How can African states benefit from the EU Critical Raw Material Act and the UK Critical Minerals Strategy

The EU CRMA and UK CMS aim to reduce dependence on China and secure supplies for the green transition, but their domestic focus may hinder African industrialization. While the EU targets 10% domestic mining and 40% processing by 2030, its international partnerships are criticized as extractivist. The brief highlights a misalignment in 'criticality' definitions, where African states prioritize regional industrialization and specific minerals like gold or coal, which may conflict with Western climate goals or sanctions. It concludes that without a shift toward supporting in-country processing and reducing certification costs for local firms, these strategies will fail to create mutually beneficial partnerships.

• The EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) sets specific 2030 self-sufficiency targets for domestic demand: 10% for mining and extraction, 40% for processing and refining, and 15% for recycled sources.
• The EU and UK strategies are characterized as less interventionist than the state-led model of China or the subsidies provided by the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), relying more on market forces and reducing business barriers.
• There is a fundamental misalignment in how 'criticality' is defined; Western nations focus on national economic needs and the green transition, while African states define it based on global demand opportunities and regional industrialization.
• Specific national priorities in Africa conflict with Western goals, such as South Africa's strategic view of coal for energy production and Zambia's inclusion of diamonds in its critical minerals list, which may clash with G7 sanctions on Russia.
• The EU's partnership model in Africa is criticized for being 'extractivist', prioritizing the export of raw materials over the development of in-country processing and value addition.
• While the EU Global Gateway projects a global investment of up to EUR 300 billion, including EUR 150 billion for Africa, the document notes that no African mining projects have received funding to date.
• High costs associated with ESG certification and 'responsible sourcing' requirements can exclude local African companies from mining supply chains, increasing reliance on imports.

APA

Vandome, C. (2024). How can African states benefit from the EU Critical Raw Material Act and the UK Critical Minerals Strategy. Africa Policy Research Institute. https://afripoli.org/how-can-african-states-benefit-from-the-eu-critical-raw-material-act-and-the-uk-critical-minerals-strategy

Chicago

Vandome, Christopher. How can African states benefit from the EU Critical Raw Material Act and the UK Critical Minerals Strategy. Africa Policy Research Institute, 2024. https://afripoli.org/how-can-african-states-benefit-from-the-eu-critical-raw-material-act-and-the-uk-critical-minerals-strategy.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Vandome |first1=Christopher |title=How can African states benefit from the EU Critical Raw Material Act and the UK Critical Minerals Strategy |publisher=Africa Policy Research Institute |date=11 September 2024 |url=https://afripoli.org/how-can-african-states-benefit-from-the-eu-critical-raw-material-act-and-the-uk-critical-minerals-strategy |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{vandome2024how, author = {Vandome, Christopher}, title = {{How can African states benefit from the EU Critical Raw Material Act and the UK Critical Minerals Strategy}}, institution = {Africa Policy Research Institute}, year = {2024}, month = sep, url = {https://afripoli.org/how-can-african-states-benefit-from-the-eu-critical-raw-material-act-and-the-uk-critical-minerals-strategy}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }