Article
Reza Payandeh1,*, Ali Mahdizadeh Bahman Abad2, Ahad Rezayan Ghayehbashi3
1Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Crossroad of Chamran and Jalal Al Ahmad Highway, Tehran, Iran
2Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management, Imam Sadiq University, Modiriat Bridge, Shahid Chamran Highway, Tehran, Iran
3Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Crossroad of Chamran and Jalal Al Ahmad Highway, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Using intuitive-logics scenario planning, this study examines Iran’s copper industry to 2030, with a focus on collaboration between NICICO and knowledge-based enterprises. Expert workshops, semi-structured questionnaires, Fuzzy TOPSIS, and MICMAC prioritized ten drivers and identified two pivotal uncertainties: Industry 4.0 adoption and KBE diversification. Their interaction produced four futures: Static Ore Chain, Islands of Innovation, Intelligent Bottleneck, and From Ore to More. Of these, From Ore to More ranked highest in plausibility, flexibility, and governance alignment. The study demonstrates how scenario planning can move beyond narrative construction by linking alternative futures to operational signposts and robust actions involving digital investment, KBE accreditation, and traceability and life-cycle assessment for standards-based market access. It thereby connects foresight, sustainability, and innovation-system perspectives to support policy reform and adaptive decision-making in resource-dependent economies.
Keywords
Scenario Planning, Copper Industry, Industry 4.0, Sustainable Value Chains, Iran
Introduction
Industries today are exposed to intensifying environmental, technological, and regulatory pressures that continuously reshape their trajectories. Value chains, once dominated by a limited set of actors and centralized drivers, are increasingly influenced by a wide range of stakeholders, emerging technologies, and policy environments, resulting in greater complexity and uncertainty (Pietrobelli & Staritz, 2018). This dynamic is particularly evident in resource-based sectors such as copper, where technological change, climate imperatives, and geopolitical shifts intersect to redefine global supply and demand patterns. Copper occupies a unique position in both industrial history and the sustainable future of energy systems. With its unmatched electrical conductivity and recyclability, copper is indispensable in renewable energy, electric vehicles, smart grids, and digital infrastructure (International Copper Study Group [ICSG], 2023). Projections indicate that global demand will grow significantly by 2030, driven by electrification, renewable energy expansion, and urbanization, while the supply side faces constraints from finite reserves, environmental regulations, and community pressures (Kang et al., 2023). These trends show that the copper industry must meet rising demand while also moving toward more sustainable and circular production models (Misra et al., 2023).
Global copper production has nearly tripled since 1970 as electrification and renewable-energy deployment have expanded demand. At the same time, refining and semi-fabrication have become increasingly concentrated in Asia, with China accounting for nearly half of global refined output. This shift indicates that competitive advantage depends not only on access to mineral resources, but also on capabilities in processing, technological upgrading, and downstream commercialization. Iran, despite its substantial copper resources and domestic refining capacity, remains concentrated in raw and semi-finished exports, underscoring the need for Industry 4.0 adoption, downstream upgrading, and stronger integration of knowledge-based enterprises into the value chain (ICSG, 2023; MiningVisuals, 2025; Recycling Today, 2025).
Iran holds a strategic position as the world’s fifth-largest copper reserve base, located on the second-largest global copper belt (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS], 2022). The National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICICO) plays a dominant role in upstream and downstream activities, but the industry remains heavily dependent on raw exports with limited upgrading into high value-added products (NICICO, 2023). This reliance on primary exports exposes Iran to global market fluctuations and reduces opportunities for innovation-driven growth. Achieving higher value capture requires integrating knowledge-based companies into copper value chains, fostering innovation, and leveraging digital technologies such as Industry 4.0.
