Jadar project: Minimal economic benefits for Serbia amid significant risks

Even if the Republic of Serbia secures 20 percent of the capital for the “Jadar” project, its income would be minimal, amounting to just 27 million euros annually—equivalent to a mere 4.1 euros per capita, according to an analysis by economic experts Danica Popović, Boško Mijatović, Zoran Drakulić and Dejan Šoškić. The findings echo those of a previously published analysis, concluding that “the economic effects of the Jadar Project for the Republic of Serbia are highly uncertain, and in the best-case scenario, they are effectively zero.”

Despite claims by the “Rio Tinto” company, the President of Serbia, and the government regarding the purported economic benefits of the project, this article examines the facts and reveals that the Jadar Project would likely yield minimal economic gains for Serbia while imposing substantial costs on the state budget and introducing long-term financial and environmental risks.

Key points include:

Supported by

• According to “Rio Tinto” projections, Serbia would receive only 17.4 million euros annually from the project, translating to just 2.6 euros per capita.
• Serbia would need to fund the entire infrastructure required for the Jadar Project, estimated to cost several hundred million euros, covering roads, railways, water supply, gas pipelines, and electrical infrastructure.
• The Serbian government would not retain any ownership stake in the project, meaning “Rio Tinto” would retain full control over the extracted lithium. Even if Serbia were to receive 20 percent of the capital, its income would remain low at 27 million euros per year.
• In the event of an environmental disaster, such as flooding or tailings spills, Serbia would bear the financial burden of rehabilitation, potentially costing hundreds of millions of euros.
• The government also plans to allocate 419 million euros in subsidies—lacking transparency and guarantees—to the little-known Slovak company “InoBat,” which is partially owned by “Rio Tinto,” despite its lack of experience in large-scale battery production.

In summary, the “Jadar” Project effectively entails that Serbia would provide the lithium and infrastructure while “Rio Tinto” reaps the profits, leaving Serbia with full financial responsibility for all risks involved. Given the economic and financial analysis, along with the significant risks tied to its implementation, experts conclude that the Jadar Project is unjustifiable and should be halted.