INSIGHT •
DEFINING AFRICA’ S CRITICAL MINERALS FOR INDUSTRIAL GROWTH
By Nomsa Mbere, partner, Webber Wentzel
As the global economy transitions towards low-carbon energy systems and digital technologies, minerals such as lithium, cobalt, platinum group metals( PGMs), rare earth elements( REEs) and graphite have become central inputs into emerging industrial systems.
Yet the conversation around " critical minerals " remains dominated by Global North perspectives, often overlooking Africa ' s unique context and developmental needs. Despite their growing importance, there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes a critical mineral. National critical-minerals classifications vary considerably and are periodically updated, with current lists generally ranging from about 30 to 35 minerals across India, the European Union, the United Kingdom and Canada.
This variation raises a fundamental policy question for African decision-makers: how can critical mineral policy be leveraged not only for global competitiveness but for domestic industrialisation, job creation and regional economic integration? Most existing critical mineral lists have been formulated by countries in the Global North in response to concerns about import dependence, supplychain resilience and strategic competition. While these frameworks provide useful reference points, their direct application in African contexts risks prioritising global supply concerns over domestic development imperatives.
This article explores whether Africa requires its own definition of mineral criticality, one that positions resource wealth as a driver of sustainable economic transformation rather than a raw export commodity. It also examines the limitations of existing global frameworks, explores regional variations in mineral priorities, and outlines principles for an Africacentred approach to defining critical minerals.
Global North ' s supply-focused approach In advanced, import-dependent economies, mineral criticality is primarily assessed through supply-side risk. Indicators such as geographic concentration of production, import reliance and economic importance dominate the analysis, often sidelining broader developmental considerations. These criteria are appropriate for economies seeking to secure uninterrupted access to externally sourced mineral inputs essential to high-technology manufacturing, defence and energy systems.
The direct application of these frameworks to African contexts presents several limitations. Firstly, they prioritise minerals based on scarcity and import exposure, metrics that undervalue minerals crucial for domestic industrialisation. Secondly, they tend to overlook minerals that are globally abundant but foundational for domestic industrial development, such as iron ore for steel production. Third, they reflect the technological priorities of advanced economies rather than the structural transformation objectives of developing economies, including infrastructure expansion, manufacturing capability and employment creation. Finally, they fail to address Africa’ s historical extraction patterns and institutional constraints that limit African value capture, perpetuating dependency on raw materials exports.
Southern Africa illustrates the divergence between Africa ' s mineral endowment and prevailing global definitions of criticality. The region hosts substantial reserves of minerals central to both energytransition technologies and broader industrial development. The Democratic Republic of Congo holds the world ' s largest cobalt reserves; Zimbabwe has emerged as an important lithium producer; South Africa accounts for significant global production of PMGs, manganese and vanadium; Namibia is developing rare earth element capacity and Zambia and Botswana remain important copper producers, including within the emerging Kalahari Copper Belt. Yet global critical mineral lists rarely reflect the strategic importance of these resources to African development agendas.
Within the Southern African Development Community( SADC), national interpretations of mineral criticality vary according to economic structure, industrial capability and Nomsa Mbere, partner, Webber Wentzel. development priorities. South Africa emphasises PGMs, manganese, vanadium and iron ore, while Zambia, Zimbabwe and Namibia prioritise copper, lithium and rare earth elements. This regional diversity underscores the need for an Africa-centred framework that balances national priorities with collective industrial ambitions.
Supplied by Webber Wentzel
South Africa ' s development-centric model South Africa defines critical minerals as those essential to economic development, employment creation, industrial advancement and national security. Its framework extends beyond supply risk to include export significance, local economic impact, industrial relevance, alignment with national development priorities, and current and projected global demand. This approach exemplifies how a country can integrate mineral policy with broader socioeconomic objectives.
South Africa ' s classification differentiates between minerals of high criticality( including platinum, manganese, iron ore, coal and chrome ore), moderate to high criticality( such as gold, vanadium, palladium, rhodium and rare earth elements), and moderate criticality( including copper, cobalt, lithium, graphite, nickel, titanium, phosphate, fluorspar, zirconium, uranium and aluminium). Notably, the inclusion of coal and iron ore, largely absent from Global North critical mineral lists, highlights the need to contextualise criticality in terms of national development priorities rather than purely global supply concerns.
A locally relevant framework should be guided by the following principles:
• Development-oriented assessment Mineral criticality should be evaluated primarily in terms of contribution to development outcomes, including employment, industrialisation, infrastructure development, fiscal revenues, foreign exchange generation, and skills and technology transfer.
• Value-chain positioning Assessments should account for a country’ s position within mineral value chains. For producer countries, this includes processing and manufacturing potential; for resourceconstrained economies, it may relate to the affordability of imports and participation in regional supply chains.
• Regional complementarity Given the uneven distribution of mineral resources across the continent, a regional or continental framework should explicitly recognise interdependencies and promote crossborder value chains that leverage comparative advantages.
www. africanmining. co. za African Mining Publication African Mining African Mining • April 2026 • 37