdeau), ezhan053@uottawa.ca (S.E. Zhang), nelson. chipangamate@wits.ac.za (N. Chipangamate), Imraan.Valodia@wits.ac.za (I. Valodia), mahsan.mahboob@wits.ac.za (M.A. Mahboob), thaka.lehohla@wits.ac.za (T. Lehohla), mulundumina.shimaponda@wits.ac.za (M. Shimaponda-Nawa), Raymond.Durrheim@wits.ac.za (R.J. Durrheim), Yousef.ghorbani@ltu.se (Y. Ghorbani). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Resources Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resourpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105045 Received 3 April 2023; Received in revised form 13 November 2023; Accepted 27 April 2024 mailto:glen.nwaila@wits.ac.za mailto:bourdeau.julie.e@gmail.com mailto:ezhan053@uottawa.ca mailto:nelson.chipangamate@wits.ac.za mailto:nelson.chipangamate@wits.ac.za mailto:Imraan.Valodia@wits.ac.za mailto:mahsan.mahboob@wits.ac.za mailto:thaka.lehohla@wits.ac.za mailto:mulundumina.shimaponda@wits.ac.za mailto:Raymond.Durrheim@wits.ac.za mailto:Yousef.ghorbani@ltu.se www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03014207 https://www.elsevier.com/locate/resourpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105045 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105045 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105045 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105045&domain=pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 2 areas for improvement. This information can help policymakers develop strategies to mitigate resource depletion, and supply chain disruption, minimise negative environmental and social impacts, and promote responsible resource management. • Supporting informed decision-making: an ordered ranking of CRMs provides quantitative and qualitative information to governmental bodies, industry and other stakeholders to support informed decision-making, including strategic planning. This information can help stakeholders make informed choices about the sources and types of CRMs they use and the sustainability of their resource use. • Promoting transparency and accountability: adopting suitable business ethical dimensions, such as through a corporate social responsibility framework, enables a country to promote transparency and accountability in its resource use and supply chains. This approach can help reduce illicit financial flows, corruption, and abuse of power, while increasing trust and confidence in the resource sector. • Innovation and investment opportunities: a CRM framework enables a nation to establish policy conditions that foster innovation and investment in key activities such as measuring, monitoring, sustainability, extracting, responsible processing, and efficient use of CRMs. Findings from this study underscores the necessity of a structured CRM framework in South Africa to effec- tively manage the complexities of resource management, economic ground, and sustainability. Integrating these frameworks into national policies can enable South Africa to secure a sustainable, economically viable, and environmentally responsible future. Such strategic initiatives are impor tant for national security, industrial policy, structural transformation, and economic stability, as well as aligning with global initiatives for respon- sible sourcing and climate change. 1. Introduction Many raw materials are increasingly becoming critical to the conti- nuity of modern societies. In Global North countries, the concept of critical raw materials (CRMs) is increasingly well developed and has already begun to shape national policy, economic growth, scientific inquiry and infrastructure planning (e.g., European Commission, 2020; Kelley et al., 2021; Government of Canada, 2022). For example, the European Union’s 5th CRM list has a total of 34 CRMs (European Com- mission, 2023). CRMs are used in a variety of industries, including: 1) high-tech/technology (Bobba et al., 2020), 2) energy (Grandell et al., 2016; Martin et al., 2022), 3) defence (Powell-Turner and Antill, 2017), and 4) infrastructure (Eid et al., 2016), among others. In the context of modern societal issues, for instance, CRMs play a key role in the green energy transition, but their supply is at risk of disruption (Ghorbani et al., 2024b; Martin et al., 2022; Ghorbani et al., 2024a). Since the exact needs of various countries generally vary, the definition, value and importance of CRMs also vary by country or super-national groups (Hayes and McCullough, 2018). Some countries, such as Canada and the United States use the terminology ‘critical minerals’ and ‘strategic minerals’, respectively, to refer to materials of a similar definition. In this paper, we adopt the term CRMs to generalise the nomenclature of all such materials. South Africa is a country undergoing a transition towards greater socio-economic equality by integrating customary indigenous practices, modern rule-of-law principles, while taking global trends towards sus- tainability into account.. In system terms, the global and South African socio-economic resources, as well as other related systems, are under- going a period of rapid evolution in response to both internal and external drivers. Navigating these rapid and multi-level societal changes requires a clear view of the role of CRMs, in terms of their risks and impacts, to enable coordinated, well-informed and timely decisions on a national level. Presently, there is no established CRM list for South Af- rica or even a CRM list with an identifiably African focus. This means that other CRM lists have less meaning for Africa, mainly because of disparities in economic, infrastructure and societal development, as well as cultural differences. This unfortunately creates an unequal footing for the planning of the South African economy, infrastructure, national policy and international engagement, because other global interests interact with South Africa with an a-priori and informed goal, while South Africa does not yet have an equivalent vision. This potentially creates a situation that could enable ‘mineral colonialism’ – the target- ing of under-informed but resource-rich countries, such as African countries, by mineral-poor countries to secure their future supplies. This study attempts to create a framework that generalises known method- ology and rationale to permit the creation of a CRM list that benefits to South Africa. Consistent with existing methodologies, we define South African CRMs as materials that: 1) make a significant economic contri- bution to key sectors; 2) have a notable high supply risk(s) due to very- high import dependence; 3) exhibit a high level of concentration in other countries and/or regions; and 4) have generally limited, to no (viable) substitutes, because of their unique and reliable properties for current and future applications (Ferro and Bonollo, 2019). South Africa is a major producer of many CRMs, as per non-South African definitions, including: vanadium, chromium, iron and manga- nese, and hosts the world’s largest known reserves of platinum group metals (PGMs; Hofmann et al., 2018; Nwaila et al., 2022a). In absence of a South African CRM list, we here discuss the contribution of externally-defined CRMs to South Africa. The benefits of a South African CRM list would obviously extend these contributions in the future. The mining and processing of CRMs is a significant contributor to the South African economy, providing employment and revenue for the country (Van der Merwe, 2011; Marais et al., 2022). The value-adding stages after mineral processing are generally foreign to South Africa. However, the supply of CRMs in South Africa faces several challenges (Nwaila et al., 2022a). Notably, the increasing global demand for CRMs is adding pressure on existing supplies (Martin et al., 2022), and declining ore grades are making it increasingly difficult to extract these materials (Nwaila et al., 2022a). Additionally, the extraction and processing of CRMs can have significant environmental and social impacts, including air and water pollution (Nwaila et al., 2022a), land degradation and displacement of communities (Fayiga et al., 2018). These impacts can have long-term consequences on the wellbeing of affected communities, as well as the sustainability of the minerals industry (Olufemi et al., 2018). To effectively manage its CRMs, South Africa needs to adopt a comprehensive and strategic approach that considers the country’s long- term needs and goals. Key considerations for creating an effective CRMs policy framework in South Africa include. • Identifying and prioritising needed CRMs and developing a strategy to secure a reliable supply of these materials. This may involve G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 3 incentivising the development of a domestic production of CRMs, establishing partnerships and collaborations with other countries, and promoting the recycling and re-use of these materials. • Ensuring that the extraction and processing of CRMs are congruent with societal customary and statutory standards (health and safety, environmental and sustainability). This may involve revising current legislation and establishing regulatory frameworks, promoting best practices, mineral chain-wide integration and innovation, and sup- porting the development of sustainable and responsible value chains. • Investing in research and development to promote short- and long- term supply and substitution of CRMs, particularly through the use of modern technologies such as mineral exploration drones, geothermal energy and advanced recycling methods. • Promoting transparency and accountability in the CRMs sector, through the publication of data, supply chain transparency and the implementation of reporting requirements. • Encouraging collaboration and information sharing among different stakeholders in the CRMs sector, including industry, academia and civil society. Considering these challenges and the importance of CRMs associated with their supply and use, it is important to have a comprehensive and strategic approach to managing the materials. In this study, we review the importance of CRMs for South Africa and identify key considerations for measuring the criticality and managing these materials in a sus- tainable and responsible manner. 2. A brief history of CRM lists Awareness of the necessity and preciousness of various minerals and metals predate modernity. In history, various civilisations that have sought materials such as iron, copper, silver and gold, recognised their intrinsic preciousness and leveraged them to build economies that were highly characteristic of the materials that empowered them (e.g., the bronze and iron ages, in particular). The modern history of rating and ranking schemes for CRMs can be traced back to the mid-20th century, when the demand for strategic materials began to increase due to their use in industrial and military applications, in turn leading to increased awareness of their critical role (Burnett et al., 2022, Fig. 1). This led to the creation of schemes that variably designated materials as ‘strategic’, which promoted national strategies to secure, stockpile and examine the supply and usage sustainability of such materials. As time and therefore societies evolve, material requirements also change. One of the earliest ranking schemes was developed by the United States Bureau of Mines in the 1970s, which listed 15 critical minerals based on their economic importance and vulnerability to supply disruption (Schulz, 2017, Fig. 1). This list was later updated in the 1980s and 1990s to include additional materials, such as rare earth elements (REEs), which were becoming increasingly important for a variety of emerging applications (Schulz, 2017). In the European Union, the first set of CRMs was first introduced in 2011, consisting of 14 CRMs based on their economic importance and supply risk (European Commission, 2011). In 2014, 2017, 2020 and 2023 the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th sets were published, expanding to 20, 27, 30 and 34 materials, respectively, with the latter sets imposing additional criteria or dimensions such as societal importance (European Commission, 2014, 2017a, 2017c, 2020, 2023, 2017a). In February 2022, the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) also released a list of 50 CRMs deemed essential to economic and national security (Applegate, 2022). Pres- ently, several countries and international organisations have developed ranking schemes for CRMs, which include. • European Union (EU): The EU has identified a list of 34 CRMs based on criteria such as economic importance, supply risk and societal importance (European Commission, 2023). • United States: The United States has several ranking schemes for CRMs, including the USGS’s list of ‘strategic and critical minerals’ (Schulz, 2017) and the U.S. Department of the Interior’s list of 50 ‘critical minerals’ (Applegate, 2022). • Japan: The Japanese government has identified 31 ‘strategic min- erals’ that are considered important for the country’s economic and national security (Giese, 2022). • Canada: The Canadian government published a list of 31 ‘critical minerals’ considered important to spur economic growth and to mitigate supply chain issues (Government of Canada, 2022). • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): The OECD has identified a set of 17 CRMs based on their economic importance and supply risk (Koyamparambath et al., 2022; Mathieux et al., 2017; David et al., 2021; Girtan et al., 2021; Guzik et al., 2021). • China: The Chinese government has identified a list of 24 ‘REEs and other strategic minerals’ that are considered important for the country’s economic development and national security (Hurst, 2010; Massari and Ruberti, 2013; Zepf and Zepf, 2013; Dutta et al., 2016; Andersson, 2020). Several international organisations also provide ratings on CRMs or related topics. Here are a few examples (Ghamisi et al., 2021a,b; Hool et al., 2022; Murguía, 2022; Martin et al., 2022). • European Commission: The European Commission publishes a list of CRMs for the EU, which is updated every three years. The list is based Fig. 1. Schematic timeline of the development of CRM lists (initial studies for the EU, Australia and Canada) and significance worldwide. G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 4 on an assessment of the economic importance, supply risk, envi- ronmental, geopolitical and social impacts of CRMs. The assessment is carried out by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission. • World Bank: The World Bank’s Commodity Markets Outlook ana- lyses commodity markets. The report includes information on pro- duction, consumption, trade, prices and other economic indicators for a range of commodities, including CRMs. • Global Risk Insights: Global Risk Insights is a consultancy that ana- lyses and forecasts global risks. The company publishes research and reports on CRMs risks and trends, including supply chain disruptions, price volatility and geopolitical risks. • Bloomberg: Bloomberg is a financial news and data provider that publishes information and analysis for a range of commodities. The company’s commodities team provides insights and analyses CRMs markets, trends and forecasts. Current methodologies to assess the criticality of materials differ by country (and presumably the data that were used to support the as- sessments), although many CRMs consistently overlap across assess- ments. For instance, the United States employs a two-stage process, whereby in the first stage, the geometric mean of indicators for supply risk, production growth and market dynamics is calculated. This is fol- lowed by the second stage, whereby a threshold analysis is performed to determine criticality and ranking (Nassar et al., 2020; Nassar and Fort- ier, 2021). The EU uses a single-stage process, whereby all materials are assessed for their economic importance and supply risk, while a hard threshold is also overlaid to delineate criticality (European Commission, 2017b). The differences between these methods are not substantial as the guiding principles are essentially identical. This is the key reason why many CRMs overlap across individual assessments. Critical analysis of CRM frameworks and lists is currently sparse and a single example exists that analysed the EU’s evolving CRM lists with specific implica- tions for South Africa (Zhang et al., 2023). The analysis revealed that the EU’s methodology exhibits a few weaknesses that enable spontaneous criticality of materials (‘emerging criticality’) that include (Zhang et al., 2023): (1) a hidden nomination phase; (2) non-dynamic criticality baselines; (3) insufficiently pragmatic motivations; (4) a blurring of civilian and military needs; (5) a lack of foresight; and (6) no explicit consideration of system behaviours. Key observations for South Africa and similar countries include (Zhang et al., 2023): (1) just energy transition is important to transition away from energy poverty; (2) a locally relevant definition of criticality; (3) the possibility of an export-bound CRM list and a domestic-needs CRM list, due to relative economic development differences between the Global North and the Global South. The current assessment methodologies in all published CRM frame- works employ a dimension-based, metric and threshold-delineated combination using a minimum of two (qualitatively) orthogonal di- mensions along which metrics are calculated. Properties of CRMs and their mineral value chain that are not fully quantitative are nevertheless assigned numerical scores to facilitate calculation. Essentially, two key and semi-independent dimensions are always assessed, one along supply and the other demand. The supply dimension is intended to capture the temporal-spatial robustness of the supply chain of materials, such that the assessments along this dimension relate to the reliability of such supply chains. The substitutability of materials is also generally considered, which can modify the considerations of risk under the supply dimension, depending on the range and extent of substitutions possible for known material uses. Similarly, the demand dimension is intended to anticipate the level of demand given a certain forecasted or vision of the future state of the society. This is due to the supply and demand behaviour of market systems, in which the CRM value chain resides. Additional dimensions that gauge auxiliary or secondary con- cerns can provide supplementary constraints to refine primary assess- ments, such as climate change mitigation capacity and military significance (e.g., Bensch et al., 2015). Once the dimensions are defined, the remaining tasks are to engineer feasible measures and metrics. The remainder of the methodology revolves around the establishment of comparisons, which can occur in the form of empirical baselines or theoretical targets. This effectively sets quantitative thresholds of criti- cality and therefore a mechanism to rank-order CRMs. It is important to recognise that CRM assessment schemes assume societal progression and usually embeds a vision component (e.g., Government of Canada, 2022). Consequently, CRM assessments and the associated methodology are often revised and updated periodically. Furthermore, because CRM assessment schemes are driven by assumptions of societal progression and political vision, it is critical that a country willing to adopt the CRM concept must design its own CRM assessment methodology using its assumptions of the future. 3. The importance of rating CRMs for South African policy The South African policy landscape is evolving rapidly, driven partly by its rapid pace of social and economic changes, and with it comes significant changes to the country’s consumption of materials. As the Global North countries attempt to move towards a more sustainable future, Global South countries are facing a dichotomous set of realities that involves the staging of their own economies (e.g., many are primary or secondary and less involved in tertiary beneficiation industries). Global South countries face a delicate balance between international and domestic consumption needs, and need to secure primary energy generation resources as such nations seek to industrialise and increase their standards of living. South Africa is in a rapidly evolving state of juxtaposition of modernity, statutory and customary (or traditional) values, following the end of Apartheid in 1994. Consequently, South African material needs is exceptionally diverse, compared to Global North CRMs (e.g., of high-tech minerals like REEs), and compared to nations that are in the early stages of industrialisation (e.g., of base metals, coal and shale for brickmaking; Figs. 2–4). The importance of establishing a South African-specific set of CRMs to support national policy-making cannot be overstated, because without an awareness and strategic planning, global influence will inevitably exert control over domestic production and prosperity outcomes. The general trend of rating CRMs based on economic and technological importance, as well as resource availability, are valuable for an industrialising nation (Fes- sehaie and Rustomjee, 2018; Jannesar Niri et al., 2024). Foreseeable policy and societal outcomes of such an assessment and its associated CRM list include. • Prioritising domestic production and stockpiling of CRMs: Rating CRMs based on economic and technological importance allows a country to determine which CRMs are most essential for its industry and economic growth (Fessehaie and Rustomjee, 2018). This infor- mation can assist policymakers in prioritising the development of domestic production and processing of CRMs, which can create jobs, promote economic growth and reduce import dependency (Govern- ment of Canada, 2022). • Attracting investment in the resource sector: Rating CRMs based on resource availability enables a country to provide investors with pertinent information regarding potential resource development (Guzik et al., 2021). Policy mechanisms including the provision of financial and taxation incentives, priority exploration and focused education curriculum can all contribute to attracting investment. This can help attract investment in the resource sector, contributing to economic growth, employment creation and generating revenue for the government. • Promoting sustainable resource use: Rating CRMs through business ethics frameworks allows a country