Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Mineral supply for sustainable development requires resource governance

A Corrigendum to this article was published on 28 June 2017


Successful delivery of the United Nations sustainable development goals and implementation of the Paris Agreement requires technologies that utilize a wide range of minerals in vast quantities. Metal recycling and technological change will contribute to sustaining supply, but mining must continue and grow for the foreseeable future to ensure that such minerals remain available to industry. New links are needed between existing institutional frameworks to oversee responsible sourcing of minerals, trajectories for mineral exploration, environmental practices, and consumer awareness of the effects of consumption. Here we present, through analysis of a comprehensive set of data and demand forecasts, an interdisciplinary perspective on how best to ensure ecologically viable continuity of global mineral supply over the coming decades.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Copper production.
Figure 2: Delays in approved copper projects worldwide based on year of discovery.
Figure 3: World exploration investment, 1975–2015.

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Rankin, J. Brussels steel summit fails to find answer to oversupply problem. The Guardian (18 April 2016; accessed June 2016)

  2. UNFPA Revision of Population Prospects (United Nations, 2015)

  3. UNFCCC Adoption of the Paris Agreement by the President: Paris Climate Change Conference. (United Nations, 2015); (accessed August, 2016)

  4. Vidal, O., Goffé, B. & Arndt, N. Metals for a low-carbon society. Nat. Geosci. 6, 894–896 (2013)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Alonso, E. et al. Evaluating rare earth element availability: a case with revolutionary demand from clean technologies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 3406–3414 (2012). Provides detailed analysis of the rapid projected rise in rare-earth mineral demand over the next three decades as a function of the growth in clean energy technologies.

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zepf, V., Reller, A., Rennie, C., Ashfield, M. & Simmons, J. B.P. Materials Critical to the Energy Industry (BP Publications, 2014)

  7. Larcher, D. & Tarascon, J.-M. Towards greener and more sustainable batteries for electrical energy storage. Nat. Chem. 7, 19–29 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bringezu, S. et al. Multi-scale governance of sustainable natural resource use — challenges and opportunities for monitoring and institutional development at the national and global level. Sustainability 8, 778 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Phillips, D. Brazil’s mining tragedy: was it a preventable disaster? The Guardian (25 November 2015; accessed August 2016)

  10. European Commission. Report on Critical Raw Materials for the EU (European Commission, 2014)

  11. Graedel, T. E., Harper, E. M., Nassar, N. T. & Reck, B. K. On the materials basis of modern society. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6295–6300 (2015)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Moss, R. L., Tzimas, E., Kara, H., Willis, P. & Kooroshy, J. Critical Metals in Strategic Energy Technologies: Assessing Rare Metals as Supply-Chain Bottlenecks in Low-Carbon Energy Technologies. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 24884 EN-2011. (European Union, 2011)

  13. Frenzel, M., Tolasano-Delgado, R. & Gutzmer, J. Assessing the supply potential of high-tech metals — a general method. Resour. Policy 46, 45–58 (2015). Presents a novel methodology for estimating supply using Monte Carlo type statistical simulations of repeated recovery of technology metals from product supply chains.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. International Resource Panel. Metals Recycling: Opportunities, Limits and Infrastructure (UNEP, Nairobi, 2007)

  15. Elshkaki, A., Graedel, T. E., Ciacci, L. & Reck, B. Copper demand, supply, and associated energy use to 2050. Glob. Environ. Change 39, 305–315 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. The World Copper Fact Book (International Copper Study Group, 2015); (accessed August 2016)

  17. Franks, D. M. et al. Conflict translates environmental and social risk into business costs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7576–7581 (2014). An evaluative study of the economic cost of social conflict estimated using a detailed analysis of mining projects worldwide through interviews with managers

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Susskind, L. & Ali, S. H. Environmental Diplomacy: Negotiating More Effective International Agreements (Oxford Univ. Press, 2014)

  19. Kesler, S. E. & Wilkinson, B. H. Earth’s copper resources estimated from tectonic diffusion of porphyry copper deposits. Geology 36, 255–258 (2008)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. USGSAnnual Review 2015: Exploration Review (accessed February 2017)

  21. Meinert, L. D., Robinson, G. R. & Nassar, N. T. Mineral resources: reserves, peak production and the future. Resources 5, 14 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gregson, N., Crang, M., Fuller, S. & Holmes, H. Interrogating the circular economy: the moral economy of resource recovery in the EU. Econ. Soc. 44, 218–243 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Natural Resource Governance Institute. Resource governance index: methodology. (accessed August 2016)

  24. Hatayama, H., Daigo, I. & Tahara, K. Tracking effective measures for closed-loop recycling of automobile steel in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycling 87, 65–71 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Angrick, M., Burger, A. & Lehmann, H. (eds) Factor X, Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science (Springer, 2013)

  26. Liu, G., Bangs, C. E. & Muller, D. B. Stock dynamics and emission pathways of the global aluminium cycle. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 338–342 (2012)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Graedel, T. et al. What do we know about metal recycling rates? J. Ind. Ecol. 15, 355–366 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Graedel, T. E., Harper, E. M., Nassar, N. T., Nuss, P. & Reck, B. K. Criticality of metals and metalloids. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 4257–4262 (2015). A comprehensive evaluation of key limiting factors that lead to potential mineral security concerns from the point of view of mineral demand and supply bottlenecks

