The U.N. says creating an international body to oversee critical commodities could shore up worldwide supply, but getting big players on board would be tricky
By Don Nico Forbes
Global competition to secure critical minerals is ramping up, and the United Nations has a plan to help countries play nice and avoid conflict.
It recently set out a proposal for a “Global Minerals Trust” that would see nations that produce and consume critical minerals, and the companies that do so within them, jointly manage a stockpile of pooled commodities in an effort to avoid shortages, encourage recycling, support production in developing countries and prioritize minerals for sustainable developers.
Think Bretton Woods—the system put in place to guide international monetary management after World War II—but for green tech.
Against an increasingly competitive geopolitical backdrop, researchers at the U.N. University—the academic arm of the U.N.—say a more collaborative and sustainable framework for organizing global resources would lead to a more reliable supply chain with less risk of shortages.
“By coordinating access, pooling resources, and embedding social and environmental safeguards, the trust can promote equitable, circular, and conflict-free mineral value chains,” according to the UNU policy brief.
But in a tense political climate, convincing governments to ditch national interest for international commitments is far from straightforward.
“You’ve got to get the big players on board for this to work, and many are just too risk averse,” said Julian Kettle, vice chair of metals and mining at research firm Wood Mackenzie.
Demand for critical minerals is set to triple by 2030, according to the International Energy Agency, with defense applications, artificial intelligence data centers and the energy transition putting an ever greater strain on resources. Clean-energy technologies alone account for more than 50% of total demand growth for critical minerals. For some like lithium and cobalt, clean tech represents the vast majority of current demand.
“As the industry develops, and volumes build, supply of minerals is going to become more critical,” said Pierre Blanc, chief executive of Leclanché, a Swiss battery manufacturer.
The sharp rise in demand has led to growing international competition and resource nationalism, with tensions among the U.S., Europe and China most prominent. In April, responding to higher U.S. tariffs, China imposed export restrictions on certain rare earths. The move forced several electric-vehicle manufacturers, including Ford and Japan’s Suzuki Motor, to cut production.
Developing countries boasting significant reserves have also been drawn into the fray. Some lack the infrastructure to process resources, but are eager to ensure that revenue—and jobs—stay local. In June, Zimbabwe banned lithium exports from 2027, despite limited refining capacity, while lawmakers in the Democratic Republic of Congo extended an export ban on cobalt.
“What we’re seeing is growing risk to the industry, where geopolitical decisions can cause major disruptions to supply chains,” Blanc said. “That’s where having more stability and visibility can really help.”
The situation makes international cooperation urgent, according to Saleem Ali, one of the authors of the U.N. proposal and a professor at the University of Delaware.
“Cases like Zimbabwe are a symptom of the problem. We don’t have sufficient global coordination. We have established clubs, divided between east and west, between global south and north,” he said.
Ali hopes the Trust would undercut nationalist tendencies by offering a more efficient and economically stable environment for both producers, who could sell consistently into the trust, and consumers, who could benefit from a more reliable supply chain.
An appetite for international cooperation could be picking up. In late June, the U.S. and China reached a deal over rare earths, making it easier for American firms to access Chinese resources. Days later, ministers for the U.S., Australia, India and Japan launched the Quad Critical Minerals Initiative, a partnership designed to “strengthen economic security and collective resilience by collaborating on securing and diversifying critical mineral supply chains.”
At the most recent Group of Seven meeting, policymakers launched what they called a Critical Minerals Action Plan, seeking to promote a more transparent, sustainable and resilient supply chain. Ali sees the G-20 as the most useful springboard for the concept, partly because China—whose participation would be key to any future trust—will have a seat at the table. But also because the U.S. will host the presidency in 2026.
But GlobalData analyst Martina Raveni said getting the dominant countries on board won’t be easy.
“Big countries like the U.S. and China don’t want to lose their control over mineral supplies. At the same time, some countries are reluctant to cede control over their resources, in terms of mineral pricing and power in negotiations,” she noted.
For Wood Mackenzie’s Kettle, the timing is inopportune.
“If this had happened five years ago with Biden in power putting the [Inflation Reduction Act] in place, Europe not having a war within its borders, stronger economic growth, then this proposal might have struck harder,” he said.
Nevertheless, for many manufacturers on the front lines of the energy transition, the idea is intriguing.
“The industry wants to be removed from the uncertainty of geopolitics. The complexity of our supply chains requires stability,” said Leclanché’s Blanc. “At least theoretically, a global trust could provide this stability and reduce the risk of shortages moving forward.”
China’s Contemporary Amperex Technology—the world’s largest EV battery maker—said it was in favor of increased international cooperation.
“The shift to a circular economy will not happen in isolation. It will require collaboration across sectors and geographies. We look forward to working with the U.N. and global partners to translate ambition into systems-level change,” it said.
International Lithium Association Secretary General Roland Chavasse said the body was “supportive of all efforts by all the governments of the world to collaborate and expedite the path towards a decarbonized economy.”
From a sustainability standpoint, a Global Minerals Trust would also seek to ensure a cleaner, more efficient supply chain for critical minerals, Ali said. Deals such as that made between the U.S. and Ukraine could be made multilaterally, and linked to sustainability indicators, for example.
When it comes to hot-button issues such as deep-sea mining, the organization could verify that sourcing comes alongside emissions reductions in terrestrial mining, Ali said.
“The aim is to prevent a race to the bottom, where you end up with lower-grade deposits, higher waste generation and new mines opening in inefficient regions. A strategic stockpile would also mean potential leasing deals and a circular system,” he said.
GlobalData’s Raveni added that the trust could help unpack the “extract-and-export” model gripping many producers in developing nations, with China in particular dominating the procurement and processing of resources in Africa and South America.
“Many developing countries that produce minerals don’t get a fair share of the profits…The trust could help change that by making sure these countries are part of the decision-making on how to manage their mineral resources, and get support to process minerals locally.”
Big players may not want to lose pricing power or control over resources, but demand from industry for critical minerals is making increased coordination a necessity, Ali said.
And despite the odds, there is precedent.
“When it comes to planetary challenges, we often cooperate even in times of conflict. In the Cold War we had the Antarctic Treaty signed,” he said, referring to the agreement that designated the continent as a scientific preserve. “We can do the same now. We just need leadership, and a vision.”
*Credit: Wall Street Journal
