Does labelling lithium as ‘critical’ make mining acceptable? From European policy and discourse apparatus to contested lithium extraction projects in Europe

• The Critical Raw Materials Act underpins a policy aimed at reviving mining in Europe. • This act relies on the concept of criticality to categorise raw materials, combining economic, environmental, and geopolitical justifications. • Criticality functions as a hegemonic discourse but has underperformed in making mining socially acceptable. • While criticality is a powerful justification, its technocratic nature limits its effectiveness. • Addressing power relations, political support, and the justice issues embedded in extraction projects remains essential. After a long-term decline in mining activities in Europe, the available academic literature documents consistent systemic opposition and constraints to the opening and operating of mines. The European Commission has developed legislation aimed at ensuring the security of Europe’s raw materials supplies: the Critical Raw Materials Act (2025). Among all, the Act aims to revitalise mining in Europe regarding those critical elements. This article examines how this definition of criticality affected social debates around lithium mining. Adopting a multi-scalar approach, we analyse how criticality apparatuses are created and received by public actors, industrial lobbies, NGOs, the press, and social networks, focusing on lithium and comparing three mine projects in Europe. The article shows that the framing of the criticality gained political strength by evolving from supply chain security to encompass energy transition and sovereignty arguments. These arguments have been adopted by many stakeholders and are rarely contested in the public arena, notwithstanding unresolved issues and a lack of internal coherence within the Act. Debates arise when mines are actually announced, particularly in rural areas fearing that they will become sacrificial zones that will bear the brunt of meeting Europe’s critical and strategic needs. This European regulation therefore raises fundamental issues of spatial justice.