1. System Exposure: This dimension captures the extent to which food, water, and energy systems depend on a given mineral and the degree to which those systems would be adversely affected by a supply disruption. In other words, it reflects the scale of damage and the vulnerability exposed by a disruption in the supply of the candidate mineral. It is determined by both the functional importance of the mineral within food, water, and energy systems and the ability of those systems to adapt to or absorb supply shocks. 2. Supply Risk (UNFC-based): Leveraging UNFC, this dimension evaluates the maturity and feasibility of resource projects, economic viability, geological knowledge, and environmental and social constraints across the supply chain, from early exploration through production and recycling. The use of UNFC for the classification of mineral projects is a direct indication of potential and time-to-market. System Exposure is defined as a function of (i) Functional System Importance and (ii) System Resilience to Disruption. Functional System Importance assesses how deeply a mineral is embedded in essential infrastructure supporting food, water, and energy systems, and whether that dependence spans multiple systems. System Resilience captures the capacity of those systems to absorb or adapt to disruptions, as measured by indicators such as time to substitution, stockpile coverage, and supply adaptability (including recycling and secondary supply). Supply Risk integrates both the probability and severity of supply disruptions. The Likelihood of Supply Disruption is proxied by normalized indicators of production concentration, import dependence, and recycling rates. The Severity of Disruption reflects the duration and constraining nature of a disruption, informed by environmental, social, and governance constraints and, critically, by UNFC-based project maturity and feasibility. UNFC categories (E, F, G axes) characterize whether credible supply exists in the pipeline, the degree of uncertainty around time-to-market, and whether environmental or socio-economic constraints could delay or prevent scale-up. The structural elements forming the FWE Nexus criticality assessment, from components to the criticality score, are represented in Figure 1. Figure 1 Structural Methodology of the FWE Nexus Criticality The tool is operationalized through a structured set of components, indices, and dimensions, which together determine the criticality score for each mineral. Each level of aggregation is designed to 59
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2