
The preceding chapters outline supply and demand dynamics, including pressures on material systems, and examine the potential contribution of circularity to closing supply gaps and building more resilient material systems. This chapter gives recommendations for business, financial, and policy stakeholders.
As has been established throughout this analysis, the five materials examined behave in distinct ways, with distinct characteristics, and recommendations at a more granular level would therefore vary by material. Here, they are kept relatively high-level, with material-specific examples brought in where useful. Lifetime-extension interventions are particularly relevant to silicon, for instance, while end-of-life infrastructure improvements are particularly relevant to ‘younger’ metals such as lithium.
These recommendations are made at a global level. More concrete recommendations would vary country-to-country. Resilience, for example, looks different depending on whether a country is a producer or a consumer nation, and countries do not share a common understanding of what value addition means—for some it centres on domestic processing and refining, for others on capturing downstream manufacturing industries such as battery-cell assembly or vehicle production.185 Reconciling these different realities and strategic objectives is therefore a task for a more detailed analysis rather than one with a global scope, and one that must weigh social and environmental value alongside economic value. With this context in mind, four overarching recommendations emerge from the analysis for the integration of circular interventions into critical raw material (CRM) systems.
The analysis indicates that ambitious circularity can materially reshape critical material supply and demand, with its greatest value emerging over time. Its contribution often arrives later than the demand it is intended to offset, but it remains important to reducing total primary material demand by 2050.
What follows is largely a question of sequencing. Material entering use this decade determines what can be recovered in the next; recovery capacity built in the 2030s determines supply availability in the 2040s; and the measurement frameworks adopted today determine which strategies are pursued at all. The decisions made now will therefore shape the critical material systems of the future.
Circularity can improve material efficiency, extend product lifetimes, and bring critical materials back into use. Continued, responsible primary extraction and substitution will remain important where circular strategies cannot meet demand, while managing demand itself will be critical to keeping material requirements within feasible limits.
The persistence of supply shortfalls across material systems, even with ambitious circularity interventions, raises a more fundamental question about demand: what are critical raw materials being used for, and who decides? With competing demands for these materials and hard constraints on supply, deciding which uses to prioritise becomes as important as using materials more efficiently. This addresses demand at its source, rather than only managing it once it has been created.
Circularity is therefore a core pillar of a resilient material transition. Building resilience will depend on getting the sequence right: reducing demand where possible, extending material use, preparing now for future recovery, and ensuring responsible primary supply where it remains necessary. It also means asking harder questions about what we use critical materials for in the first place. The choices made today will shape whether the material systems of tomorrow are resilient, resource-efficient, and capable of delivering the energy transition while potentially minimising environmental and social impacts.
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