Capital
We work for capital requiring durable, lawful, and socially operable supply.
When legitimacy fails, capital fails abruptly
Capital has not pulled back from critical minerals because demand is uncertain.
Governments have already made demand explicit — through defence procurement, clean energy mandates, industrial policy, strategic stockpiles, export finance, equity stakes, offtake agreements, and price support mechanisms. Public capital is now firmly in the market, led by the United States and increasingly mirrored across OECD economies.
Yet despite this, the global investment gap in critical minerals remains vast — estimated at ~US$800 billion this decade. The problem is not capital availability. It is that capital is managing the wrong risk.
-
Traditional investment models are built to manage:
geology
engineering
cost curves
commodity prices.
These risks can be priced, hedged, and diversified.
What increasingly cannot be hedged — and now dominates outcomes — is development certainty:
whether a project can be permitted
whether approvals are durable
whether community and Indigenous consent is sustained
whether political and legal support holds over time.
Across the sector, projects with strong technical fundamentals are:
delayed for years
stalled indefinitely
or shut down after capital is committed.
Approvals are challenged. Licences are revoked. Political support evaporates.
Value is lost abruptly, not gradually.
This is not a project-specific problem.
It is a structural mismatch between how capital assesses risk and how value is now destroyed.
-
Most “de-risking” happens too late.
Legal strategies are slow and adversarial
Political interventions are unpredictable
ESG frameworks improve disclosure but rarely change outcomes once designs are locked and capital is sunk.
By the time legitimacy issues surface, options are constrained and losses are already embedded.
This is why governments are increasingly stepping in with public capital — not to replace private investment, but because delivery risk has become too large and too opaque to carry downstream.
But without resolving the risks that actually stop projects, this simply shifts exposure from private balance sheets to sovereign ones.
-
What is missing is a development capability that resolves the right risks early enough.
Many of the most attractive opportunities sit in:
pre-permitted but stalled assets
built or near-built projects stranded by legal or social fragility
Tier-1 deposits with unresolved community opposition
basins that were never designed with a viable consent or supply-chain pathway.
These assets are not un-investable because fundamentals are weak.
They are un-investable because development certainty is missing.
-
Mining and processing companies are structurally focused on capital allocation, project execution, and operational performance. Their expertise — and their incentives — sit downstream of development certainty.
Once capital is committed, miners are expected to:
build efficiently
operate safely
manage costs
deliver output.
They are not funded, nor organised, to absorb the open-ended work required before investment decisions are made: resolving legitimacy, consent, permitting durability, land-use conflicts, and cross-system alignment while project design is still fluid.
By the time these issues surface within a proponent-led process, capital is already committed and options are constrained.
This is not a failure of mining companies.
It is a structural gap in the development system.Spektrum exists to fill that gap — operating upstream of capital allocation, so miners and processors can deploy capital into projects that are already development-certain.
What Spektrum does differently
Spektrum exists to reduce the risks that actually determine whether capital earns a return.
We operate upstream, before large capital commitments are made, to resolve:
legitimacy
consent
permitting durability
delivery sequencing
These are the risks most likely to delay, impair, or strand value — and the ones traditional models largely ignore.
Through our Development by Consent© (DbC) methodology and Legitimacy Value-at-Risk analysis, we:
make visible the value erosion caused by delay, conflict, licence instability, and forced shutdowns
test whether a legitimate, consent-based pathway forward exists
reshape project foundations — design, sequencing, governance, participation — before capital is locked in
This is precision de-risking.
It does not dilute returns.
It protects them by removing the high-risk tail that destroys value.
How capital works with Spektrum
We partner with asset owners, private equity, strategic investors, and public capital providers who recognise that:
the primary constraint on returns is no longer technical feasibility, but development certainty
many of the most compelling opportunities sit in stalled or stranded assets, not because they are flawed, but because legitimacy failed
better decisions at the foundation stage materially outperform attempts to “fix” projects after capital is committed.
Together, we:
define target geographies, asset types, and risk parameters
quantify legitimacy-driven value erosion using our Value-at-Risk framework
test whether a durable, consent-based pathway exists
structure investment only where projects can proceed — or exit early where they cannot.
What this means for different capital partners
Asset owners
reduced headline and write-down risk
greater confidence in long-duration cash flows
a defensible basis for allocation decisions
re-entry into assets currently avoided.
Private equity
earlier clarity on investability
improved timeline predictability and IRR protection
value creation through redesign, not distress
clearer exit pathways to strategics, OEMs, or states.
Public and catalytic capital
lower probability of stranded sovereign investment
reduced political and legal exposure
faster, more durable supply outcomes.
The result
Capital is deployed into projects that can actually be delivered.
Timelines become credible.
Litigation risk falls.
Political and sovereign exposure is reduced.
Returns are protected not by optimism, but by design.
Spektrum does not promise that every project will proceed.
We ensure that capital is not trapped in projects that should not.
That discipline is what accelerates supply — and why the next phase of critical minerals investment will be won upstream, not downstream.
