As geopolitical disputes escalate, critical mineral access becomes a new front in great power rivalry. The rules for their extraction and management are scattered, but one UN body establishes tools that could potentially plug regulatory cracks.
Countries are ramping up their efforts to secure minerals required to power high-speed processors and autonomous weapons systems as well as sensors, as the nature of war evolves from frontline warfare to AI-assisted, remote-controlled drone attacks. The green energy transition, aided by a spike in fossil fuel prices triggered by the war in Iran, has also pressured consumption of minerals utilised in the production of products like electric vehicles and batteries as well as solar panels.
Minerals have emerged as a weak spot in Washington’s trade war with Beijing, which dominates the mining and refining capacity when it comes to critical substances. Trump’s interest in Greenland was also partly due to the Danish territory’s enormous reserves of rare-earth minerals. Washington has also gained access to Ukraine’s and Venezuela’s deposits by means of coercive bargaining or military force.
But the rush for resources has sparked fears of possible environmental and social violations in the face of weak or absent national or international rules.
According to the co-founder and executive director of the Geneva Platform for Resilient Value Chains at the Geneva Graduate Institute, Peter Wooders, “A lot of the challenges in developing critical minerals remain the same as for any mineral. When you are looking to develop more copper, cobalt, lithium or whatever mined product, there will be long lead times, a long time to get your money back and high capital cost requirements.”
Countries that host the minerals will face other issues, he adds, weighing up economic advantages to the country by means of licences granted to developers, or by acquiring a share in the production, with social and environmental repercussions.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo’s ambassador to the United Nations, Zénon Mukongo Ngay, recently went on to warn the UN Security Council that mineral trade has frequently fuelled violence. The UN said the need for critical minerals is projected to increase fourfold by 2040 from around $2.5 trillion in 2023.
Establishing standards
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe – UNECE is running its Resource Management Week at present, demonstrating tools and strategies that encourage sustainable practices and financial viability in mining thereby reiterating the need for efficiency as the UN body establishes tools. This is in advance of the G7 summit in Evian in June 2026, when mineral access as well as energy security are expected to be high on the agenda.
In a sector which is traditionally ambiguous, the UN Framework Classification for Resources – UNFC provides greater accountability and transparency for nations as well as other stakeholders in mining projects, said the director of the UNECE sustainable energy division, Dario Liguti, to Geneva Solutions.
It is well to be noted that UNFC is a tool for classifying and describing mineral resources. It uses a three-pronged approach when it comes to data collection in terms of geological reserves, economic and financial feasibility of projects, and social and environmental effects of projects.
The methodology lets countries and companies evaluate mineral projects so that policymakers, along with investors, can have a holistic perspective of each project to comprehend its features and what is required to be done to develop it, Liguti said.
According to the UN official,” UNFC is the only mining classification methodology -Ed. that takes into consideration not only economic and financial perspectives but also what its environmental and social impacts are and how we can mitigate those aspects.”
Use of tools
In particular, the European Union has embraced the homogenised approach in the Critical Raw Materials Act, that defines the region’s strategy in order to become more independent in its minerals supply chain, in accordance with the sustainable development goals of the UN and the Paris climate agreement.
The EU’s first call for mineral supply projects earlier in 2026 selected 60 initiatives, out of which 47 are in the EU and 13 happen to be outside, all classified according to the UNFC. The European Commission said accomplishing strategic project status would assist them by generating financial resources. Ukraine also embraced the UNFC and its norms, and the African Union is employing a UNFC derivation for the African context, says Liguti.
Australia’s vast reserves of key minerals, including the world’s second-largest lithium deposit as well as aluminium and manganese, were part of the latest trade deal signed between the EU and Canberra. This involves employing the UNFC through the European Critical Raw Minerals Act.
Furthermore, the UNECE has established voluntary standards, the UN Resource Management System – RMS, based on UNFC, to promote good governance when it comes to the ethical production and administration of mineral resources.
As per Liguti, “You have a classification methodology (in UNFC), and then (with RMS) you have a project management methodology to support the sustainable development of these resources.”
He notes that organisations listed on stock exchanges have additionally been adopting those approaches and standards. Both tools could also enable interested parties, such as local communities, to get involved in the development of mining projects.
Opportunity or mineral curse?
UNFC may be gaining momentum, but experts warn that mineral-rich nations remain at risk as the need for critical minerals increases.
If there is a country that has a critical mineral, it is essential to be really careful when it thinks through what the pros and cons of exploiting that resource are, Wooders warns.
He cites Indonesia as an example which banned exports of nickel ore in a bid to broaden its economy but suffered severe environmental consequences as it established its processing industry. Now the country is the world’s biggest producer of the metal that is used in wind turbines and solar panels as well as electric vehicles.
The laws and regulations in this domain were never adequate or strong, and there always existed a significant execution gap, says environment director with Human Rights Watch, Richard Pearshouse. This relatively fragile system is now under unimaginable stress from this rush for critical minerals.
He also says environmental, social and governance promises are being diluted and that government rules, such as the EU corporate sustainability due diligence directive, are also being diluted.
Pearhouse claims that enforceable regulations are needed to guarantee that affected populations are able to take part in project development in order to avoid social and environmental harm. Wooders says that as interest rises, nations with critical minerals are in a stronger bargaining position. They should be able to bargain for more favourable deals than what they might get for non-critical minerals, including a variety of other advantages.