REWAS 2019 pp 321-324 | Cite as

Advancing the State of Prospective Materials Criticality Screening: Integrating Structural Commodity Market and Incentive Price Formation Insights

  • Michele Bustamante
  • Tanguy MarionEmail author
  • Rich Roth
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)


Broad, screening-style assessments of criticality highlight economically important materials facing significant threats to secure, sustainable supply. The studies identify many valuable metrics influencing the likelihood and impact of constraint; however, approaches to aggregating these metrics vary and lack unifying, causally grounded strategies. The present work seeks to advance the state of criticality screening by targeting this gap with structural commodity market insights. Grounded in the principle of price as indicative of economic scarcity, the model uses a small number of high-level metrics to drive changes in future incentive price (i.e., cost of opening new mines) by influencing structural markets elements in different ways (i.e., shape of long-run supply, demand, and incentive curves). Metrics like resource cover, ore grade loss, barriers to entry, secondary supply, end-use substitution and dematerialization rates, and all help to approximate changing supply–demand balance and inform criticality. The approach balances strengths of rapid, broad screening with insights of more detailed market modeling.


Criticality Screening Supply Demand 


  1. 1.
    Erdmann L, Graedel TE (2011) Criticality of non-fuel minerals: a review of major approaches and analyses. Environ Sci Technol 45(18):7620–7630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gleich B et al (2013) An empirical approach to determine specific weights of driving factors for the price of commodities—a contribution to the measurement of the economic scarcity of minerals and metals. Resour Policy 38(3):350–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Graedel TE, Nuss P (2014) Employing considerations of criticality in product design. JOM 66(11):2360–2366 (Web)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hatayama H, Tahara K (2018) Adopting an objective approach to criticality assessment: learning from the past. Resour Policy 55:96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    National Research Council (2008) Minerals, critical minerals, and the U.S. economy (Web)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Materials Systems LaboratoryMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations