Traceability systems are becoming more widely used across critical-mineral supply chains, although adoption remains uneven and fragmented, according to a new report from the OECD.
The report, Enhancing Resilience Through Traceability: Insights from Lithium and Nickel Supply Chains in Latin America and Southeast Asia, examines lithium supply chains in Argentina and Chile and nickel supply chains in Indonesia and the Philippines. It draws on an OECD-IEA survey of 90 companies across critical-mineral value chains, supplemented by stakeholder interviews and site visits.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
The OECD says reliable supply-chain data is becoming increasingly important as governments and industry seek to strengthen the resilience of critical-mineral supply chains. Traceability can provide information on the origin and production conditions of minerals, as well as provenance, grade, ownership and chain of custody.
In practice, companies are using a combination of supply-chain mapping, mass balance and auditing to improve visibility, often as part of broader due-diligence programmes. However, the report says existing traceability systems remain fragmented.
Government-led platforms such as Indonesia’s SIMBARA operate alongside industry and multi-stakeholder responsible-sourcing systems. The OECD says these existing systems provide a basis for further development through targeted policy measures.
Private-sector uptake is growing but varies significantly across the supply chain. Most systems are being developed within individual companies using proprietary tools, with limited public disclosure. Traders report the highest implementation rates, while miners have the lowest.
More than 60% of survey respondents identified brand reputation or customer demand as primary drivers for adopting traceability, with regulatory compliance ranking closely behind.
Cost and interoperability are among the main obstacles. More than half of respondents identified both factors as barriers to establishing traceability systems, while confidentiality concerns, supplier leverage and data quality can constrain their operation.
Regulatory consistency was identified as the top priority for scaling traceability by half of respondents, with a similar proportion citing shared data infrastructure.
The OECD also identifies ownership opacity as a significant gap, particularly in nickel supply chains, where complex corporate structures can make it difficult to establish who ultimately controls mineral assets. The report links this issue to both responsible sourcing and economic security.
Despite the barriers, nearly three-quarters of respondents plan to increase investment in traceability. However, most said it was still too early to identify tangible benefits, while the absence of price premia remained a disincentive.
The OECD recommends a risk-based approach rather than uniform traceability requirements across all mineral supply chains. It proposes that the intensity and scope of traceability should reflect the risk and strategic sensitivity associated with individual materials and end uses.
In the near term, governments could make greater use of existing trade data, supplier mapping and audit programmes, while incorporating responsible-business-conduct standards and transparency requirements into bilateral mineral agreements and development finance.
Over the medium term, the report calls for greater engagement with traders, exchanges and smelters, improved beneficial-ownership transparency and independent mineral testing to track the physical evolution of materials and recycled content.
Longer-term measures include interoperable data platforms capable of supporting cross-border traceability, identity preservation for the most sensitive materials and expanded digital product passports for batteries and other high-impact products.
The report says lithium and nickel require different approaches. For lithium from Argentina and Chile, existing trade data and supplier mapping already capture significant processing dependencies in China, while greater ownership transparency could address concerns about foreign entities in the upstream supply chain.
Nickel supply chains in Indonesia and the Philippines are described as more complex, with exposure to transnational ownership structures. The OECD points to Indonesia’s SIMBARA system and the London Metal Exchange’s responsible-sourcing requirements as existing foundations for greater supply-chain transparency, alongside growing participation by mines in sustainability initiatives and audits.
The OECD says greater alignment between governments and international organisations could help avoid duplication, with common minimum traceability requirements allowing data collected for one purpose to support others, including price-floor eligibility, defence procurement and stockpiling.
