March 26, 2026
Transition minerals are getting a lot of attention, but how does donor funding match with on-the-ground needs? This new scan look at where, to whom, and for what sort of issues and activities funds are and are not flowing.
Demand for mining and minerals has expanded dramatically in recent years and is projected to continue rapidly accelerating over the next few decades. As these trends unfold in a global context of geopolitical fragmentation and competition, some governments are prioritizing diversification of supply chains to reduce reliance on and vulnerability to Chinese mineral supplies and processing. Various global actors see the potential for hastening transitions away from fossil fuels to more sustainable energy sources, securing and diversifying mineral access for consuming countries, companies and consumers, and closing the gap between high- and low-income countries.
Producer and processing countries across the globe hope these developments will help strengthen national economies, combat poverty, advance equity, and improve social welfare. However, as decades of experience with extractive industries have shown, none of these positive outcomes is guaranteed. The possibilities of a range of “resource curses” – and the associated potential social, economic, political, and environmental harms of mining – loom large.
How mining activities and mineral value chains are governed can often play a major role in conditioning outcomes, shaping whether and to what extent opportunities will be realized and harms avoided.
Yet, at the exact moment governance needs are rising, funding for mineral governance is tightening. Official development assistance is contracting and several legacy philanthropies are scaling back their funding for these issues. For those working to improve mineral governance, this means having to do much more with less.
There is growing pressure to ensure that the funding that is available for mineral governance work will be used to maximum effect, to advance coordination over fragmentation, and strategic thinking over passive “business-as-usual” approaches. This funding scan is intended to serve as an input into the process of helping funders and implementing parties contend with this task. Drawing on publicly available data, dozens of interviews, and surveys of implementing parties and funders, the analysis sheds light on current and anticipated developments in the mineral governance funding landscape. It provides insights and impressions on where, to whom, and for what sort of issues and activities funds are and are not flowing. The scan aims to catalyze difficult but crucial conversations among funders, implementing parties, and stakeholders concerned with the fate and outcomes of mining at this crucial moment in time.
Download and read the funding scan and detailed methodology annex here:
Funding scan – Thinking Strategically About Mineral Governance Funding: Perspectives on Current and Future Priorities
Annex – Detailed Research Methodology
TAI will be developing a blog series on this content. If you are interested in contributing, please reach out to [email protected].