Despite the global recognition of copper’s strategic role, limited scholarly attention has been given to how resource-rich developing economies, particularly Iran, can design futures that transcend raw material dependence. Previous studies on copper have largely focused on technological applications (International Copper Association [ICA], 2017; International Renewable Energy Agency [IRENA], 2019) or market projections (ICSG, 2023), with relatively little attention to foresight methods that link sustainability, governance, and innovation systems. Moreover, while global experiences (e.g., in China, the U.S., and Germany) show that upgrading resource-based sectors requires country-specific strategies, the Iranian context remains underexplored in the academic literature (Kang et al., 2023). Accordingly, this study addresses this research gap by applying a scenario planning approach to Iran’s copper industry, with a specific focus on collaboration between NICICO and knowledge-based companies. By doing so, it not only contributes to foresight studies in resource-dependent economies but also integrates insights from sustainability transitions and innovation systems into the analysis of copper value chains.
The study contributes by translating uncertainties into adaptive policy options, operationalizing the GBN process through wild cards, signposts, futures wheels, and stress testing, and linking Innovation System Functions with Global Value Chain upgrading under institutional constraints.
Literature Review
Copper’s centrality to the low-carbon transition has been widely recognized, yet how resource-rich developing economies can leverage this opportunity through value chain upgrading remains insufficiently theorized and empirically explored. Despite extensive studies on copper technologies and markets, four major gaps persist.
1. Environmental and resource efficiency gap.
Studies on environmental performance and life-cycle assessments have revealed significant variations in energy intensity, emissions, and water footprints across copper operations (Northey et al., 2013; Rönnlund et al., 2016). While these works highlight potential eco-efficiency gains, they rarely connect technological improvements to the governance mechanisms required to realize them. Recent demand–supply scenarios project steep demand growth toward mid-century (Elshkaki et al., 2016; B. Li et al., 2025), but the policy and institutional levers for balancing environmental and industrial objectives remain underexplored.
2. Value chain upgrading gap.
Global value chain (GVC) research emphasizes that capturing higher value depends on functional upgrading, which involves moving from raw extraction to refined products, advanced fabrication, and knowledge-based services (Gereffi & Fernandez-Stark, 2016; Pietrobelli & Staritz, 2018). Yet few studies explain how resource-based economies under external constraints, such as sanctions, can achieve such upgrading. For Iran, which remains largely export-oriented in semi-processed copper, this literature implies that new governance and innovation mechanisms are essential to foster learning and resilience (Abdelbary & Elshawa, 2023; Cheratian et al., 2023).
3. Innovation system and foresight integration gap.
Innovation system functions (ISF) research identifies key processes, including knowledge diffusion, resource mobilization, and legitimacy building, that accelerate technological transitions (Bergek et al., 2015; Hekkert & Negro, 2009). However, its application to mineral-based industries is limited. Similarly, foresight and scenario planning approaches (Amer et al., 2013; Schwartz, 1996) provide structured tools for dealing with uncertainty, but are rarely combined with ISF or GVC perspectives to produce actionable strategies for industrial upgrading.
4. Institutional coordination gap.
Empirical evidence shows that technology alone is insufficient; institutional credibility, evaluation systems, and collaboration mechanisms strongly influence innovation outcomes (De Paula et al., 2023; Reuer & Lahiri, 2013). In sanction-constrained economies, additional frictions, including limited global partnerships and fragmented certification systems, further restrict upgrading and learning (Cheratian et al., 2023).
Synthesis and contribution
Taken together, these four gaps point to a broader integrative problem: existing scholarship does not adequately explain how environmental upgrading, value-chain development, innovation-system functions, and institutional coordination can be aligned under conditions of deep uncertainty. This study addresses this problem by integrating scenario planning, Innovation System Functions (ISF), and Global Value Chain (GVC) upgrading within a context-sensitive analytical framework for Iran and comparable resource-based economies. Its central contribution is to demonstrate how foresight and scenario planning can support policy reform by translating deep uncertainty into alternative futures and linking those futures to monitoring signposts, robust actions, and contingent policy options. In this way, the study moves beyond scenario construction as a descriptive exercise and positions foresight as a practical mechanism for adaptive decision-making and strategic coordination.
