Estimated time of reading: ~ 4 minutes

The need to The European Commission considers critical raw materials as resources of high economic importance, as the EU demand for rare earth metals is expected to increase six-fold by 2030 and seven-fold by 2050; for lithium, EU demand is expected to increase twelve-fold by 2030 and twenty-one-fold by 2050. “Today, Europe relies heavily on imports, often from a single third country, and recent crises have underlined EU strategic dependencies. Without joint and timely action, a well-functioning single market, resiliency and competitiveness, European industries, and EU efforts to meet its climate and digital objectives are at risk, as the EU Commission stated in presenting the European Critical Raw Materials Act. In Brussels’s view, this plan should have an impact on both the economies and the societies of the EU member states. “Building on the strength of the single market, the Act will ensure that the EU can rely on strong, resilient, and sustainable value chains for critical raw materials. The regulation will strengthen all stages of the European critical raw materials value chain, diversify the EU’s imports to reduce strategic dependencies, improve EU capacity to monitor and mitigate risks of disruptions to the supply of critical raw materials, and improve circularity and sustainability,” as the European Commission explained. Still, there is a clear gap between what concerns economic and industrial development and its impact on the daily life of citizens, especially for those projects that concern mines and deposits outside the EU territory. In this regard, the first 13 strategic projects presented by the EU are in Canada, Greenland, Kazakhstan, Norway, Serbia, Ukraine, Zambia, New Caledonia, Brazil, Madagascar, Malawi, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

One of the most discussed is the Project Jadar in western Serbia, near the city of Loznica, which also counts as the only one for lithium and boron on the list. Discussions about the Jadar mine have been going on for many years, as the Serbian government first granted mining permits to a large Anglo-Australian company, Rio Tinto, in 2019, but later decided to revoke them due to widespread protests in the country. Many analysts saw the Belgrade government’s moves as politically motivated, as in 2022, when the Serbian government ordered the project halted, President Aleksandar Vucic sought re-election. More recently, after the Serbian Constitutional Court ruled that the revocation of the mining permits to Rio Tinto had been unconstitutional, the government urged the project to restart, prompting new protests by local residents and environmental groups. Those who spoke against the Serbian government’s decision cited the lack of transparency and the risks for health, nature, and agriculture as major concerns, also highlighting the potential pollution of water sources. Other projects, related to Greenland, highlight the difficult choice that European authorities are called to make between respecting environmental balances and economic and development needs, a theme that is perfectly embodied in the paradox represented by the green transition. The recent elections held in Greenland, both those of 2025 and the previous ones in 2021, had at the center of the debate the need of the local population to seek greater autonomy, if not independence, from Denmark, while trying not to sell off the territory of the island to energy and mining companies ready to exploit the resources of the subsoil.

Written by: Francesco Marino