Scholarlink

<p>Mineral commodity supply chain analyses rely on international trade data reported by individual countries as quantities of a mineral commodity form imported from (or exported to) a partner. However, export quantities frequently exceed a country’s domestic production, or occur when no production data are reported, suggesting that the trade partner is merely an intermediary in a transshipment. These discrepancies can result in misleading conclusions regarding supply chain vulnerabilities and dependencies. We present a two-stage methodology to reconcile gaps between reported material sources and actual producers. First, we construct trade networks for specific mineral forms, treating production as a type of import to distinguish producing nations from entrepôts. By tracing flows through these networks, we attribute a target country’s imports to original producers via both direct (in a single trade link) and indirect (transferring through intermediaries) pathways. Second, these production-attributed flows are incorporated into multi-stage supply chains to determine the upstream provenance of feedstock for domestic refining and processing. This approach provides a more representative picture of trade reliance. For example, while the United States (U.S.) Geological Survey reports no imports of unwrought antimony metal from Russia in 2022 (U.S. Geological Survey (2025). Mineral Commodity Summaries 2025. 10.3133/mcs2025), our analysis reveals that over 16% of U.S. imports can be traced back to Russian mining through intermediate processing in countries such as China, India, and Vietnam. Additionally, our analysis of the aluminum supply chain shows that while the U.S. is reported as 52% net import reliant on aluminum materials in 2022, it is 100% reliant on foreign bauxite, 7% of which arrived indirectly. This unreported reliance, which is predominantly tied to bauxite mined in Brazil (43%) and Jamaica (28%), highlights our methods ability to capture the supply chain’s dependence on foreign feedstock that may be missing in single-stage trade data.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Indirect mineral import reliance and provenance

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月27日

查看全文
  • Jamie L. Brainard,
  • Andrew L. Gulley,
  • Nedal T. Nassar

摘要

Mineral commodity supply chain analyses rely on international trade data reported by individual countries as quantities of a mineral commodity form imported from (or exported to) a partner. However, export quantities frequently exceed a country’s domestic production, or occur when no production data are reported, suggesting that the trade partner is merely an intermediary in a transshipment. These discrepancies can result in misleading conclusions regarding supply chain vulnerabilities and dependencies. We present a two-stage methodology to reconcile gaps between reported material sources and actual producers. First, we construct trade networks for specific mineral forms, treating production as a type of import to distinguish producing nations from entrepôts. By tracing flows through these networks, we attribute a target country’s imports to original producers via both direct (in a single trade link) and indirect (transferring through intermediaries) pathways. Second, these production-attributed flows are incorporated into multi-stage supply chains to determine the upstream provenance of feedstock for domestic refining and processing. This approach provides a more representative picture of trade reliance. For example, while the United States (U.S.) Geological Survey reports no imports of unwrought antimony metal from Russia in 2022 (U.S. Geological Survey (2025). Mineral Commodity Summaries 2025. 10.3133/mcs2025), our analysis reveals that over 16% of U.S. imports can be traced back to Russian mining through intermediate processing in countries such as China, India, and Vietnam. Additionally, our analysis of the aluminum supply chain shows that while the U.S. is reported as 52% net import reliant on aluminum materials in 2022, it is 100% reliant on foreign bauxite, 7% of which arrived indirectly. This unreported reliance, which is predominantly tied to bauxite mined in Brazil (43%) and Jamaica (28%), highlights our methods ability to capture the supply chain’s dependence on foreign feedstock that may be missing in single-stage trade data.