The study also advances theory by conceptualizing value-chain upgrading as a dynamic, anticipatory, and institutionally enabled process. It extends the ISF perspective by showing how governance credibility, institutional evaluation mechanisms, and sanction-related constraints shape resource mobilization, legitimacy creation, and market formation. It also enriches GVC analysis by incorporating foresight, digital transformation, and institutional learning into upgrading pathways. This integrative framework connects firm-level innovation, value-chain structures, and governance conditions, while clarifying how institutional trust and coordination capacity influence sustainable value creation.
Iran provides a particularly relevant setting for examining these relationships. Its innovation system remains largely state-led and resource-dependent, while limited transparency in evaluation, procurement, and certification constrains collaboration with knowledge-based enterprises. International sanctions further restrict access to advanced technologies, foreign capital, global standards, and learning opportunities (Madani, 2021; Middle East Institute, 2025), while domestic certification arrangements may favor incumbent firms and reinforce institutional lock-in (Atlantic Council, 2019). At the same time, innovation funds, domestic R&D consortia, and strong engineering capabilities provide a foundation for reform. By testing policy options across plausible futures, scenario planning enables policymakers to distinguish robust measures from contingent ones and revise them as technological, institutional, and market conditions evolve. This adaptive policy capacity represents the main practical significance of the study for resource-rich economies operating under external constraints.
Methodology
Scenario planning has been widely used in futures studies to prepare organizations and governments for uncertain environments by exploring alternative trajectories rather than predicting a single outcome. Over time, the method has evolved into several distinct schools of thought, with the Royal Dutch Shell / Global Business Network (GBN) approach emerging as one of the most influential and widely applied frameworks in both corporate and policy contexts (Millett, 2003; Schwartz, 1996; Van der Heijden, 1997). The GBN approach is among the most recognized traditions within the intuitive-logics school because of its adaptability, participatory nature, and its ability to combine qualitative insights with structured analytical techniques (Amer et al., 2013; Bishop et al., 2007; Cordova-Pozo & Rouwette, 2023). Rather than offering predictions, scenario planning provides a set of plausible futures that illuminate key uncertainties, encourage strategic reflection, and support robust decision-making under conditions of complexity and change (Godet, 2000; Wulf et al., 2010).
Scenario planning encompasses a diverse set of traditions and methodologies. Beyond the intuitive-logics tradition represented by GBN, futures scholars have developed alternative approaches including La Prospective, Morphological Analysis, Transformative Scenarios, Critical Futures Studies, and Causal Layered Analysis. These approaches differ in their assumptions regarding uncertainty, participation, power relations, agency, and the construction of future narratives. Discussions within the futures studies community have increasingly emphasized the importance of recognizing this methodological plurality and critically reflecting on the assumptions embedded in scenario construction (Bradfield et al., 2005; Wilkinson & Eidinow, 2008). In particular, contributions to the Journal of Futures Studies Scenario Symposium discussed debates regarding the theoretical foundations of scenario planning, the practical value of scenarios, and the need to move beyond dominant assumptions when imagining alternative futures (Inayatullah, 2009; Molitor, 2009; Wilkinson, 2009).
At the same time, the GBN approach has been subject to critical examination within the futures studies literature. Critics have noted that intuitive-logics scenarios may, under certain conditions, reflect dominant stakeholder assumptions, underrepresent issues of power and conflict, and privilege continuity over more transformative or disruptive futures (Inayatullah, 2004; Ramirez & Wilkinson, 2016; Wilkinson & Kupers, 2013). Critical futures scholars therefore emphasize the importance of making assumptions explicit, incorporating diverse perspectives, and exploring alternative interpretations of future developments. Recognizing these concerns, the present study incorporated participants from government, academia, industry, and civil society throughout the scenario-development process and combined multiple analytical techniques to enhance methodological robustness and reduce potential bias.