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. Naden, J. Sustainable Use of Natural Resources (Science and Implementation Plan, Security of Supply of Mineral Resources (SoS Minerals) Research Programme 2012–2017, Natural Environment Research Council, UK, 2013);

  30. Gunn, G. & Bloodworth, A. Briefing: minerals security of supply: a geological perspective. Proc. ICE Waste Resour. Management 165, 171–173 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  31. European Commission. Report of the Ad hoc Working Group on Defining Critical Raw Materials (European Commission Report on Critical Raw Materials for the EU, European Commission, 2014)

  32. National Science and Technology Council. Assessment of Critical Minerals: Screening Methodology and Initial Application (The White House, 2016);

  33. British Geological Survey. World Mineral Production 2006–10 (British Geological Survey, 2012)

  34. Glöser, S., Tercero Espinoza, L., Gandenberger, C. & Faulstich, M. Raw material criticality in the context of classical risk assessment. Resour. Policy 44, 35–46 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wilts, H. & Bleischwitz, R. in Factor X, Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science (eds Angrick, M., Burger, A. & Lehmann, H. ) Ch. 7 (Springer, 2013)

  36. Henckens, M. L. C. M., Driessen, P. P. J., Ryngaert, C. & Worrell, E. The set-up of an international agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of geologically scarce mineral resources. Resour. Policy 49, 92–101 (2016). Bold article that makes the case for an international agreement on minerals based on both intergenerational equity and resource conservation arguments with a suggested quota development model.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Preston,F., Bailey, R., Bradley, S., Wei, J. & Zhao, C. Navigating the New Normal: China and Global Resource Governance (Chatham House and Development Research Centre of the Chinese State Council, 2015);

  38. Desai, M. The Advent of the United Nations Environment Assembly. Insights from the American Society of International Law 19, (2015)

  39. Melcher, F. et al. Analytical fingerprint for tantalum ores from African deposits. Geophys. Res. Abstr. 11, 2452 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Franken, G. et al. in Non-Renewable Resource Issues: Geoscientific and Societal Challenges (eds Sinding-Larsen, R. & Wellmer, F. W. ) Ch. 10 (Springer, 2012)

  41. Correa, C. Integrating Public Health Concerns into Patent Legislation in Developing Countries (The South Centre, Geneva, 2000)

  42. Crawford, I. A. Lunar resources: a review. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 39, 137–167 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Roth, S. E. Developing a law of asteroids: constants, variables, and alternatives. Columbia J. Transnatl. Law 54, 827–872 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Gielen, D., Boshell, F. & Saygin, D. Climate and energy challenges for materials science. Nat. Mater. 15, 117–120 (2016)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. Jeffries, E. Coming clean. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5, 93–95 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  46. International Resource Panel. Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impact from Economic Growth (UNEP, 2011)

  47. International Resource Panel. Metal Stocks in Society: Scientific Synthesis (UNEP, 2010)

  48. International Resource Panel. Recycling Rates of Metals: A Status Report (UNEP, 2011)

  49. International Resource Panel. Metals Recycling: Opportunities, Limits, Infrastructure (UNEP, 2013)

  50. International Resource Panel. Environmental Risks and Challenges of Anthropogenic Metal Flows and Cycles (UNEP, 2015)

  51. International Resource Panel. Estimating Long-run Geological Stocks of Metals (UNEP, 2011)

  52. International Resource Panel. Global Material Flow and Resource Productivity (UNEP, 2016)

Download references


The authors are an interdisciplinary group, operating under the Resourcing Future Generations initiative of the International Union of Geological Sciences, the International Council for Science Unions and UNESCO. D. Nyanganyura of the International Council for Science and F. Masotti of Vale Corporation provided comments that led to this Perspective. S. Mohr of the University of Technology Sydney assisted with the model output results presented. Financial support provided by UNESCO, IUGS and ICSU, and logistical support provided by the Namibian Geological Survey, is acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



S.H.A. designed and synthesized the written Perspective with N.A. and D.G.; E.N. led S.H.A., D.G., N.A., R.O., L.M., A.D., M.A.E., J.S., G.B., N.Y., A.L., G.S., J.K. and R.D. to develop the analytical framework and policy response recommendations through consensus; O.V. and N.A. contributed data for Fig. 1 and for material in Supplementary Information SI-1; D.G. contributed material in Supplementary Information SI-2; R.S. contributed data for Figs 2 and 3 and material in Supplementary Information SI-4. A.D. contributed material in Supplementary Information SI-5 and provided commentary on geochemical database and other existing tools and their data deficits. M.A.E. and J.S. prepared Box 1.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saleem H. Ali.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks J. Gutzmer, S. Kesler and B. Reck for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Figures, Supplementary Tables and additional references. (PDF 1039 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ali, S., Giurco, D., Arndt, N. et al. Mineral supply for sustainable development requires resource governance. Nature 543, 367–372 (2017).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing