Responsibility is the surest path to resilience in the Minerals Age
Rohitesh “Ro” Dhawan is the president and CEO of the International Council on Mining and Minerals (ICMM), a role he has held since 2021. He leads the Council of 26 CEOs of the world’s largest mining and metals companies in voluntary leadership actions that raise the standards of responsible mining. This essay is part of the 2026 Global Energy Agenda.
In industry, we often talk about minerals as the hidden ingredients of modern life. They are the enablers of technological progress and economic growth, and more recently of national security. But the world’s dependence on them is no secret. Throughout history, people have shown a primordial connection to metals and minerals, dating back to the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. Each marked a step forward in human development as each era harnessed the power of these resources.
Now the world is on the cusp of another defining era: the Minerals Age.
Four big transitions are converging at once: the shift from fossil fuels to electrification; from just-in-time globalization to just-in-case economic security; from relative geopolitical stability to strategic rivalry and rearmament; and from the digital age to the age of artificial intelligence. All four are dramatically increasing demand for minerals.
Copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, and rare earths have become strategic resources: the “new oil.” They’re in everything from phones to semiconductors, fighter jets, transmission lines, wind turbines, and data centers. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that demand for critical minerals in clean energy systems alone could double or quadruple by 2040 depending on the pace of the energy transition. Artificial intelligence (AI) will add further pressure through the rapid expansion of energy-intensive digital infrastructure.
But the world is entering this new era with deeply concentrated and increasingly vulnerable supply chains.
China is now the dominant refiner for nineteen of the twenty strategic minerals analyzed by the IEA, with an average market share of around 70 percent. Each represents a potential chokepoint. Recent export controls on graphite, gallium, germanium, and rare earths have demonstrated how quickly mineral dependencies can become geopolitical leverage.
Structural weaknesses across the mining value chain compound the problem. Bringing a new mine from discovery to production now takes an average of sixteen years. Ore grades are declining in many mature mining regions. Permitting processes are often slow and unpredictable. Infrastructure constraints remain severe across many resource-rich economies. And increasingly, projects face delays or cancellation because they fail to secure long-term support from affected communities.
That last point matters more than many policymakers realize.
Minerals may underpin global supply chains, but mining is ultimately a local business. Mines operate near communities, often on or close to Indigenous lands, and alongside ecosystems and water systems that people depend upon. The upside of this is mining often happens in places with limited other economic activity, so a mine can bring hugely significant benefits to communities; but when trust breaks down, vulnerability to disruption and political intervention rises sharply. Without a social license to operate, there is no real resilience at site level, no matter how strategically important the resource is.
This is one of the defining characteristics of the Minerals Age, and there is a growing risk that resilience becomes narrowly defined as access and volume alone. Leaders should resist this temptation.
A mine built without local support will likely face delay. A processing facility built without affordable and reliable power is not viable without state support. Nor is an operation dependent on scarce water resources in regions already under climate stress.
That is why responsible mining should be viewed as the surest path to resilience.
For too long, responsibility has been framed in ethical or reputational terms: important, but secondary to economic and strategic priorities. The reality is much more practical. Responsible mining is as much about whether supply chains can withstand disruption and endure over time.
Take community relationships. Across many jurisdictions, social conflict has become one of the largest causes of project delay. Operations built on meaningful local partnership and shared value are far more likely to maintain stability through political and economic change. For instance, the giant Quellaveco mine in Peru—operated by Anglo American, a member of the International Council on Mining and Minerals (ICMM)—stands out for sustaining local support in a country all too familiar with tensions around mining.
The same principle applies operationally. Companies investing in water efficiency, recycling, and desalination are better prepared for the growing physical impacts of climate change. ICMM members operating in Chile, including the likes of Antofagasta Minerals and Teck Resources, have invested in some of the world’s leading desalination and water management practices—including, in some cases, voluntarily handing continental water rights back to the state to redistribute to communities.
Circular supply chains and recycling won’t eliminate the need for new mining, but they can become important sources of domestic resilience and reduce exposure to geopolitical coercion.
None of this means sacrificing competitiveness. In many cases, it is precisely the opposite. Increasingly, the jurisdictions and companies most likely to attract long-term capital will be those able to offer stable and responsibly produced supply.
This is also how the debate around environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles can become more constructive. The language of responsibility has become politically charged in some parts of the world, but resilience is something everyone understands, whether they’re allocating capital or drafting legislation. Responsible mining is just the clear-eyed recognition that unstable systems eventually fail.
This is where the industry now has an opportunity to align around a clearer framework for responsible production. Later this year, ICMM, together with The Copper Mark, Mining Association of Canada, and World Gold Council, will launch the Consolidated Mining Standard Initiative (CMSI), a new global standard that reduces complexity and clarifies responsible practices for mining companies of all sizes, across all locations and commodities.
CMSI is by design an ambitious standard, even for those such as ICMM members who are already leading the way. Yet it’s also a ladder, providing an opportunity for smaller companies to take their first steps on this journey. It offers a generational opportunity to make an ambition for responsible mining something all mining businesses can and should aspire to.
At a time when governments are racing to secure supply, this opportunity and clarity matter.
History’s great material transitions have always reshaped the global balance of power. The Minerals Age will be no different. But the winners will be the ones that build resilient supply chains that endure under pressure. And responsibility is the surest path to achieving it.
all essays
explore the program
The Global Energy Center develops and promotes pragmatic and nonpartisan policy solutions designed to advance global energy security, enhance economic opportunity, and accelerate pathways to net-zero emissions.
Image: A drone view of the world's largest iron ore mine, run by Brazilian mining company Vale in the middle of a vast rainforest preserve, where autonomous mining vehicles are used to increase productivity by operating around the clock in hazardous environments, at Carajas National Forest in the Amazonian state of Para, Brazil, October 8, 2025. REUTERS/Jorge Silva