Eurasia — spanning Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, the Caucasus, Türkiye and Mongolia — is entering one of the most dynamic phases of its mining history. Driven by soaring global demand for copper, rare earth elements, gold, uranium and battery metals, the region is attracting billions in new investments. Yet behind the surge in exploration and extraction lies a growing challenge: persistent governance gaps and mounting transparency concerns that threaten both investor confidence and the long-term credibility of mining-led development.
A boom shadowed by governance weaknesses
Recent audits, policy analyses and civil-society reports across the region have revealed inconsistencies in mineral revenue reporting, opaque licensing processes, irregular tendering practices and a lack of meaningful public oversight. As capital pours into copper, gold and lithium projects, these structural weaknesses risk widening the gap between mineral wealth and public benefit — a familiar pattern in resource-rich economies.
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan under reform pressure
Kazakhstan, a major global supplier of copper and uranium, has vowed to modernise its licensing regime after widespread criticism over preferential access to mining concessions and uneven enforcement of environmental regulations. Officials promise a shift toward clearer rules, digitalised licensing and stricter compliance monitoring.
Uzbekistan, meanwhile, is navigating the complexities of opening its once-closed mining sector to foreign investors. While its liberalisation has attracted significant interest, it also raises concerns about informal rent-seeking, murky joint ventures and the risk of regulatory capture. Ensuring transparency will be essential as the country expands its copper, gold and lithium portfolio.
Environmental and community tensions in the Caucasus and Mongolia
Across Armenia and Georgia, large-scale mining projects increasingly face public pushback rooted in environmental fears and distrust over opaque decision-making. Communities demand clearer information, stronger safeguards and genuine involvement in project planning.
Mongolia, balancing foreign capital with national sovereignty, continues to face high-stakes disputes over royalties, contract renegotiations and governance around major copper and gold operations. These tensions illustrate the fine line between resource development and public accountability.
Global competition intensifies the stakes
Eurasia’s governance challenges are unfolding amid fierce geopolitical competition for critical minerals. The region holds deposits vital to global supply chains — from copper essential for electrification to gold and uranium central to strategic industries. Poor governance does not only hinder local development; it risks disrupting global markets through project delays, uncertain regulation or investor retreat.
Calls for transparency and stronger institutions
International financial institutions, NGOs and foreign investors are increasingly pushing for robust transparency measures, including public disclosure of mining contracts, open royalty payment databases, third-party environmental audits and independent community oversight mechanisms. Some Eurasian governments are signalling willingness to adopt these reforms, recognising that institutional credibility is essential to attracting long-term, high-quality investment.
The future hinges on governance, not geology
Eurasia’s mining destiny will be determined less by the richness of its copper, gold or lithium deposits and more by its capacity to build transparent, predictable and accountable institutions. If governance reforms advance in step with investment, the region could become a cornerstone of the global energy-transition economy. If reforms stall, Eurasia risks repeating an all-too-familiar pattern: abundant mineral wealth without sustainable development.
