Boom or Bust: The Fragile Future of Mineral Resources Security in East Africa
Beneath East Africa’s soil lies the possibility of global transformation – rare earths, gold, graphite, niobium, and tantalum. Yet above ground, the region wrestles with a familiar paradox: how to convert mineral wealth into durable prosperity without repeating the punitive cycles of the past.
This is not just a discussion of rocks and regulations, but one of sovereignty, of value, of who gets to define the future and who gets to move the chess pieces.
The Landscape of Mineral Wealth
The region’s mineral endowment is uneven but potent. Tanzania leads the region with significant deposits of gold, graphite, nickel, and rare earth elements (REEs). Uganda is emerging as a player in REEs and gold, while Kenya holds promise in niobium, titanium, and fluorspar. Ethiopia’s gold and tantalum reserves round out the quartet of mineral-rich states.
According to the International Energy Agency, East Africa is becoming a strategic hub for minerals critical to the energy transition. Tanzania’s graphite reserves, for instance, are among the top five globally, essential for lithium-ion battery anodes. Uganda’s rare earth potential, particularly in the Makuutu deposit, is drawing attention from global investors. Located in Eastern Uganda, the Makuutu deposit is one of the few ionic adsorption clay-hosted rare earth projects outside China - a geological profile prized for its ease of processing and lower environmental impact. Australian firm Ionic Rare Earths has secured a majority stake in the project and is advancing plans for a local separation and refining facility, signaling a shift toward in-country value addition.
Despite this promise, the region remains largely a supplier of raw materials. The value chain begins and ends at the mine gate.
Multinational Footprints: Who is Digging?
To set the picture, attention ought to be directed to the players involved in the exploration of the rare minerals. The mining landscape in East Africa is increasingly shaped by multinational firms.
Barrick Gold, the Canadian giant, operates the North Mara and Bulyanhulu mines in Tanzania, producing over 500,000 ounces of gold annually. China’s Shandong Gold and Sichuan Hongda have invested heavily in Tanzanian gold and iron projects, in addition to Ionic Rare Earth in Uganda. These firms bring capital, subject matter expertise, and scale - but also raise questions. Do their operations align with local aspirations for beneficiation and industrialisation? Are they partners in development or agents of extraction?
The tension lies in the gap between national aspirations and corporate imperatives. East African governments increasingly demand local content, environmental stewardship, and value addition, but these multinationals instead are inadvertently causing an enormous balance of payments deficit in the nations they operate in. Communities near mining sites often experience displacement, ecological degradation, and limited economic spillovers, while processed minerals and profits flow outward. As the region positions itself within the global energy transition, the challenge is not just to attract investment, but to in fact shape its narrative. Mineral security, in this context, means more than securing deposits; it means securing dignity, development, and a future that is locally defined.
Protective Legislation: Guardrails or Gaps?
In order to ensure protectionism policies, East African governments have taken steps to regulate mining and protect national interests. In Tanzania the 2017 Mining Act revisions introduced mandatory government stakes in mining projects, increased royalties, and banned unprocessed mineral exports. These reforms signal Tanzania’s intent to reclaim greater control over its mineral wealth and ensure that extraction translates into tangible national benefit. By mandating local ownership and curbing raw exports, the government aims to stimulate domestic processing industries, create jobs, and capture more value within its borders.
Uganda’s Mining and Minerals Act of 2022 emphasises environmental safeguards, community rights, and local content requirements. By mandating environmental impact assessments and rehabilitation plans, the legislation seeks to mitigate the ecological damage historically associated with mining operations. It also empowers communities to participate in decision-making and benefit-sharing, reinforcing the principle that mineral development must not come at the expense of environmental integrity. In doing so, Uganda positions itself to balance resource extraction with long-term ecological stewardship.
Kenya’s Mining Act (2016) established the National Mining Corporation and introduced a transparent licensing regime, though enforcement remains uneven. The Act was designed to streamline mineral governance, reduce corruption, and ensure equitable access to mining rights through a digital cadastre system. However, gaps in institutional capacity and inconsistent application of rules have led to delays, disputes, and investor uncertainty. Strengthening enforcement mechanisms remains critical if Kenya is to fully realise the environmental and developmental safeguards envisioned in its mining framework.
