Review and development of the methodology and data used to produce the UK criticality assessment of technology-critical minerals

Josso, P.; Lusty, P.; Gunn, A.; Shaw, R.; Singh, N.; Horn, S.; Petavratzi, E.. 2023 Review and development of the methodology and data used to produce the UK criticality assessment of technology-critical minerals. Nottingham, UK, British Geological Survey, 93pp. (OR/23/044) (Unpublished)

Before downloading, please read NORA policies.

Download (4MB) | Preview


This report was produced by the British Geological Survey (BGS), which hosts the UK Critical Minerals Intelligence Centre (CMIC). The aim of the study was to review the methodology used to produce the 2021 UK Critical Mineral List, with the objective of refining the criticality indicators and associated data for the next UK Criticality Assessment. The first part of the report summarises the methodology employed during the 2021 UK criticality assessment ('2021 CA') (Lusty et al., 2021). It describes the list of candidate materials (CMs) considered in the 2021 CA study and the indicators selected to evaluate their criticality. A review of the major criticality assessments (CAs) conducted by other nations and industry is also presented, discussing objectives, methodological best practices, and inherent limitations. Many governments have published national CA studies in the last decade. Most user a similar, mainly quantitative, approach to determine a numerical rating of relative criticality among numerous CMs. However, it is evident that CAs are flexible and can be adapted in both scope and scale to reflect the needs and objectives of the commissioner. In broad terms, CAs can be used to identify the business opportunities for resource-rich jurisdictions of the supply chain vulnerabilities for major resource-consuming nations. As a result, the methodology and scope of reviewed CAs largely depend on objectives and access to reliable, high-quality, national, and global datasets. An in-depth review of the 2021 CA methodology is presented, including the proposed list of CMs to be evaluated. The list is now expanded from 26 to 82 CMs, including individual elements and industrial minerals. Each indicator and its associated metrics are evaluated alongside discussion regarding retaining, modifying, or discontinuing the indicator. Mathematical best practice on aggregation of indicators and the graphical representation of the candidate material in a criticality space are also reviewed and presented. The major developments are presented in Table 1.

Item Type: Publication - Report
Funders/Sponsors: British Geological Survey, Department for Business & Trade
Additional Information. Not used in RCUK Gateway to Research.: This item has been internally reviewed, but not externally peer-reviewed.
Date made live: 03 Jan 2024 16:48 +0 (UTC)

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Document Downloads

Downloads for past 30 days

Downloads per month over past year

More statistics for this item...