to encourage the utilisation of CRMs with fewer negative impacts on the environment and com- munities, thus promoting sustainable resource usage (Government of Canada, 2022). This can help reduce resource depletion, minimise G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 5 adverse environmental and community impacts, and support responsible resource management. To initiate a CRM rating scheme, the following steps and factors need to be considered (Ghorbani et al., 2024a,b; Koyamparambath et al., 2022; Galos et al., 2021; Salim et al., 2022; Domaracka et al., 2022). • Assume a realisable future societal state and identify the materials to be rated: The first step is to create a realistic vision of the future and identify materials that are currently or will be important for the country’s industry, economy and national security. • Define the rating dimensions: The next step is to establish the rating dimensions to be used, which may include economic importance, environmental risk, social risk, governance risk, technological importance, among others. • Construct metrics and weights for each rating dimension: Metrics and weights should be assigned to each criterion to assess its relative importance. For example, if the objective is to emphasise CRMs that are crucial for the country’s industry and economic growth, eco- nomic importance may be given a higher weight. • Collect data on the CRMs: Data must be collected on the CRMs to be rated in accordance with rating criteria. This data may include in- formation regarding location, economic importance, environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks, technological importance, among others. Data can be sourced from various locations, such as govern- ment statistics, industry reports, market dynamics and academic research. • Calculate ratings: Using the collected data, metrics and weights, ratings can be calculated for each CRM. This will provide a score for each CRM based on the chosen rating criteria. • Analyse and interpret ratings: Ratings can then be analysed and interpreted to understand the strengths and limitations of each CRMs and identify areas for improvement. Ratings can also be used to guide decision-making, prioritise domestic production development and ensure a stable supply of CRMs. • Documentation: The final adopted ratings must be accurately docu- mented and secured. Models that allow automatic rating updates based on the formulae and rating criteria used need to be created for easy analysis in case of a national change in priorities. Ultimately, the knowledge management model detailing the governance of the CRM list in terms of updates, sharing and use must equally be developed. 4. The role of the CRM list for corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives A CRM list can facilitate CSR initiatives, such as the effective usage of ESG frameworks in several ways. The list can be used to optimise exploration and exploitation of materials, as well as to manage accept- able risks and impacts to the environment and society (Kemp and Owen, 2022; Jannesar Niri et al., 2024; Lèbre et al., 2020). Once a list is compiled, organisations and governments will be better positioned to prioritise their efforts to engage stakeholders, reduce risk(s) and mini- mise impact(s) (Ferro and Bonollo, 2019; Chipangamate et al., 2023), for example, by providing informed scenario planning and simulating various outcomes in advance of an activity. Furthermore, the list can help organisations and governments identify opportunities to source materials from more sustainable and/or responsible sources (e.g., locally recycled resources). A CRM list can promote research and development efforts to find alternative sources of materials or substitutes, especially for high-risk materials, thus reducing resource extraction-associated Fig. 2. Historically known and actively mined base metal deposits in South Africa. Data sourced from Padilla et al. (2021) and South Africa Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE; Operating mines 2022: https://www.dmr.gov.za/mineral-policy-promotion/operating-mines). Data included as supplemen- tary material. G.T. Nwaila et al. https://www.dmr.gov.za/mineral-policy-promotion/operating-mines Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 6 environmental and social impacts, while bolstering supply chain resil- ience (Wall et al., 2017). In addition, data supporting the evaluation of CRMs can be used to perform socio-economic cost-benefit analyses to rank-order various ESG initiatives, and therefore, shape national policy. Designating a CRM implies that more scrutiny around its supply chain must necessarily occur. Hence, a CRM list can help increase transparency around the supply of materials, which can, in turn, help improve the accountability of organisations and governments (Ghamisi et al., 2021a, b). This can help ensure that materials are sourced in a responsible and sustainable manner, and that the potential risks and impacts of their extraction and processing are adequately addressed (Christmann, 2021). More directly, a CRM list can help inform the development of regulatory frameworks and policies to govern the extraction, processing, and use of different materials for security and sustainability reasons (Talapin and Braun, 2020). This can help ensure that these activities are carried out in a responsible and sustainable manner and that the risks and impacts are effectively managed (Talapin and Braun, 2020; Government of Canada, 2022). A CRM list can improve international cooperation on resource management issues by providing common ground for different countries to work together to share knowledge, address challenges and create opportunities (Kelley et al., 2021). This can include initiatives to increase the sustainability and resilience of supply chains, promote the development of substitute ma- terials, or support research and development efforts (Wall and Pell, 2017). In addition, tracking illicit trading of materials (Oloruntoba, 2017), as well as formalisation of artisanal and small-scale mining are facilitated by the existence of a CRM list. Transparent and total scrutiny of supply chains and usage is key in comprehending the trade-offs be- tween overall benefits and negative impacts of CRMs at a time when there are intentions to reduce global carbon emissions (Dewit, 2021). A CRM list can help facilitate stakeholder engagement on resource management challenges by providing a common set of materials and issues for different stakeholders to discuss and address (e.g., Chi- pangamate et al., 2023). This can include engaging with industry, academia, communities and other relevant groups to identify shared goals and priorities, and to develop strategies to address shared chal- lenges and create opportunities. For example, the multi-stakeholder framework used by the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) would be greatly enhanced by a CRM list, as it would promote ownership disclosure and transparency around production and remit- tance between organisations, local authorities and governments (Sova- cool et al., 2016; Wilson et al., 2021). In addition, a CRM list could inform investment decisions of organisations and governments by providing a common set of knowledge and risks to consider. This ensures that investments are made in an informed manner, and that they support the long-term resilience and sustainability of supply chains. A CRM list can help organisations and governments identify and manage the risks associated with the supply of different materials (Government of Can- ada, 2022). Measures adopted to manage risks can include: stockpiling, diversifying sources of supply and developing contingency plans to mitigate the impact of supply disruptions. Additionally, a list can help support the development of a circular economy, by identifying essential materials and promoting recycling and re-use of these materials (Euro- pean Commission, 2014). In turn, this can help reduce the pressure on primary mineral extraction, minimise environmental and social impacts, and increase the resilience and sustainability of supply chains (Nwaila et al., 2022a). A CRM list may create a remarkable opportunity for mining waste, of which South Africa has plenty, thus capturing or creating additional value, and in some cases in collaboration with local communities (Morseletto, 2020). Together, the ideas align well with various sustainability, ESG, CSR and national security considerations (Bontempi et al., 2021; Dewit, 2021). Much of the work on mitigating environmental impacts and enhancing social contribution hinges on responsible and sustainable Fig. 3. Historically known and actively mined construction-related deposits for the continuing industrialisation of South Africa. Data sourced from Padilla et al. (2021) and South Africa Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE; Operating mines 2022). Data included as supplementary material. G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 7 exploration, exploitation and use of CRMs. 5. The role of a CRM list for research, development and innovation At the moment, South Africa’s minerals sector is in a state of slumber, following decades of high output and global leadership (Neingo and Tholana, 2016; Frimmel, 2019). Numerous operations have been shut down and mining companies have expressed low interest in the continuation of mineral resource extraction. A future effect of the continuation of this reality is that South Africa will likely become more reliant on foreign supplies of materials. This exacerbates the criticality of non-local materials. Innovation is a significant component to solve issues encountered in the minerals sector, particularly if it can be inte- grated seamlessly (e.g., Ghorbani et al., 2022, 2023a, b; Nwaila et al., 2022a). At the moment, the challenges facing the South African minerals sector are many: (1) declining ore grades; (2) worker unrest and labour conditions; (3) low technological and innovation investment; (4) increasingly more complex geology/ore bodies; (5) increasing ESG scrutiny and investor sentiment; and (6) unstable national electrical grid (Neingo and Tholana, 2016). Although these challenges seem harsh, they are technically solvable. Indeed, innovation is critically needed in the South African minerals sector to modernise it towards: (1) faster and more targeted exploration; (2) increased operational agility; (3) more energy-efficient operations; (4) enhanced extraction capability; (5) better environmental monitoring; and (6) safer working environments (e.g., Neingo and Tholana, 2016; Nwaila et al., 2022a; Ghorbani et al., 2023a). In the last decade, the South African government has launched a number of initiatives aimed at addressing some of the above challenges in the minerals and extractive industry. These include the "Minerals Beneficiation Strategy," published in June 2011; "Operation Phakisa," a fast-track program launched in July 2014 to help accelerate the goals of the National Development Plan; and the South African Minerals Extraction Research, Development, and Innovation (SAMERDI) strategy. The establishment of a South African CRM list has the potential to catalyse the growth of research, development and innovation (RDI) in the minerals industry, as well as other linked sectors. This is because ideas and innovation on the extraction, processing and use of CRMs altogether depend on their perceived value by stakeholders. Therefore, having clear ratings for South Africa’s CRMs will help the country’s policymakers prioritise funding of various RDI activities. Hence, desig- nation of materials as ‘critical’ creates the necessary conditions for effective policy conditions to catalyse RDI through directing research and development funding and the re-focus of academies, institutions and private entities, which are critical to the rejuvenation of South Africa’s minerals industry. The effect of RDI enabled by the existence of a CRM list is tripartite, because any RDI that assists with the exploration, extraction, processing and recycling of CRMs would necessarily alleviate the criticality of those CRMs. For example, funding for RDI could result in an increase in the use of modern transdisciplinary approaches such as using artificial intelligence towards mineral targeting. This is highly beneficial to alleviate the criticality of CRMs, because re-purposing of legacy exploration data, such as geochemical data and seismic data, and big data, such as satellite-borne remote sensing data are absolutely necessary to ensure, for example, the timely discovery of mineral de- posits and/or valorisation of tailings (e.g., Nwaila et al., 2021a, b, 2022b, c; Mutshafa et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2022). 6. The challenges associated with ranking CRMs in South Africa Establishing a CRM list can be challenging for several reasons. The ideal of ‘critical’ exhibits geographical, economic and temporal char- acteristics, which implies that the definitions of criticality are subject to change, especially with rapidly evolving global economic and Fig. 4. Historically known and actively mined deposits for the economic and energy prosperity of South Africa. Data sourced from Padilla et al. (2021) and South Africa Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE; Operating mines 2022). Data included as supplementary material. G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 8 geopolitical conditions. South Africa is facing an unprecedented energy supply challenge with rolling blackouts (load shedding) that limit all forms of productivity (Ibrahim et al., 2021). This is probably the most rapidly developing social concern and could destabilise society at large. Minerals related to the energy infrastructure are needed to stabilise the energy grid until an energy transition can be reasonably achieved (e.g., Fig. 4). To further complicate the creation of a South African CRM list, while the specific geographical and socio-economic context changes with time, the CRM designation methodology itself is also evolving, and no universal methodology of assessment exists, nor best practices because the outcomes of CRM lists have yet to be correlated to the inputs. However, there seems to be an excellent agreement at the meta- methodology level, which is to say that high level concerns around supply robustness and the degree of necessity of materials are common internationally and throughout time (Fortier et al., 2019; Lèbre et al., 2020; Kelley et al., 2021). However, the specifics of the methodology vary greatly. Different organisations and governments generally estab- lish quantitatively dissimilar metrics and thresholds, such as for eco- nomic importance, supply risk and strategic importance, which themselves are fluid concepts. Furthermore, it is difficult, but not impossible (e.g., scaling criticality ratings by their range to obtain a relative comparison), to quantitatively compare results from different assessments across nations, simply because numerical results are not directly comparable. The impacts of these differences imply that the more marginal a CRM is, the more likely it will change with variations in assessment methodology and data sources, although a core group of CRMs is likely to remain robust across assessments. In this context, setting a threshold with a buffer margin is probably a good practice methodologically to accommodate for potential variability in the data, metric and weight choices, at the cost of a potentially enlarged number of CRMs. As a result, there may be disagreements about which materials should be listed, and thus, the lists will continue to evolve with time. In this context, a ranking of criticality in terms of assessment robustness may be a welcoming addition to existing methodologies. Aside from quantitative methodological differences and deficiencies of existing approaches, perhaps a greater challenge is the exactitude of qualitative assumptions, supporting data and goals. For example, it is unclear if the data underpinning the assessments worldwide are them- selves comparable and to what degree, despite the fact that producers of some materials (e.g., REEs and cobalt) are highly centralised. Other factors that may need to be taken into account include the softer con- siderations, including: geopolitical risks, social licence risks, resource depletion, technological change, among others. Geopolitics can change very rapidly on a global scale, and similarly for technological innovation (De Ridder, 2013; Johansen, 2019). For example, new technologies may emerge, requiring new materials. In order for the list to remain relevant, it must be continuously reviewed and revised. The revision rate must be fast enough to accommodate for changes in underlying factors but not too fast, so as to prevent the use of such lists for decision-making. This means that CRM lists must be created with an a-priori and pragmatic balance of the bias of such a list (e.g., a vision of future needs) and variance (e.g., of rapidly changing market conditions, geopolitics and supply chain configurations) (Zhang et al., 2023). Hence, it is important that the lists be updated under two conditions: (1) a set amount of time has elapsed since the last update, triggering a new update; and (2) sudden and lasting change has occurred in the underlying conditions well before an update interval that affects the value of the list itself. For (1), an example time interval, using the EU method, is every three years (European Commission, 2014, 2017a, 2020, 2023). This is generally a long enough time to match with the timescales of the policy cycle in the EU (from consideration and consultation to rollout). To ensure that some stability of CRM methodology and lists exists, and the core group of CRMs remain stable, it is important to have a consistent and unwavering set of guidance principles in the designation of criticality, which sta- bilises the design of an assessment methodology during policy implementation. This is likely where South African needs will diverge from those of the Global North, given its current state of socio-economic development and substantial intra-national contrast in living standards. In addition, reliable data (e.g., objective, accurate and timely) and information are necessary to accurately assess the supply risks and economic importance of different materials. However, this information can be difficult to obtain, especially for materials that are not widely traded or for which there is limited data available, such as material derived from artisanal and small-scale mining or materials strongly related to military use. This includes certain materials that may have political implications, as it may affect the trade and production of these materials or where other political or social priorities compete with ac- cess to CRMs (e.g., resource assessment over protected land or habitat). Consequently, there may be pressure from special interest groups (do- mestic and international, grassroots and organised) to include or exclude certain materials from the list (e.g., Applegate, 2022). Some of CRMs are produced as by-products of other industries and are often sourced from or partly processed material. For example, cobalt is a by-product of copper and nickel mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo, with further refining mostly conducted in China (Savinova et al., 2023 and references therein). This can make it difficult to accu- rately assess the risks to the supply of these materials, as disruptions in one part of the supply chain may have knock-on effects on the avail- ability of the material. For these materials, the shape of the supply chain is topologically less of a linear stretch but more convoluted with potentially complex feedback and mesh-like topology. This complicates simple and linear assessments of supply chain risks and impacts (e.g., difficult to correlate inputs and outputs in a mesh topology). More advanced supply system modelling may be necessary to anticipate complex network dynamics. For some CRMs, there may be limited substitutes or alternatives available at different time periods. This can make mitigating supply disruption risks difficult, as there may be few easy or cost-effective material alternatives. The prices of CRMs can be affected by a wide range of market forces, including supply and demand, economic growth and currency exchange rates. These dynamics can make it challenging to accurately assess the economic importance of different materials and forecast them appropriately in anticipation of the coming-into-effect of any CRM list. The complex system nature of the market is also difficult to predict, and in extreme situations, designation of criticality may trigger those materials to be hoarded or stockpiled by private firms or competing international interests, in anticipation of increased market demand and government subsidies, which would be counterproductive. Some materials may be essential for certain in- dustries or applications but may be limited to other sectors. This can make it difficult to accurately assess the overall importance of these materials, as they may need to be factored in the overall demand or supply calculations. Some global and local disruptions, especially in the case of black swan events (events and their magnitudes that are statistically unob- served before and therefore unforeseeable), such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, are difficult to predict but continue to create deleterious, rapid and fluid global impacts, and are perhaps the most recent reminders of the peril of national dependency on global supply chains for CRMs (Allam et al., 2022). Together, these factors position the global CRM context as volatile, uncertain, nonlinear, complex and ambiguous, and therefore, difficult to predict with exac- titude. These factors highlight the timeliness of CRM designations and the need to dynamically assess the criticality of materials. 7. A link between CRMs and a ‘just’ energy transition The ‘just’ energy transition is a vision that focuses on a fairer tran- sition to a low-carbon energy system. For South Africa, the potential financing of R200 billion to R8.5 trillion depending on scale of impli- mentation to achieve the transition could lead towards substantial levels of growth and jobs; whereby the gross domestic product could increase G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 9 at a yearly average of about 2.3% between 2022 and 2050 (World Bank, 2022). However, it is unclear how this projection interacts with the predicted losses in gross domestic product of an aggregate of 9% for developing countries due to climate change from 2022 to 2100 (IPCC, 2022). Some authors estimate that two in three jobs will be created by investing in climate mitigation and adaptation for each of the 300 000 jobs that may be lost in the high-emission sectors (O’Brien, and Lei- chenko, 2000; Fankhaeser et al., 2008; Paavola, 2008; Wahlgren et al., 2010; Frosch et al., 2018). CRMs are often used in the production of clean energy technologies, such as solar panels, energy storage facilities, wind turbines and electric vehicles (Dewit, 2021). This could also include nuclear power and biomass energy. Specifically, critical ele- ments include: REEs, lithium, cobalt and copper (Pommeret et al., 2022; Ghorbani et al., 2024a). In addition to clean energy technologies, CRMs are used in other energy-adjacent sectors, such as transportation, con- struction and industry (Furszyfer Del Rio et al., 2022). For example, CRMs are used in the production of light-weight materials for the automotive and aerospace industries, which can help reduce fuel con- sumption and greenhouse gas emissions (Pommeret et al., 2022; Jan- nesar Niri et al., 2024). Therefore, the availability and sustainable use of CRMs are important for the transition to a low-carbon, energy-efficient and resource-efficient economy (Valero et al., 2021). Since required CRMs in the energy transition are invariant with respect to the country utilising them, it is imperative that South Africa establishes its own CRM list to balance between domestic needs versus exports, such that the energy transition remains just. Additionally, it is important to also consider current sources of energy supply, because the energy transition process itself requires energy and its implementation should be smooth and productive. By rating CRMs based on various factors, such as eco- nomic importance, ESG risks and technological importance, South Africa can identify which CRMs are most important for its energy transition strategies and develop strategies to secure stable supply and promote sustainable resource use (Bontempi et al., 2021; Christmann, 2021). CRMs are probably the most important ingredient in the quest to achieve the International Energy Agency (IEA) objective of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 (Dewit, 2021). Examples of CRMs used in the green energy sector include (Fig. 5). • REEs: Neodymium, dysprosium and cerium are used in the produc- tion of permanent magnets, which are essential components of wind turbines and electric vehicles. • Lithium: Used to produce lithium-ion batteries, which are in turn widely used in electric vehicles, portable electronics and energy storage systems. • Cobalt: Used in the production of cathodes for lithium-ion batteries, in turn used in electric vehicles and portable electronics. • Copper: Used in the production of electrical wiring, printed circuit boards, motors and transformers, all of which are needed in a range of energy-related applications, including electric vehicles, renewable energy systems, and energy transmission and distribution. • Graphite: Used to produce lithium-ion batteries, fuel cells and nu- clear reactor-core components. • Gallium: Used in producing photovoltaic cells and producing high- temperature superconductors, which have potential applications in energy transmission and distribution. • Silicon: Used to manufacture photovoltaic cells and semiconductor devices, which are in turn used in a range of energy-related appli- cations, including renewable energy systems and energy-efficient electronics. Fig. 5. Materials critical for the transition to a low-carbon economy by technology type (https://www.mining.com/sponsored-content/minings-energy-challenge/). G.T. Nwaila et al. https://www.mining.com/sponsored-content/minings-energy-challenge/ Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 10 • Indium: Used in producing photovoltaic cells and in producing thin- film solar panels. • Tin: Used in producing photovoltaic cells and in producing lead-free solders which is used in the electronics industry. • Aluminium: Used in producing wind turbines and light-weight structural materials for the automotive and aerospace industries, which can in turn help reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. • Molybdenum: Used in manufacturing steel alloys, which are used in the construction of wind turbines, as well as in producing catalysts for fuel cells. • Tungsten: Used in producing light-weight materials for the auto- motive and aerospace industries and in producing X-ray tubes and high-speed cutting tools. • Zinc: Used to produce galvanised steel, needed for constructing wind turbines and producing zinc-carbon batteries. • Tellurium: Used in producing photovoltaic cells and in producing alloys for the aerospace industry. • Nickel: Used in producing stainless steel, needed for constructing wind turbines and in producing nickel-metal hydride batteries. • Platinum: Used in producing catalysts for fuel cells, internal com- bustion engines, jewellery and other luxury products. • Palladium: Used in producing catalysts for fuel cells, jewellery and other luxury products. • Bismuth: Used to produce lead-free solders, which are in turn used in the electronics industry and in the production of pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. • Calcium: Used to produce steel alloys, which are in turn used in constructing wind turbines, create cement and other building materials. • Iron: Used in the production of steel, which is needed for con- structing wind turbines, and in the production of a range of other products including automobiles, machinery and appliances. In South Africa, present knowledge of the aforementioned CRMs indicate that they are mainly concentrated in four provincial mining districts, namely: (1) the Northern Cape, (2) Limpopo, (3) North West, and (4) Mpumalanga provinces (Figs. 2 and 4). None of these provinces has downstream beneficiation facilities (and therefore no value-adding activities), and materials mined are often shipped to Europe, Asia and North America for further refining, including the production of indus- trial and technology materials and components, respectively. To reduce carbon emissions, there is therefore a need for South Africa to atten- tively observe how materials and energy are used in production, trans- portation, processing and use, to thus ensure a fair and equitable outcome (Dewit, 2021). 8. Role of stakeholders Stakeholders play a vital role in ensuring the availability of CRMs. From governments to industry and academia, stakeholders can engage in a variety of activities to ensure the responsible and secure supply of CRMs. From the technical side of mineral resources, geological surveys can play an important role in updating lists of CRMs by providing data and information on the occurrence, distribution and availability of these materials, unless CRMs are designated for national security reasons (Lawley et al., 2021). Geological surveys can collect and analyse data on the geology, mineralogy and geochemistry of different materials, which can be used to evaluate their potential as CRMs. This information can help identify new sources of CRMs and assess the potential risks and opportunities associated with their extraction and processing (Deetman et al., 2018). Geological surveys can also provide data on the environ- mental and social impacts of CRM mining and processing, which can be used to inform policy decisions and support sustainable resource man- agement. They can also collaborate with other government agencies and stakeholders to share knowledge, develop strategies and plans for the responsible and sustainable supply of CRMs (Ghorbani et al., 2024a,b; Kelley et al., 2021). In this way, geological surveys can contribute to the updating and revising of CRM list by providing data and information that can assess the criticality of different materials. The private sector can have input on lists of CRMs through a variety of channels. For example, companies that are involved in the mining and processing of CRMs, or original equipment manufacturing (technology and innovation sector), play a crucial role in the identification and revision of CRMs (Cimprich et al., 2022; Applegate, 2022). They can provide information about the materials they use, the sources of these materials, and the challenges and opportunities associated with their supply and use. This information can help inform policy decisions and support the development of strategies for the responsible and sustain- able supply of CRMs. Private sector organisations can also engage with policymakers and regulators through consultation and stakeholder engagement (Chipangamate et al., 2023). For example, they can provide input on draft CRM lists or policy proposals through written sub- missions, public hearings, or other consultation processes. Private sector organisations can also participate in industry associations or forums that address CRM-related issues and provide a platform for dialogue and collaboration with policymakers and other stakeholders. In addition, private sector organisations can support RDI efforts focused on improving the sustainability of CRM extraction, their processing and/or developing alternatives to these materials. This can help reduce envi- ronmental and social impacts of CRM use and mitigate supply disruption risks. Civic organisations and the general public can also have input on lists of CRMs through a variety of channels. For example, non-foreign non- governmental organisations (NGOs) can engage with policymakers and regulators to provide information and perspectives on CRM-related is- sues. They can provide input on draft CRM lists or policy proposals through written submissions, public hearings and/or other consultation mechanisms (Gray et al., 2016; Applegate, 2022). Civic organisations can also engage with the private sector and other stakeholders to pro- mote the responsible and sustainable use of CRMs (Arond et al., 2019). The general public can also have a voice in developing CRMs through participation in public consultation processes and their choices as con- sumers. For example, the public can support firms and products that use CRMs responsibly and sustainably, or advocate for the adoption of policies and practices that promote the responsible and sustainable use of these materials (Wilson et al., 2021). The general public can also raise awareness about CRM-related issues and mobilise support for action on these issues through social media, online petitions, or other forms of grassroots activism. In addition to the public, local communities hosting CRM extraction and/or processing are important stakeholders as they have a significant role in informing any possible disruption of supply through social resistance (Wilson et al., 2021; Jannesar Niri et al., 2024). This includes formal or informal artisanal and small-scale mining communities. A few mining projects have been disrupted or