IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework for firm-level critical material supply management and mitigation


  • Griffin, Gillian
  • Gaustad, Gabrielle
  • Badami, Kedar


Organizations of all sizes are vulnerable to critical material supply disruptions. Although there is a significant body of literature that examines how large entities such as nations and governments can assess and mitigate criticality, there is very little work that addresses firm-level criticality in a way that is actionable for businesses. This work uses literature review and case study analysis to understand the impact of critical material supply risk at the firm level, and to determine salient internal indicators. A total of 42 criticality studies were reviewed and the findings were used to develop a matrix to assess and monitor criticality risk using internal firm-specific data. The matrix incorporates three categories of risk including product concept viability, production, and profitability. It also contains four key business functions including finance, procurement, marketing, and production. These aspects were chosen because they are relevant to all businesses that produce and sell manufactured goods, and because they represent dynamics that are within the control of an individual firm. Unlike the global and national level indicators emphasized in most current research, the indicators proposed in this research are derived from data that firms can compile with reasonable ease. Finally, this work considers the role of the organization in criticality risk assessment and mitigation through an examination of the data needed to complete the aforementioned matrix and the likely sources of that information. The findings of this analysis elucidate the gap between internal and external and micro- and macro- criticality assessment, as well as provide a framework for firm-level criticality mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Griffin, Gillian & Gaustad, Gabrielle & Badami, Kedar, 2019. "A framework for firm-level critical material supply management and mitigation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 262-276.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:60:y:2019:i:c:p:262-276
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.12.008

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Blengini, Gian Andrea & Nuss, Philip & Dewulf, Jo & Nita, Viorel & Peirò, Laura Talens & Vidal-Legaz, Beatriz & Latunussa, Cynthia & Mancini, Lucia & Blagoeva, Darina & Pennington, David & Pellegrini,, 2017. "EU methodology for critical raw materials assessment: Policy needs and proposed solutions for incremental improvements," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 12-19.
    2. T. E. Graedel & Barbara K. Reck, 2016. "Six Years of Criticality Assessments: What Have We Learned So Far?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(4), pages 692-699, August.
    3. Brown, Teresa, 2018. "Measurement of mineral supply diversity and its importance in assessing risk and criticality," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 202-218.
    4. Helbig, Christoph & Wietschel, Lars & Thorenz, Andrea & Tuma, Axel, 2016. "How to evaluate raw material vulnerability - An overview," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 13-24.
    5. Lapko, Yulia & Trucco, Paolo & Nuur, Cali, 2016. "The business perspective on materials criticality: Evidence from manufacturers," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 93-107.
    6. Hau L. Lee & V. Padmanabhan & Seungjin Whang, 1997. "Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 546-558, April.
    7. Nieto, Antonio & Guelly, Kirsten & Kleit, Andrew, 2013. "Addressing criticality for rare earth elements in petroleum refining: The key supply factors approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 496-503.
    8. Daw, Georges, 2017. "Security of mineral resources: A new framework for quantitative assessment of criticality," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 173-189.
    9. Georges Daw, 2017. "Security of mineral resources: A new framework for quantitative assessment of criticality," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01591701, HAL.
    10. Bustamante, Michele L. & Gaustad, Gabrielle, 2014. "Challenges in assessment of clean energy supply-chains based on byproduct minerals: A case study of tellurium use in thin film photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 397-414.
    11. Rosenau-Tornow, Dirk & Buchholz, Peter & Riemann, Axel & Wagner, Markus, 2009. "Assessing the long-term supply risks for mineral raw materials--a combined evaluation of past and future trends," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 161-175, December.
    12. Achzet, Benjamin & Helbig, Christoph, 2013. "How to evaluate raw material supply risks—an overview," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 435-447.
    13. Georges Daw, 2017. "Security of mineral resources: A new framework for quantitative assessment of criticality," Post-Print halshs-01552131, HAL.
    14. Kevin B. Hendricks & Vinod R. Singhal, 2005. "Association Between Supply Chain Glitches and Operating Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 695-711, May.
    15. Jasiński, Dominik & Cinelli, Marco & Dias, Luis C. & Meredith, James & Kirwan, Kerry, 2018. "Assessing supply risks for non-fossil mineral resources via multi-criteria decision analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 150-158.
    16. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    17. Olhager, Jan, 2003. "Strategic positioning of the order penetration point," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 319-329, September.
    18. S Cannella & A P Barbosa-Póvoa & J M Framinan & S Relvas, 2013. "Metrics for bullwhip effect analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 64(1), pages 1-16, January.
    19. Hatayama, Hiroki & Tahara, Kiyotaka, 2018. "Adopting an objective approach to criticality assessment: Learning from the past," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 96-102.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:60:y:2019:i:c:p:262-276. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.