Across the region, legislation reflects a desire to reclaim agency. Yet, implementation lags and regulatory uncertainty can deter long-term investment. Primarily, ambigous legalese, has allowed some firms to have operations that would otherwise be deemed unlawful following global rubrics.
Value Addition Efforts Across the Region
The push for mineral beneficiation is gaining momentum. Tanzania has built a graphite processing plant in Lindi, aiming to supply battery-grade material to global markets. Uganda’s government is negotiating with Ionic Rare Earths to establish a local separation facility for REEs. Kenya has proposed a niobium refinery in Kwale, though progress is slow.
Outside the region, as a yardstick, noteworthy is Zimbabwe’s export ban on raw lithium and the DRC’s cobalt export restrictions, recently transitioning from a full on ban to a moderate quota system. The success of their implications have the potential to inspire East African policymakers to consider similar measures. But value addition is not just a policy - it is a question of capacity. It requires extensive investment in power, infrastructure, skilled labor, and patient readily available capital. Without these, the dream remains deferred.
Regional Coordination as a Path Forward
Coordination is the antidote to fragmentation. The establishment of comprehensive common markets could suffice as a watering hole for all these factors of production. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the Lobito Corridor initiative, for example, offer more than geographical logistical convenience - they represent a strategic pivot toward regional mineral sovereignty. AfCFTA’s promise lies in its ability to dissolve intra-African trade barriers, enabling East African countries to move minerals, machinery, and talent across borders without punitive tariffs or bureaucratic delays. The Lobito Corridor, connecting Angola to Zambia and the DRC, could be extended eastward to integrate East African mineral flows into continental infrastructure. These platforms have the potential to transform mineral economies into interconnected, collaborative systems rather than isolated, extractive outposts.
East African states often compete for foreign investment, offering tax holidays, relaxed regulations, and expedited licenses to attract multinational firms. This undermines collective bargaining power and weakens regulatory standards. By harmonising mining codes, environmental safeguards, and fiscal regimes, countries can present a unified front - one that demands fairer terms, deeper value addition, and shared infrastructure. Regional mineral blocs, modeled after the Southern African Development Community (SADC) mining protocols, known as an industry standard in efficient cross border mineral trade, could help East Africa negotiate from strength rather than scarcity.
To operationalise these ideals, East African governments must invest in shared beneficiation hubs, regional geological surveys, and cross-border training programs. A centralised mineral testing and certification center, for instance, could reduce duplication and ensure quality standards across the region. Joint ventures in refining and smelting - especially for rare earths, gold, and graphite - would allow countries to pool resources and scale up processing. These efforts would not only capture more value locally but also position East Africa as a credible supplier of refined minerals to global markets.
Moreover, regional integration must extend to data and transparency. A shared digital cadastre system could track licenses, production volumes, and revenue flows across borders, reducing corruption, increasing visibility and improving investor confidence. Collaborative environmental monitoring would ensure that mining does not degrade shared ecosystems like Lake Victoria or the Albertine Rift. By embedding accountability into regional frameworks, East Africa can move beyond reactive regulation toward proactive stewardship.
Ultimately, mineral security in East Africa will not be won by individual countries acting alone. It will be forged through deliberate collaboration, grounded in shared values and mutual benefit. AfCFTA offers the scaffolding - but it is up to East African leaders, institutions, and communities to build the architecture of a mineral future that is inclusive, resilient, and transformative.
Conclusion
East Africa’s mineral story is still being written. The ground is rich, but the control is fragile. The multinationals are here, but the value chains are not. The legislation exists, but the enforcement is patchy.
To truly rewrite this story, East Africa must move from reactive policy to proactive vision -anchored in regional partnerships, institutional excellence, and community agency. The region’s mineral wealth is not just a resource; it is a responsibility, demanding stewardship that transcends extraction. If the region can align its governance with its aspirations, build infrastructure that connects rather than isolates, and invest in people as much as in projects, then minerals can become more than commodities but catalysts for exponential growth. While the path is difficult, the stakes are generational, and the opportunity is now with movement, ambition, and a growing insistence that minerals must serve people, not just profits.