For this study, the GBN scenario planning framework was adopted to analyze possible futures for collaboration between the National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICICO) and knowledge-based enterprises with a time horizon extending to 2030. This choice was made for three reasons: (1) its proven application in complex and uncertain industrial environments, (2) its emphasis on stakeholder engagement and iterative foresight, and (3) its capacity to integrate qualitative judgments with quantitative techniques such as Fuzzy-TOPSIS and MICMAC analysis. While alternative scenario traditions may yield different interpretations of future developments, the GBN approach was considered particularly suitable for examining strategic interactions among multiple actors operating within a highly uncertain industrial and policy environment. The process was therefore structured around the five key stages of GBN: Orient, Explore, Synthesize, Act and Monitor (Scearce & Fulton, 2004), and was operationalized through the eight analytical steps described below.
Results
Step 1: Orient
The first stage involved framing the scope of the scenario project and defining the guiding questions. Following Schwartz’s (1996) framing checklist, a ten-year time horizon was adopted given the high volatility of Iran’s political and economic environment (Hafezi et al., 2018). The research consortium consisted of representatives from government agencies, universities, copper-related firms, and NGOs (Table 1). This diverse composition ensured both industrial and policy perspectives were incorporated.
Table 1: Background Information on the Research Consortium
Step 2: Explore (Identifying Driving Forces)
In this stage, the research team identified driving forces shaping collaboration between NICICO and knowledge-based companies. Data sources included (1) electronic interviews available on industry-related websites such as nicico.com, CRU Group, and the London Metal Exchange (LME, 2022); and (2) 26 in-depth expert interviews with members of the research consortium. The expert panel was carefully selected based on relevant sectoral experience, academic and industry background, and policy expertise to ensure comprehensive coverage. To mitigate cognitive bias, participants disclosed potential conflicts of interest, and inputs were collected independently. A saturation analysis (Ayoubi & Salehi, 2025) confirmed that beyond the 26th participant, additional inputs did not substantially change scenario outcomes or indicator prioritization, indicating that the panel size was sufficient. A thematic analysis (Attride-Stirling, 2001) was conducted to classify the results into nine categories. These forces were then prioritized using Student’s t-test (Student, 1908) and the Fuzzy-TOPSIS method (Chen, 2000), ensuring robustness through triangulation of qualitative and quantitative methods. Table 2 presents the top ten driving forces, including synchronization with Industry 4.0 (Liu et al., 2023), sustainable access to raw materials (Koppelaar et al., 2023), and the development of various types of knowledge-based companies (De Paula et al., 2023).
Table 2: Driving forces
Step 3: Synthesize (Determining Critical Uncertainties)
To identify critical uncertainties, an interaction-effect questionnaire was distributed to the core research group (Gordon, 2012). The results were analyzed using the MICMAC software (Godet, 2001), which maps drivers according to their influence and dependence. Two uncertainties were highlighted as pivotal: (1) the degree of adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies in NICICO (Schwab, 2016) and (2) the diversification of knowledge-based companies in the copper value chain. These uncertainties formed the axes of the scenario matrix (see Figure 2). The final cross-impact matrix used to identify the critical uncertainties is presented in Figure 1.
Fig. 1: Final Cross-Impact Matrix Extracted from the Expert Panel
0: No influence, 1: Weak, 2: Moderate influence, 3: Strong influence
Step 4: Scenario Building
Scenarios were constructed at the intersection of the two uncertainties. This process involved multiple workshops with the research consortium, during which the scope, logic, and narrative of each scenario were debated and refined. The resulting four scenarios are Static Ore Chain, Islands of Innovation, Intelligent Bottleneck, and From Ore to More. They reflect different pathways for the Iranian copper industry’s future (see Figure 2). Scenario names were selected to align with copper processing terminology, thus enhancing their interpretability and memorability for stakeholders.
