One year later: Is Europe's "Strategic Projects" strategy working or stalling?

It has been one year since the European Commission unveiled the first wave of 47 Strategic Projects under the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA), raising expectations about faster permitting, stronger investment, and clearer pathways to domestic supplies. But has the initiative lived up to its promise? As the landscape continues to evolve, the following overview examines what has progressed, what hasn’t, and what it means for the projects involved. 

Q: How have funding trends evolved since the EU47 list was released, and to what extent has the “strategic project” label helped developers advance their initiatives? 

A: Since the list was introduced, most project funding has come from public sources, including government grants and export credit agencies. Lithium projects have attracted the lion’s share, around €1.5 billion over the past nine months, thanks to a steadier, long-term outlook. While being labelled a strategic project has helped some developers access and secure grants, the anticipated benefit of faster permitting is still handled by national and regional authorities. Limited public disclosure by many project owners makes it difficult to access real permitting progress. 

Q: Why is lithium attracting strong investment, and what broader factors are shaping funding decisions? 

A: Lithium continues to attract funding because it’s used in almost every battery type, and investor confidence has improved as prices have doubled since last year. Most new funding is directed to upstream mining where established markets make risks easier to manage. At the same time, demand for data-center and AI-related storage is accelerating the shift from nickel manganese cobalt batteries, primarily used in electric vehicles, to lithium iron phosphate, which now dominates stationary storage. This transition doesn’t affect lithium miners, but disrupts midstream producers like pCAM suppliers, whose materials are tied to alternate chemistries. In the west, investor caution is also rising due to shortages of skilled labor, lower productivity, and higher energy and fuel costs tied to geopolitical tensions. 

Q: What’s keeping investors from funding new projects, and what financing options are they overlooking? 

A: Investors are holding back because many projects depend on unproven technologies, come with high costs and tight margins, and have a pattern of delays and budget overruns. They also want clearer permitting updates, visible progress in reducing technical risk, and credible execution plans that detail contracting strategies, workforce needs, and engineering, procurement, and construction involvement. At the same time, developers often overlook Export Credit Agencies, which now provide debt for technical studies and can help close early-stage funding gaps that private investors won’t fill. Financiers also need a clearer picture of long-term demand—how each project fits into Europe’s future supply chain and the assumptions behind its forecasts—before they’re willing to commit capital. 

Q: What does all this say about Europe’s industrial strategy one year after the launch of the EU47 initiative? 

A: The program has raised visibility for critical minerals and given industry a platform to engage policymakers. But without clearer market signals and stronger, more consistent policy implementation, especially around permitting and midstream capacity, private capital remains hesitant. Similar strategic-project approaches are already underway in the U.S., Canada, Australia, and South America, giving Europe a chance to draw lessons from those models as it plans its next steps. 

Q: What’s next? 

A: The one-year anniversary provides an opportunity to take stock of progress and set clearer priorities for the future. It’s a moment to reassess the strategic framework guiding the projects, ensuring it still reflects current market realities and policy goals. It also offers a chance to strengthen communication between project owners and policymakers so that expectations, constraints, and timelines are better aligned. At the same time, it’s an ideal point to identify the specific actions needed to improve both financing pathways and project execution.  

Europe has made a start. The next year is about maturing the market, clarifying demand, and better aligning project-level execution with strategic ambitions.     The EU47 initiative set the direction. The challenge now is proving that it can deliver the industrial scale and supply‑chain resilience it has promised. 

You may also be interested in: 47 projects. One vision. Can Europe secure its critical minerals supply?