Hero image

CGR Critical Raw Materials

Executive summary
1. Introduction
2. Measuring the circularity of critical raw materials
3. Baseline: The five critical raw material systems
Copper
Nickel
Silicon
Lithium
Cobalt
4. Circularity scenarios
Material stocks
System resilience
Circularity's limits
Decarbonisation pathways
Material flows
Secondary supply
5. Solutions and next steps
About

Introduction

The rise of critical raw materials

Hidden within the infrastructure and technologies that our economies run on is a complex array of minerals. Copper carries electricity. Lithium stores energy. Nickel strengthens batteries and alloys. Cobalt enables high-performance technologies. Silicon underpins both semiconductors and solar panels. Together with many other materials, they sustain the products that modern societies rely on every day. These are critical raw materials (CRMs): materials characterised by two converging conditions—high economic importance and significant supply risk. 1

There is no single globally agreed-upon definition of what makes a material ‘critical’. Governments and institutions develop their own lists and assessment frameworks, reflecting differences in industrial requirements, access to resources, and other strategic priorities.2 Criticality is also inherently dynamic. A material may become critical as demand rises or supply becomes more concentrated, and become less critical as technologies evolve, substitution becomes viable, or new sources emerge.3 Despite these differences, definitions converge on two core dimensions:

  • Economic importance: the role a material plays in strategically important industries and technologies important to modern society, from semiconductors and batteries to permanent magnets and aerospace components.
  • Supply risk: the likelihood of disruption arising from factors such as geographic concentration of extraction and processing, limited substitutability, market fluctuations, and geopolitical exposure.4

CRMs underpin a wide range of economic sectors, supporting essential societal needs—from clean energy and mobility to healthcare and housing—as well as a broader set of strategic priorities, including industrial resilience, advanced technologies, and national security.

Their supply chains are among the most geographically concentrated and structurally complex in the global economy. A single material may be extracted in one country, processed and refined in another, fabricated into components in a third, and assembled into finished products in a fourth before being consumed worldwide. These already complex supply chains are further complicated by limited transparency.5 Many CRMs are used in small quantities or obtained as by-products of other materials. The result is a highly interconnected global material system with multiple points of fragility, vulnerable to risks ranging from trade restrictions to processing bottlenecks and price fluctuations.

The five materials at the centre of this report—copper, nickel, cobalt, lithium, and silicon—illustrate in different ways how these structural characteristics could translate into real-world impacts.

Aims of the Circularity Gap Report: Critical Raw Materials

This report examines the historical and future supply and demand dynamics of five critical raw materials: copper, nickel, cobalt, lithium, and silicon. Using dynamic material flow analysis, it looks at how these materials move through the global economy between 2020 and 2050, and assesses how circular economy strategies could help close emerging supply gaps while strengthening long-term resilience.

The report aims to:

  1. Quantify the gap between projected demand for CRMs and current supply trajectories, identifying where potential supply constraints may emerge.
  2. Assess the potential of circular strategies—including longer product lifetimes, lower material intensity, reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling—to narrow supply gaps and strengthen resilience across different CRM systems.
  3. Identify the key leverage points for improving CRM management in ways that strengthen economic resilience while reducing environmental and social pressures.

Together, these aims seek to clarify not only how much more CRMs the global economy may require, but also how much of that demand could be met by keeping materials in circulation for longer, reducing material demand, and recovering the resources already embedded within the economy.

References

  1. 1. While in this analysis we use the term ‘critical raw materials’, these are also referred to as simply ‘critical materials’ or ‘critical minerals’. ‘Critical raw materials’ specifically is the term used within EU policy-making.
  2. 2. For instance, in the EU, this list is detailed in the EU Critical Raw Materials Act and assessed for continued strategic importance every three years, while in the US, The US Department of the Interior and the Geological Survey assigns its own list of strategically important raw materials which is also updated at least every three years. At least 23 countries across the globe have such lists of materials designated critical.
  3. 3. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2023). Geopolitics of the energy transition: Critical materials (Rep.). Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency. Retrieved from: IRENA website
  4. 4. International Energy Agency. (2025). Critical minerals policy tracker. Retrieved from: IEA website
  5. 5. International Renewable Energy Agency. (2023). Geopolitics of the energy transition: Critical materials (Rep.). Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency. Retrieved from: IRENA website
  6. 6. Sobotka, B. (2023, January 18). The great minerals scramble: How can we provide the materials needed for the energy transition? World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
  7. 7. UNEP. (2024). Critical transitions: Circularity, equity, and responsibility in the quest for energy transition minerals (Working paper, Rep.). Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved from: UNEP website
  8. 8. International Energy Agency. (2025). Global critical minerals outlook 2025 (Rep.). Paris: International Energy Agency. Retrieved from: IEA website
  9. 9. Allgood, K., & Hulak, I. (2025, December 10). Metals at scale for AI at scale: Securing the data centre materials backbone. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
  10. 10. International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). (2025). Critical raw materials and European defence (Rep.). London: International Institute for Strategic Studies. Retrieved from: IISS Website
  11. 11. International Energy Agency. (2025). Global critical minerals outlook 2025 (Rep.). Paris: International Energy Agency. Retrieved from: IEA website
  12. 12. World Economic Forum. (2024). Translating critical raw material trade into development benefits (White paper, Rep.). Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
  13. 13. UNEP. (2024). Critical transitions: Circularity, equity, and responsibility in the quest for energy transition minerals (Working paper, Rep.). Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved from: UNEP website
  14. 14. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL). (2024). Environmental impacts of extraction and processing of raw materials for the energy transition (Rep.). The Hague: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Retrieved from: PBL website
  15. 15. van Gaalen, J. M., & Chris Slootweg, J. (2024). From critical raw materials to circular raw materials. ChemSusChem, 18(2). doi:10.1002/cssc.202401170
  16. 16. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL). (2025). Social impacts of mining critical raw materials: Challenges and entry points for governance (Rep.). The Hague: PBL, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Retrieved from: PBL website
  17. 17. International Resource Panel. (2020). Resource efficiency and climate change: Material efficiency strategies for a low-carbon future (Rep.). Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved from: IRP website
  18. 18. Stanimirova, R., Harris, N., Reytar, K., Wang, K., & Barbanell, M. (2024, October 23). Mining is increasingly pushing into critical rainforests and protected areas. World Resources Institute. Retrieved from: WRI website
  19. 19. Gill, V. (2023, 22 September). Metal-mining pollution impacts 23 million people worldwide. Retrieved from: BBC News website
  20. 20. World Economic Forum. (2024). Translating critical raw material trade into development benefits (White paper, Rep.). Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
  21. 21. As demonstrated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, for example.
  22. 22. United Nations (UN). (2026) The Faultlines in our World are Widening'–UN Secretary-General at the General Assembly. Retrieved from: UN website
  23. 23. United Nations Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2026). Critical minerals, critical decisions: Industrial policy for the energy transition. Retrieved from: UNCTAD website
  24. 24. World Economic Forum. (2024). Translating critical raw material trade into development benefits (White paper, Rep.). Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
  25. 25. Eurostat. (2023). Contribution of recycled materials to raw materials demand – end-of-life recycling input rates (EOL-RIR). Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  26. 26. Charpentier Poncelet, A., Helbig, C., Loubet, P., Beylot, A., Muller, S., Villeneuve, J., … Sonnemann, G. (2022a). Losses and lifetimes of metals in the economy. Nature Sustainability, 5(8), 717–726. doi:10.1038/s41893-022-00895-8
  27. 27. European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). (2017). Critical raw materials and the circular economy – Background report (Rep.). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from: JRC website
  28. 29. IEA. (2026). Designing an effective strategic stockpiling system for critical minerals. Retrieved from: IEA website
  29. 30. World Economic Forum. (2024). Translating critical raw material trade into development benefits (White paper, Rep.). Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from: WEF website
Previous
Executive summary
Next
2. Measuring the circularity of critical raw materials

The Circularity Gap Report is an initiative of Circle Economy, an impact organisation dedicated to accelerating the transition to the circular economy.

© 2008 - Present | RSIN 850278983