For the second consecutive year, South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Morocco are the four countries leading the ranking of the 25 most attractive African countries for mining.
According to Africa Report magazine, Ghana and Zambia are emerging as the main challengers, followed by several Francophone countries that have recorded sharp increases — and some surprising declines.
These changes, the source notes, reflect both the dynamism of the sector — driven by the race for critical minerals and the sky-high prices of gold and copper — as well as growing intra-African and international tensions.
To compile its ranking, the Africa Report assessed five criteria: the volume of reserves of 13 key minerals (bauxite, cobalt, copper, diamonds, iron ore, graphite, lithium, manganese, gold, nickel, platinum, uranium and zinc); the number of ongoing projects involving critical minerals; the business environment and country risk; the legal framework and governance; and the quality of energy and transport infrastructure.
Although genuine geological potential is an obvious prerequisite for attracting mining companies, meeting the other criteria remains crucial to triggering an investment decision.
South Africa (No. 1) leads the ranking thanks to its proven reserves — the largest and most diversified on the continent.
The country holds the world’s largest reserves of platinum and manganese, two metals that are essential both for traditional industries and for emerging ones. Platinum is used in automotive catalysts and green hydrogen technologies, while manganese is a fundamental component of steel and batteries.
Close behind South Africa, Namibia (2nd place), Botswana (3rd place) and Morocco (4th place) stand out precisely for their legal stability and business-friendly environments.
Their reserves of critical minerals are also an important factor. Namibia is rich in uranium — a low-carbon energy source — as well as copper, graphite and lithium. Morocco benefits from copper and cobalt resources.
At the bottom of the ranking, some countries face serious governance problems, notably Zimbabwe (18th place) and Niger.
The lowest positions are also occupied by countries considered “new frontiers,” such as Angola (23rd place), Malawi (24th place) and Uganda (20th place), where known reserves are more limited. Should investors increase their investments, future editions of the ranking could present a very different scenario.
The ranking methodology analyzes the potential of 13 strategic minerals using a multidimensional approach: although geological reserves (50% of the score) and the dynamism of ongoing projects (10%) form the basis of the assessment, the model also assigns significant weight to the operational environment.
Thus, 40% of the final score is based on the concrete capacity of states to develop these resources, measured fairly through the quality of governance, risk management and the business environment, as well as the maturity of infrastructure.
The data sources used are multiple, including, among others, the Fraser Institute, Coface, the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Critical Minerals: Pivotal Outlook, and theglobaleconomy.com.
Data from these sources were standardized and harmonized, and each criterion was assigned a score from 0 to 100. When data were missing, a score of 0 was assigned to the corresponding criterion in the calculation of the final score.
Lider Magazine, 02/03/2026
