Critical raw material supply chain risks and resilience: Discrepancies of perspectives – A SLR approach

Critical raw materials (CRMs) are essential for the energy transition, yet their supply chains remain highly vulnerable to geopolitical and environmental risks. This study examines how European and Chinese scholars perceive CRM supply chain risks and resilience through a systematic literature review (SLR) based on the methodology of Durach et al. (2017). For a structured analysis, the CRM Resilience Comparative Framework (CRRCF) is introduced extending the supply chain risk model of Ritchie & Brindley (2007) by integrating geopolitical and institutional dimensions. Findings reveal both convergences and divergences of perspectives: European authors emphasize sustainability, circularity, and policy-driven resilience, reflecting regulatory priorities and environmental standards. Chinese authors highlight supply security, industrial upgrading, and market power, shaped by resource dominance and strategic growth objectives. These contrasting perspectives reflect differing institutional contexts and economic priorities, shaping how resilience is framed and operationalised. Despite these differences, both regions highlight diversification and long-term strategies as essential for mitigating vulnerabilities. The study offers practical implications for policymakers and industry leaders. For Europe, the findings suggest that achieving resilience may require stronger coordination between industry and government, including targeted interventions, strategic stockpiling, and diversified sourcing. For China, greater transparency and ESG alignment could strengthen trust with international partners. Despite political challenges, shared vulnerabilities indicate potential benefits from more coordinated approaches to CRM governance. The study contributes by linking firm-level and geopolitical resilience perspectives and showing how regional risk framing influences strategic responses, providing a balanced foundation for future CRM policy and research.