Fig. 2: Scenario matrix
To strengthen the credibility of findings, several triangulation and validation strategies were employed. First, methodological triangulation was achieved by combining qualitative (interviews, thematic analysis) and quantitative (Fuzzy-TOPSIS, MICMAC) techniques. Second, data triangulation was ensured by incorporating multiple stakeholder groups from government, academia, industry, and civil society. Third, iterative feedback loops were embedded: preliminary results were circulated to the consortium members for validation, and subsequent revisions incorporated their expert feedback (Meyerowitz et al., 2018). Finally, the scenario narratives were assessed against environmental signals and policy documents to ensure plausibility and contextual relevance (Saritas & Aylen, 2010).
4.1: Static Ore Chain scenario
This scenario emerges when the National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICICO) fails to align with the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0) and when knowledge-based copper companies remain underdeveloped. The industry remains locked in traditional production routines, with limited diversification and weak downstream development. This stagnation reproduces structural inefficiencies and deepens Iran’s dependency on low-value exports.
Experts suggest three urgent interventions: (1) creating a discourse and organizational culture that emphasizes downstream industries within NICICO and Iranian society (Cheratian et al., 2023); (2) facilitating technology transfer through targeted imports and export market access, conditional on easing international sanctions (Zhang et al., 2023); and (3) developing customized raw materials to meet the needs of emerging firms while offering governmental support to guarantee quality standards and insurance mechanisms. Without such reforms, Iran risks being excluded from global copper value chains, where digitalization and sustainable production are becoming the dominant competitive logics (Liu et al., 2023).
4.2: Islands of Innovation scenario
This scenario reflects a context where NICICO does not adopt Industry 4.0 technologies, yet knowledge-based companies are relatively active and growing. The lack of digital transformation at the core of NICICO restricts systemic modernization, but a parallel ecosystem of knowledge-based firms attempts to fill the innovation gap. This asymmetric development produces tensions: companies innovate in niches, but the absence of smart manufacturing and data-driven systems reduces the scalability and competitiveness of their solutions.
Key measures include: (1) upgrading the evaluation and ranking system of knowledge-based companies under the Vice Presidency for Science and Technology to enhance credibility; (2) institutionalizing guarantees and trust-building mechanisms for NICICO to cooperate with such firms; and (3) linking domestic firms with international knowledge-based networks to co-develop and commercialize copper-related products (De Paula et al., 2023). However, without NICICO’s digital transformation, these initiatives risk remaining fragmented, reflecting similar cases in other resource-based industries in Latin America and Africa (Abdelbary & Elshawa, 2023; An et al., 2023).
4.3: Intelligent Bottleneck scenario
In this scenario, NICICO adopts Industry 4.0 technologies and successfully undergoes digital transformation, yet knowledge-based companies remain underdeveloped. Smart mining systems, IoT-enabled production, and AI-driven efficiency gains modernize the industry, but the lack of a vibrant innovation ecosystem prevents downstream diversification. This leads to a top-down modernization that strengthens NICICO but leaves SMEs and entrepreneurial firms marginalized.
Experts emphasize the need for regulatory reform, particularly the revision of the Law of Knowledge-Based Production Leap and adjusting export tariffs for high-tech copper products, to create incentives for SME growth (Ghazinoori, 2012; Hafezi et al., 2018). Establishing specialized copper innovation hubs and industrial parks can provide material and institutional support to smaller firms. In this configuration, NICICO becomes a driver of smart production but risks monopolizing innovation unless supported by policies that diffuse capabilities across the ecosystem. Similar dynamics have been observed in China’s mining sector, where state-owned enterprises lead digitalization but private innovators lag behind (Koppelaar et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023).
4.4: From Ore to More scenario
This scenario represents the most desirable future, characterized by both NICICO’s digital transformation and the flourishing of diverse knowledge-based companies. Industry 4.0 technologies, including AI, IoT, cloud computing, and big data analytics, are fully integrated into mining and production processes, enabling predictive maintenance, efficiency gains, and environmental monitoring (Liu et al., 2023; Schwab, 2016). Simultaneously, knowledge-based firms diversify across the copper value chain, producing high-value downstream products and integrating into global markets.
