Unsplash / Sorin Basangeac
By Staff Writer – MAC Insights
For decades, mineral wealth has largely been measured by what can be extracted from the ground. But as critical minerals become increasingly important to energy, technology and advanced manufacturing, a different question is emerging: who captures the value after the mineral leaves the mine?
Uzbekistan provides an interesting example of this shift. The country is positioning its mineral resources as a foundation for wider industrial development, with a focus on attracting foreign investment, technology and expertise while expanding domestic processing. According to the latest information, Uzbekistan currently processes around 100,000 tonnes of copper, while projects launched in 2026 are expected to increase deep-processing capacity to 240,000 tonnes. The country has also attracted around $10 billion in foreign investment into its mining sector over the past nine years and plans to increase copper production to 500,000 tonnes a year by 2030.
The value beyond the mine
Having a mineral deposit does not automatically mean capturing the greatest economic value from it. The journey from ore to finished product can involve extraction, concentration, refining, processing, manufacturing and, ultimately, the production of technologies or industrial goods. Each stage requires different levels of capital, technology, skills and infrastructure.
For resource-rich countries, the strategic question is therefore becoming increasingly difficult: is it enough to supply the mineral, or should more of the value chain be developed around it? There is no simple answer. Building downstream industries can require significant investment and reliable access to energy, transport, technology, skills and markets, while not every country can compete successfully at every stage of every mineral value chain.
But the global critical-minerals race is changing the calculation. Copper, lithium, manganese, platinum-group metals and rare earth elements are increasingly linked to technologies and industries ranging from electrification and energy storage to advanced manufacturing. That makes control over processing and supply chains strategically important alongside control of the resources themselves.
For mineral-producing countries, the opportunity is potentially significant, but so is the risk of remaining primarily an exporter of raw materials. The more stages of the value chain that can be developed competitively, the greater the potential for mineral resources to contribute to broader industrial activity rather than simply generating revenue at the point of extraction.
Africa faces the same question
The issue is particularly relevant to Africa, where significant mineral resources coexist with a long-standing debate about how much value is created locally from those resources. South Africa has already recognised the importance of moving further along the value chain.
The country’s Critical Minerals and Metals Strategy, approved by Cabinet in 2025, identifies value addition and localisation, research and development, infrastructure, skills and beneficiation among its strategic priorities. South African government policy has also emphasised a transition from exporting raw minerals towards local beneficiation, high-tech manufacturing and greater participation in mineral value chains.
That places South Africa within the same broader international debate as Uzbekistan and other resource-producing economies. The question is not simply whether the country has the minerals that global markets want, but whether it can create the conditions required to capture more value from those resources.
The challenge, however, is that beneficiation cannot simply be declared into existence. A country needs competitive energy, efficient infrastructure, appropriate technology, skilled people, investment and access to markets. It also needs to identify which parts of a value chain make genuine economic sense rather than attempting to manufacture everything domestically.
That makes the critical-minerals opportunity as much an industrial strategy question as a mining question. The countries that are able to connect their mineral resources with the right combination of infrastructure, investment, skills and technology could potentially position themselves differently in an increasingly competitive global market.
Who wins the value race?
The global critical-minerals competition may therefore be entering a new phase. The countries with the largest deposits will remain important, but resource ownership alone may not determine who benefits most from rising demand.
The bigger advantage could belong to countries capable of connecting their mineral resources to processing, technology, manufacturing, infrastructure and skills. Uzbekistan’s approach is one example of a country attempting to make that connection, while South Africa’s own critical-minerals strategy shows that the same question is being considered here.
For mining nations, the debate is consequently moving beyond a simple question of how much can be taken from the ground. It is becoming a question of how much value can be created from what comes out of it.
That distinction could become increasingly important as countries compete not only for access to critical minerals, but also for the investment, technology and industrial capabilities needed to process them. The real prize may not be the mineral in the ground, but the economic value created after it comes out.
Source: EIN Presswire “Critical Metals Are Becoming a New Tool for Uzbekistan’s Industrialization – Alona Lebedieva”. Additional South African context: South African Government, Critical Minerals and Metals Strategy 2025.
The factual information and figures are sourced from the above material. The broader interpretation of the implications for mineral value chains is editorial analysis.
