Key Points
-
G20Lens report says South Africa lacks tax and policy incentives for critical minerals.
-
Ghana, Zambia, and Namibia show clearer strategic direction.
-
Africa’s mineral wealth can drive industrial growth if supported by strong policy frameworks.
South Africa’s approach to developing its critical minerals sector lacks the financial incentives and policy clarity needed to attract new investment, according to a G20Lens analysis published by ENSafrica.
The report says the country’s critical minerals strategy isn’t supported by a modernized mining policy that aligns with its industrial goals.
There are no tax holidays, royalty breaks, or other targeted measures to draw investors into exploration or critical mineral development.
Although the government ranks minerals by their level of criticality, it hasn’t introduced a regulatory system that reflects that ranking.
The report also points out that beneficiation targets remain mostly aspirational because of ongoing challenges in electricity supply, logistics, and port operations.
Policy gaps and unclear implementation
Regulatory uncertainty continues to deter investment. The Mineral Resources Development Bill, introduced in May 2025, includes a requirement for mandatory beneficiation by producers but leaves key investment terms unresolved.
The government has not yet published an actionable implementation plan or a framework for accountability.
The findings were outlined by ENSafrica’s team: department head Ntsiki Adonisi, Ghana-based executive Rachel Dagadu, senior associate Zinzi Lawrence, Namibia associate Amarachukwu Odo, and Zambia associate Chimwemwe Tembo-Shula.
Their report notes that Africa holds more than 30 percent of global critical mineral reserves, from platinum group metals and cobalt to lithium and copper.
These minerals are essential for clean energy technologies and industrial growth, but without effective policies, the continent risks repeating the historic pattern of exporting low-value raw materials while importing high-value finished goods.
Comparative strategies across Africa
Ghana, Zambia, and Namibia have each developed distinct approaches to critical minerals.
Ghana doesn’t have a fixed statutory list of critical minerals but includes gold, lithium, bauxite, and manganese as key to economic security and industrial growth.
Gold remains its dominant export, accounting for about 90 percent of mineral revenues.
Zambia, which adopted its five-year critical minerals strategy in 2024, defines these minerals as essential for green energy applications such as solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicle batteries.
Its list includes cobalt, copper, graphite, lithium, manganese, nickel, tin, and rare earth elements.
The government is investing in geological mapping, local processing, and research partnerships with universities.
Namibia classifies uranium, lithium, manganese, graphite, copper, and selected rare earths as strategic minerals.
In 2025, it banned the export of unprocessed lithium, cobalt, manganese, and rare earths to encourage domestic processing and job creation.
Missed opportunities and the way forward
The G20Lens analysis highlights that Africa’s mineral wealth could support broad-based economic transformation if governments strengthen policy coherence and improve data quality.
Countries with clearer frameworks, such as Ghana, have begun to attract greater investor confidence.
However, outdated geoscientific data, overlapping permitting agencies, and policy instability in countries such as Nigeria and Côte d’Ivoire continue to hinder progress.
The report stresses that export bans alone are ineffective unless supported by power infrastructure, logistics, and legal certainty.
The authors argue that Africa can turn its geological advantage into industrial strength only by linking mining with energy and manufacturing policy.
With stronger institutions, better data systems, and transparent regulation, the continent can build integrated value chains, create jobs, and share economic benefits more equitably.
