Accepted Paper

The (Geo)politics of Development and Critical Minerals in Zambia: A New Dawn for Development?  
Aidan Barlow (University of Bath)

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This paper explores how Zambia has sought to capitalise on growing geopolitical frictions to aid its development. Through an exploration of infrastructure projects, and industrial development zones, this paper argues that, while there are many discussions, less action is seen at the ground level.

Paper long abstract

Spurred on through the growth of renewable energy technologies and a growing securitisation of mineral value chains, ‘critical minerals’ have emerged as a point of contention between global powers. Whilst seen as a point of vulnerability for advanced economies, for mineral-producing states, this increased competition, and subsequent demand for a diversification of mineral supply provides an opportunity. Being rich in a variety of different critical minerals, Zambia is one such country that stands to benefit. Attracting American, European, Chinese, Indian, and Arab partners to its mining sector, Zambia has sought to capitalise on growing geopolitical frictions to aid mining-based development. This is not just in terms of foreign direct investment, but also for value addition and infrastructure development. Using documentary evidence and elite interviews based on eight months of fieldwork across Zambia, this paper explores how the geopolitics of critical minerals is influencing mining-based development strategies, and how the country is utilising geopolitical rivalries for domestic gains. It does this through two case studies: Firstly, it explores the US and EU backed Lobito corridor, which is seen as counter Chinese dominance of mineral value chains in the region. Secondly, it explores the US-backed DRC-Zambia effort to establish a battery manufacturing sector. It argues that, in the extractives sector, it appears that geopolitics is upstaging economics. However, whilst there are a lot of discussions at the national and international level, less action can be seen on the ground, highlighting the limits of relying on geopolitical rivalries for sustainable development.

Panel P63
Development pasts and futures amid renewed great power competition