prevented altogether by host communities. The communities have a significant interest as traditional custodians of the land where mining occurs and as the most directly affected by negative environmental and social impacts of mineral exploitation (Mabey et al., 2020). In addition, local communities are most likely to be benefitted by the extraction and value-adding activities associated with CRMs. As such, involving them early in identifying and disseminating any CRM list is of paramount importance. Host commu- nities are sometimes displaced from their land to pave way for generally large-scale mining activities; therefore, engaging them meaningfully should be integral to the identification of CRM lists (Cha, 2020; Svo- bodova et al., 2021). Communities, especially when they collaborate with civil society organisations, are responsible for ensuring that orga- nisations extract and use natural resources responsibly and sustainably (Cole and Broadhurst, 2022). End users, such as retail store owners, can also have input on CRM lists through a variety of channels. Retail store owners can engage with G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 11 policymakers and regulators to provide information about the materials and products they use and sell, and the challenges and opportunities associated with their supply and use. This information can help inform policy decisions and support the development of strategies for the responsible and sustainable supply of CRMs. Retail store owners can also engage with suppliers and manufacturers to ensure that the products they sell are sourced from responsible and sustainable sources. For example, they can obtain information about the materials used in the products they sell and choose to work with suppliers that use CRMs responsibly and sustainably. Retail store owners can also communicate with their customers about the importance of responsible and sustain- able sourcing, and encourage them to support responsible and sustain- able CRMs products. In addition, retail store owners can support research and development efforts focused on improving the sustain- ability of CRMs extraction and processing or developing alternatives to these materials. This can help reduce the environmental and social im- pacts of CRMs usage and mitigate supply disruption risks. Other downstream users could include recyclers, because as more primary material circulates through the market, there will be more material that would be recycled and this stream is likely to grow in significance with the rise of CRMs in circulation. Adequate early engagement around recycling would facilitate organised, productive and value-adding cir- cular activities that include urban mining and encourage investment into energy- and labour-efficient solutions, because circular activities are generally very labour intensive and currently results in low-wage and manual labour jobs (Llorente-González and Vence, 2020). Academia and educational institutions are important public stake- holders as they have the expertise to coordinate through education and research, and disseminate information through training for continuous or life-long learning as CRM lists are created and updated. Building a comprehensive CRM list is complex and requires collaborative efforts of primary and secondary research that are within the purview of inter- disciplinary scholars, and into the social dimension, such as how stakeholders perceive the issue of CRMs. While general stakeholders, such as private companies may have their own agendas, scholars are probably more capable of using broader reliable data and research ev- idence to assist in creating a comprehensive and unbiased (in an agenda sense) list. For example, some environmental civil society organisations or non-governmental groups may be against extractive activities for various reasons. Therefore, uncompromised and unbiased scholars may provide evidence of why and how sustainable extraction, processing and usage are in fact, necessary for greater sustainability. Creation and maintenance of a CRM list requires a network of scholars who are dedicated to scientific research, data and policy gathering and analysis, and economic planning. Availability of information about the production, processing and usage of CRMs can be very difficult to obtain as the mining industry is by nature secretive and conservative. For that reason, the government or some effective third party (e.g., a geological survey) can play a critical role in collecting and sharing of information, and in crafting policies and statutes that encourage the generation/update of CRM lists by making available useful data and information. The government is also an important stakeholder as the chief consumer of the list as well as informing the country’s strategic direction (e.g., regarding energy infrastructure planning, national exploration and geopolitics), which is also central to defining which materials could be part of that ambition (e.g., Government of Canada, 2022). 9. Development of the methodology for ranking CRMs in South Africa Several methods are already published to identify and select CRMs (Tkaczyk et al., 2018; Černý et al., 2021; Hackenhaar et al., 2022). These methods always consider multiple important dimensions (or character- istics), notably: material importance, supply risk and geopolitical impact. Thereafter, the crafting of performance indicators and metrics along dimensions depends on the definition of criticality in a socio-economic and technological context. The importance dimension captures the significance of a material to some current or envisioned future societal state. The risk dimension captures the probability that a significant (e.g., prolonged) discontinuation of supply would occur given a set of probable considerations. The impact dimension captures the repercussions of a discontinuation of material supply. The product of risk (probability of occurrence) and impact is an effective proxy of the net economic cost of inaction, whereas material importance proxies net economic gain of action. A dimensional framework would also work for South Africa, but material importance cannot be solely based on present needs, given its developing nation status, but also in a large proportion, driven by forecasts that are guided by a vision of the future state of the society. This was also a conclusion reached by Khan et al. (2022), which identified a potential vision of the society and linked it to technologies with known material requirements. Although dimensional frameworks are intended to feature dimensions that are as decorrelated as possible, correlation of indicators across dimensions can occur if the system being measured exhibits significant feedback (dynamically complex). For instance, indicators measuring material importance and impact could be interconnected in the context that a material deemed highly important due to its economic significance might also have substantial environ- mental and societal impacts in case of a supply disruption. For example, if a CRM such as lithium is crucial for the production of electric vehicle batteries (importance) and electric vehicles are already a major mode of transport (impact), then importance and impact dimensions are corre- lated. However, this is not always the case, because importance can be forecasted, and hence, at least partially pertains to the future, and impact is grounded to the present state. Thus, a CRM may be important for future uses, whose impacts are not realisable presently. Conse- quently, and particularly for South Africa, material importance and impact could be generally temporally decoupled to reduce feedback and correlation. Using a vision of the future to assess material importance was also determined to be a feasible approach by Khan et al. (2022). The degree of criticality is a multi-dimensional composite or model of indicator scores (as assessed through the use of at least one metric and data). If there exists significant correlation across indicators, then out- comes maybe exaggerated (excessive model variance). In this case, a combination of knowledge-driven and statistical methods to decorrelate variables could be used to enhance assessment robustness. Some of the most common indicators along various dimensions include. • Economic importance: selection based on economic considerations, including contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP), employment and trade. A material’s economic significance can be influenced by its strategic importance. For instance, a CRM that is dual-use would be significantly affected by its consumption rate or stockpiling in the defence sector. • Strategic importance: selection based on strategic national concern. Moreover, strategic importance can also exhibit significant system- level feedback with supply risk, as materials critical to national se- curity may face supply chain vulnerabilities due to geopolitics. • Supply risk: selection based on notions of probability of disruption. Supply risk must be examined in context of complex systems, such as geopolitical and market competitions, because the dynamics of either is difficult to predict and includes competitive and anti- competitive behaviours, and system behaviours such as panic hoarding. • Environmental impact: selection based on notions of environmental costs and benefits, which include lifecycle assessments of CRMs. Materials with a lower environmental impact may be preferred to those with a higher impact. Additionally, materials with a high environmental impact may face regulatory scrutiny and pressure to adopt more sustainable practices, potentially influencing their sup- ply and societal impacts. G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 12 • Agenda impact: selection based on democratic agendas, which could include poverty reduction, which is a part of the sustainable devel- opment goals. Agendas are essentially a type of societal principle, whose interpretation and implementation depends on pragmatic context. Favourable interpretation could be associated with reduc- tion in supply risk (e.g., diversification of energy mixture), for example. • Societal impact: selection based on potential societal impacts of a disruption in supply, e.g., employment, social stability, continuity of society, health and quality of life. Disruptions in the supply of ma- terials crucial for essential services or industries can have cascading effects on society, affecting employment, social stability, and overall quality of life. Clearly there could be overlap of indicators along this dimension and economic importance, since societal activities contribute to economic activity. A variety of actual rating methods exist to cater to different purposes. To ensure an objective assessment of criticality, it is essential to carefully consider interdependencies and potential biases when selecting and weighting indicators. This can be examined systematically using statis- tical methods, by treating the indicators as models that are driven by supporting data. Consequently, the extent of correlation between in- dicators could be anticipated via statistical analyses of supporting data (e.g., nonlinear correlation and causality analysis) and effects such as hidden weightings could be minimised in principle. This leads to more transparent methodologies and a more accurate evaluation of material criticality. It is important to carefully consider the strengths and limi- tations of each method when rating CRMs. Regardless of the method and data used to perform ratings, a key fundamental control on the identi- fication of CRMs is the a-priori guiding vision, which imparts a bias towards some CRMs. For example, a pre-supposition of an increasing adoption of electrification essentially dictates that materials that are important in electrification (e.g., lithium, cobalt, copper and REEs) would become critical by any reasonable rating method. Designing a sound vision is important to crafting achievable, realistic and contex- tually relevant principles to guide CRM assessments. In general, it is important to adopt at least two key orthogonal criteria along supply and demand (one for significance and one for risk), such that the criticality can be defined as a function of supply and demand simultaneously. Additional criteria can be used to disambiguate closely ranked materials for better differentiation. In subsections 9.1 to 9.12, we provide example formulae and cal- culations that demonstrate an implementation of our framework. Each subsection addresses a dimension of criticality, such as economic importance, supply risk, environmental, agenda and societal impacts. Each subsection provides an example of a quantitative assessment, which bridges the gap between the theoretical aspects of our framework and its practical application. More specifically, they permit us to implement a metric-based approach to assessing each dimension. Note that the indicators in the examples are intended to be strictly positive, and their exact values are not critical since they represent weighted scores based on various factors, normalised to a sum of 1. 9.1. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on economic importance Formula: Relative economic importance score = Value of production of CRMs / Total value of production of all CRMs Example Calculation: Suppose we want to rate three CRMs (A, B and C) based on their economic importance. We have the following data on the value of pro- duction of each CRM. • CRM A: $100 million; CRM B: $200 million; CRM C: $300 million. • The total value of production of all CRMs = $600 million. To calculate the relative economic importance score for each CRM, we can use the formula above. • Relative economic importance score for CRM A = $100 million/$600 million = 0.17. • Relative economic importance score for CRM B = $200 million/$600 million = 0.33. • Relative economic importance score for CRM C = $300 million/$600 million = 0.50. Based on this calculation, CRM C has the highest relative economic importance score, followed by CRMs B and A. 9.2. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on supply risk Formula: Supply risk score = Weighted sum of factors affecting supply risk Factors affecting supply risk may include. • The concentration of production: The degree to which CRMs are produced in a small number of countries or regions. • Diversity of sources: The degree to which a CRMs is sourced from a diverse range of countries or regions. • Importance of CRMs to various industries: The extent to which CRMs are used in a variety of industries. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: Suppose we want to rate three CRMs (A, B and C) based on their supply risk. We have the following data on the factors affecting supply risk for each CRM. 1. CRM A: • The concentration of production: Low (production is spread across multiple countries). • Diversity of sources: High (sourced from a diverse range of countries). • Importance of the CRMs to various industries: Moderate. 2. CRM B: • The concentration of production: High (production is concentrated in a single country). • Diversity of sources: Low (sourced from a few countries). • Importance of the CRMs to various industries: High. 3. CRM C: • The concentration of production: Moderate (production is concentrated in a few countries). • Diversity of sources: Moderate (sourced from a few countries). • Importance of the CRMs to various industries: Low. We assign the following weights to each factor. • The concentration of production = 0.3 • Diversity of sources = 0.4 • Importance of the CRMs to various industries = 0.3 These weights represent a maximum score, which may range from 0 to a maximum, e.g., a CRM can score 0.1 out of 0.3 for the possible concentration of production. To calculate the supply risk score for each CRM, we can use the G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 13 formula above and sum the weighted values for each factor. Thus, the general supply risk score = The concentration of production + Diversity of sources + Importance of the CRMs to various industries. Therefore, in our example: 0.3+0.4+0.3 = 1 (Table 1). 9.3. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on environmental impact using life cycle assessment (LCA) Formula: Environmental impact score = Weighted sum of environmental impacts over the life cycle of the CRM Environmental impacts may include. • Greenhouse gas emissions. • Air pollution. • Water pollution. • Land use. • Waste generation. The weight assigned to each impact can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each impact. Example Calculation: Suppose we want to rate three CRMs (A, B and C) based on their environmental impact using LCA. We assign the following weights to each impact (Table 2). • Greenhouse gas emissions: 0.3 • Air pollution: 0.2 • Water pollution: 0.2 • Land use: 0.2 • Waste generation: 0.1 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest environmental impact score, followed by CRMs B and C, which have the same score. 9.4. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on social impact Formula: Social impact score = Weighted sum of social impacts of the CRM Social impacts may include. • Number of jobs related to the production and use of the CRM. • Health impacts of the CRM. • Impacts on quality of life. The weight assigned to each impact can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each impact. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each impact (Table 3). • Number of jobs related to the production and use of the CRM = 0.4 • Health impacts of the CRM = 0.3 • Impacts on quality of life = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest social impact score, followed by CRMs B and C, respectively. Below are a variety of other considerations when rating CRMs. Some examples include. • Governance risk: CRMs can be rated based on the risk of governance problems, such as corruption, poor regulation, or lack of trans- parency, which can affect the supply and use of the material. • Financial importance: CRMs can also be rated based on their finan- cial importance, which may be influenced by factors such as the price of the material, the extent to which it is traded and the extent to which it is used as a financial asset. • Technological importance: CRMs can be rated based on their tech- nological importance, which refers to the extent to which the ma- terial is essential for the development and use of new technologies. • Political importance: CRMs can be rated based on their political importance, which refers to the extent to which the material relates to political and strategic considerations, such as national security or foreign relations. • Health and safety: CRMs can be rated based on their potential im- pacts on health and safety, including the potential for accidents, spills, or exposure to hazardous materials. • Social and ethical considerations: CRMs can also be rated based on social and ethical considerations, such as the potential impacts on human rights, the environment, or local communities. Different considerations may be more relevant depending on the specific context and the purpose of the rating. 9.5. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on governance risk Formula: Governance risk score = Weighted sum of factors affecting governance risk Factors affecting governance risk may include. • Transparency: The extent to which information about the CRMs is available and accessible to stakeholders. • Regulation: The extent to which the CRMs are regulated and the effectiveness of the regulatory system. • Corruption: The extent to which corruption is present in the pro- duction, trade and use of CRMs. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Table 1 Supply risk scoring matrix. CRMs The concentration of production Diversity of sources Importance of the CRMs to various industries Total A 0.3 0.4 0.3 1 B 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.7 C 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.5 Table 2 Environmental impact risk matrix. CRMs Greenhouse gas emissions Air pollution Water pollution Land use Waste generation Total A 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 1 B 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.8 C 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 Table 3 Social impact risk matrix. CRMs Number of jobs related to the production and use of the CRM Health impacts of the CRM Impacts on quality of life Total A 0.4 0.3 0.3 1 B 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 C 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 14 Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 4). • Transparency = 0.4 • Regulation = 0.3 • Corruption = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM B has the highest governance impact score, followed by CRMs A and C, respectively. 9.6. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on financial importance Formula: Financial importance score = Weighted sum of factors affecting finan- cial importance Factors affecting financial importance may include. • Price: The current price of the CRMs and the extent to which it is expected to fluctuate. • Trading volume: The volume of the CRMs traded and the extent to which it is traded in multiple markets. • Use as a financial asset: The extent to which the CRMs is used as a financial asset, such as through the use of futures contracts or other financial instruments. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 5). • Price = 0.4 • Trading volume = 0.3 • Use as a financial asset = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM C has the highest financial impor- tance score, followed by CRMs B and A. 9.7. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on technological importance Formula: Technological importance score = Weighted sum of factors affecting technological importance Factors affecting technological importance may include. • Use in new technologies: The extent to which the CRMs is essential for the development and use of new technologies. • Use in existing technologies: The extent to which the CRMs is used in existing technologies and the importance of those technologies. • Potential for substitute materials: The availability and feasibility of substitute materials that could potentially replace the CRM. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 6). • Use in new technologies = 0.4 • Use in existing technologies = 0.3 • Potential for substitute materials = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest technological importance score, followed by CRMs C and B. 9.8. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on health and safety Formula: Health and safety score = Weighted sum of factors affecting health and safety Factors affecting health and safety may include. • Accident risk: The risk of accidents occurring during the production, transportation, or use of the CRM. • Spill risk: The risk of spills or releases of the CRMs occurring during the production, transportation, or use of the CRM. • Hazardous properties: The hazardous properties of the CRM, such as its toxicity or flammability. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 7). • Accident risk = 0.4. • Spill risk = 0.3. • Hazardous properties = 0.3. Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest health and safety score, followed by CRMs B and C. 9.9. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on resource availability Formula: Resource availability score = Weighted sum of factors affecting resource availability Factors affecting resource availability may include. • Annual global production: The annual global production of the CRM. • Annual global demand: The annual global demand for the CRM. Table 4 Governance impact risk matrix. CRMs Transparency Regulation: Corruption Total A 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.7 B 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.0 C 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 Table 5 Financial importance risk matrix. CRMs Price Trading volume Use as a financial asset Total A 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.5 B 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.7 C 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.9 Table 6 Technological importance risk matrix. CRMs Use in new technologies Use in existing technologies Potential for substitute materials Total A 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.0 B 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 C 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.8 G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 15 • Reserve base: The estimated amount of the CRMs economically and technically recoverable. • Recycling rate: The percentage of the CRMs recycled. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 8). • Annual global production = 0.4. • Annual global demand = 0.3. • Reserve base = 0.2. • Recycling rate = 0.1. Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest resource avail- ability score, followed by CRMs C and B. 9.10. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on ethical considerations Formula: Ethical considerations score = Weighted sum of factors affecting ethical considerations Factors affecting ethical considerations may include. • Working conditions: The working conditions at the production sites of the CRM. • Child labour: The use of child labour in the production of the CRM. • Human rights violations: The occurrence of human rights violations in the production, processing, transportation, or use of the CRM. • Transparency: The level of transparency in the supply chain of the CRM. The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 9). • Working conditions = 0.4 • Child labour = 0.3 • Human rights violations = 0.2 • Transparency = 0.1 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest ethical consider- ations score, followed by CRMs C and B. Lastly, technical scores can also be incorporated such as geological and metallurgical scores. 9.11. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on geological importance Formula: Geological importance score = Weighted sum of geological factors Geological factors may include. • Probability of resource depletion. • Geographical location of resource deposits. • Quality and characteristics of the material (such as purity, rarity and versatility). • Impact of extraction on the environment (including habitat destruction and pollution). The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Example Calculation: We assign weights to each factor (Table 10). • Probability of resource depletion = 0.2 • Geographical location of resource deposits = 0.2 • Quality and characteristics of the material = 0.3 • Impact of extraction on the environment = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest geological impor- tance score, followed by CRMs B and C, which have the same score. 9.12. Formula and example calculation for rating CRMs based on metallurgical importance Formula: Metallurgical importance score = Weighted sum of metallurgical factors Metallurgical factors may include. • Demand for the material in various industries (such as construction, automotive, electronics, etc.). • Versatility of the material (its ability to be used in a wide range of applications). • Recyclability of the material. • Ease of processing (including factors such as melting point, reactivity and toxicity). The weight assigned to each factor can depend on the specific context and the relative importance of each factor. Table 7 Highest health and safety risk matrix. CRMs Accident risk Spill risk Hazardous properties Total A 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.0 B 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.8 C 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.6 Table 8 Resource availability and safety risk matrix. CRMs Annual global production Annual global demand Reserve base Recycling rate Total A 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.9 B 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 C 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 Table 9 Ethical considerations and safety risk matrix. CRMs Working conditions Child labour Human rights violations Transparency Total A 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.8 B 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 C 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 Table 10 Geological importance and safety risk matrix. CRMs Probability of resource depletion Geographical location of resource deposits Quality and characteristics of the material Impact of extraction on the environment Total A 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.9 B 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 C 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 G.T. Nwaila et al. Resources Policy 93 (2024) 105045 16 Example Calculation: We assign the following weights to each factor (Table 11). • Demand for the material in various industries = 0.3 • Versatility of the material = 0.2 • Recyclability of the material = 0.2 • Ease of processing = 0.3 Based on this calculation, CRM A has the highest metallurgical importance score, followed by CRMs B and C, which have the same score. 10. A potential CRM list for South Africa Based on the metrics that were demonstrated in an example imple- mentation of our framework (section 9), we perform an actual prototype assessment using available data. In this assessment, we use uniform weighting of all indicators across all dimensions. This is because the weights depend strongly on an overall supply and consumption chain analysis (e.g., to increase weighting on supply-bottleneck components), and political focus (e.g., focus on primary resource or infrastructure development versus decarbonisation), which are beyond the scope of this study. In addition, not all dimensions could be assessed using our data sources. There was only sufficient data to assess: supply risk, ESG risks and economic importance. Data was sourced from reliable data- bases, which are those of the S&P Global (https://www.spglobal. com/en/) and Minerals Council of South Africa (https://www.mine ralscouncil.org.za/). They consisted of published datasets and reports. Each jurisdiction or producer was evaluated based on a set of plausible criteria specific to the non-technical or non-economic aspect in question, and the scores were then aggregated to give an overall score for each indicator. This method ensured that our assessment was not only grounded in measurable data but also incorporated realistic variability. However, the assessment of non-technical and non-economic aspects is intrinsically more qualitative than the other aspects, because there are no universally adopted accountability frameworks (e.g., ESG frame- works) that could be used in data poor and high poverty regions. We do not regard the confidence of social and governance risks at the same level as technical and economic data-informed aspects. Based on the calculations and framework parameters discussed above, we here present a prototype CRM list for South Africa in Table 12, with the location of some of the proposed CRMs presented in Fig. 6. In Table 12, we observe a diverse range of CRMs ranked based on various criteria, including supply risk, ESG risks and economic importance. Notably, PGMs are listed with a supply risk-score of 0.34, which appears relatively low compared to other CRMs. While PGMs may be essential for many countries lacking local resources, their supply for domestic consumption is seemingly non-critical. It is also evident that the CRMs listed benefit from domestic production, as indicated by their economic importance. This leads to the outcome that criticality scores are higher for elements that are not domestically available. The results in Table 12 emphasise the significance of geographic diversity in CRM production. Elements such as cobalt and heavy rare earths, which are largely concentrated in specific regions such as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Zambia, Malawi and Namibia, demonstrate high supply risk indicators. Conversely, CRMs such as coal, natural gas and oil, which are available in multiple countries, exhibit comparatively lower supply risk indicators. These findings underscore the importance of diversifying sources and reducing dependence on a limited number of regions to enhance supply security and mitigate associated risks. 11. A CRM list as an opportunity for South Africa South Africa has an opportunity to take advantage of the changing global economic landscape and reposition its economy to become a leader in the production, processing and further value-adding of CRMs. With a strategic focus on developing the country’s resources and expanding its industrial base, South Africa can emerge as a major sup- plier of the essential materials needed to drive the world’s modern economy. South Africa has several opportunities to position itself for success in the production of CRMs and clean energy. One key strategy is the development of a comprehensive CRM strategy that identifies the CRMs that are most important for the country’s energy goals, and out- lines strategies to secure stable supply and promote sustainable resource use. Investing in RDI can also be beneficial, as it can improve the effi- ciency and sustainability of CRM extraction, processing and recycling, Table 11 Metallurgical importance and safety risk matrix. CRMs Demand for the material in various industries Versatility of the material Recyclability of the material Ease of processing Total A 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.0 B 0.3