A new wave of resource nationalism is gathering pace across Africa as governments seek a larger stake in the continent’s mineral wealth, signalling a shift from decades of investor-friendly mining policies toward greater state participation and tighter control over strategic resources, Mining Zimbabwe reports.
By Ryan Chigoche
The trend was thrust into the spotlight this month when Mozambique approved sweeping amendments to its mining law requiring the state to hold a non-dilutable 15% stake in all mining projects. The reforms also oblige mining companies to process minerals locally where feasible, marking one of the most assertive attempts by an African government to capture more value from its natural resources.
The move comes just weeks after Zimbabwe unveiled a new Critical, Special Critical and Strategic Minerals Framework that similarly seeks to increase government participation in projects involving minerals deemed vital to national development and the global energy transition.
While the two countries have adopted different approaches, both policies reflect a growing conviction among African governments that the continent should retain a larger share of the benefits generated by its vast deposits of lithium, copper, cobalt, nickel, graphite, gold and platinum.
Under Zimbabwe’s framework, minerals have been classified into three categories. Strategic minerals include gold, diamonds and platinum group metals, while lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite and rare earth elements fall under the critical minerals category because of their importance to battery technologies and clean energy supply chains.
The policy provides for mandatory state participation through special purpose vehicles in projects involving these minerals. It also grants the government pre-emptive rights over transfers of mining assets and allows authorities to exercise first-refusal rights where strategic mineral interests are being sold. Officials have argued the measures are necessary to safeguard national interests in resources considered essential to future economic growth.
The framework builds on a broader policy shift already underway in Zimbabwe. Authorities have tightened restrictions on exports of unprocessed minerals, pushed mining companies toward local beneficiation and recently reserved small- and medium-scale gold mining for Zimbabwean citizens and locally controlled entities.
For many governments, the changes are being driven by a simple question: how can countries rich in minerals remain poor while global demand for those same resources continues to surge?
Africa holds some of the world’s most sought-after deposits of minerals needed for electric vehicles, renewable energy systems and energy storage technologies. Yet policymakers increasingly argue that much of the value chain remains concentrated outside the continent, leaving producing countries with limited benefits beyond royalties, taxes and employment.
That sentiment has been gaining traction across several mining jurisdictions. The Democratic Republic of the Congo has strengthened state oversight of its cobalt sector, while Tanzania, Zambia and Burkina Faso have all pursued policies aimed at increasing domestic participation or expanding national benefits from mining.
Supporters of the emerging approach argue that greater state participation can help governments secure long-term revenues, encourage industrialisation and ensure strategic resources contribute more directly to national development. They point to countries that exported raw minerals for decades without building significant downstream industries.
Mining investors, however, have traditionally viewed ownership restrictions and state participation requirements with caution. Developing large-scale mines often requires billions of dollars in capital and years of exploration, feasibility studies and infrastructure development before a project generates returns. Industry executives warn that policy uncertainty can raise investment risk and make it harder for countries to compete for global capital.
The debate is particularly relevant for Zimbabwe, which is seeking to attract fresh investment into lithium, gold and platinum projects while simultaneously expanding local value addition and strengthening state oversight of strategic minerals. Although the government has announced mandatory participation in designated projects, details regarding the level of ownership to be held by the state have yet to be fully clarified.
Mozambique’s decision to fix the state’s stake at 15% provides investors with greater certainty, even as it increases government involvement. Zimbabwe’s framework, by contrast, has left industry stakeholders watching closely for further regulations that will determine how the policy is implemented in practice.
Taken together, the developments suggest that a new model of African mining policy is emerging—one that no longer focuses solely on attracting investment but increasingly seeks to balance foreign capital with national ownership, local processing and greater control over strategic resources.
As competition for critical minerals intensifies, the challenge for governments will be ensuring that efforts to capture more value from mining do not undermine the investment needed to unlock the very resources they hope will drive future economic growth.