In this future, NICICO entrusts its core products to a network of trusted firms, supported by government-backed assurance mechanisms, enabling co-production and innovation at scale. Knowledge-based companies must continuously align with international standards, investing in R&D to maintain competitiveness (Cordova-Pozo & Rouwette, 2023; Meyerowitz et al., 2018). Policy measures include building consumer markets for advanced copper-based products in Iran, fostering export-oriented clusters, and ensuring environmental compliance through digital monitoring tools (Godet, 2000; Wulf et al., 2010). The scenario highlights how an integrated innovation ecosystem can transform Iran’s copper sector into a regional leader, echoing successful models of resource-based innovation in countries like Chile and Australia (Abdelbary & Elshawa, 2023; Saritas & Aylen, 2010). Table 3 summarizes the defining characteristics and strategic implications of the four scenarios.
Table 3: Summary of the Four Scenarios
Building on the GBN scenario-thinking process, we derived four plausible futures for Iran’s copper industry. To make these narratives decision-ready, we extend the process with four additional steps: Step 5 surfaces disruptive events and weak signals that may branch or hybridize scenarios; Step 6 specifies signposts to infer which future is unfolding; Step 7 maps first- to third-order consequences using a futures-wheel logic; and Step 8 stress-tests strategies across all scenarios to isolate robust actions and define contingent options with clear trigger conditions.
Step 5: Wild Cards and Weak Signals
Beyond the structured scenarios, the analysis incorporates low-probability/high-impact wild cards and early, ambiguous weak signals to test assumptions and pre-plan contingencies. Practically, this means translating potential shocks, such as breakthroughs that reduce copper intensity, abrupt sanctions reconfigurations, power-system instability, or changes in carbon pricing, into concrete branch points while tracking early cues such as digital-passport pilots, AI-enabled exploration and predictive maintenance announcements, emerging LCA/traceability requirements in destination markets, the rate and diversity of domestic knowledge-based entrants, and investment shifts toward recycling and urban mining. A living registry links each item to one or more scenarios with predefined responses so that, as signals strengthen or a wild card materializes, governance can escalate without delay.
Among the potential wild cards identified by participants, geopolitical conflict emerged as one of the most significant sources of uncertainty due to its potential effects on industrial infrastructure, energy markets, international trade routes, and global commodity chains. One important geopolitical wild card affecting the future of Iran’s copper industry is the continuation or escalation of regional conflicts involving Iran, Israel, the United States, and other regional actors. Recent military confrontations in the Middle East during 2025–2026 highlighted how geopolitical shocks can rapidly influence industrial development pathways, investment decisions, technological upgrading, inflationary pressures, and access to international markets. While such tensions may disrupt industrial and energy infrastructure and increase economic uncertainty, they may simultaneously stimulate domestic innovation, strengthen collaboration between large industrial firms and knowledge-based enterprises, and accelerate technological self-reliance strategies.
Beyond Iran, the implications of regional conflict extend to the global copper value chain. Although Iran accounts for a relatively limited share of global copper production, the strategic importance of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz creates broader systemic risks for international commodity markets. Disruptions to maritime transportation routes may increase energy prices, insurance costs, shipping expenses, and the cost of critical inputs such as sulfur and sulfuric acid required for copper processing and refining (Elshkaki et al., 2016; Guo et al., 2024). Consequently, major copper-producing countries, including Chile, Peru, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, Australia, and Indonesia, may face rising production costs and supply-chain uncertainties. On the demand side, higher copper prices and increased market volatility can affect infrastructure investments, renewable energy deployment, electric vehicle production, and industrial manufacturing in major consuming economies such as China, the United States, India, Japan, South Korea, and the European Union (Guo et al., 2024; ICA, 2023; B. Li et al., 2025). Consequently, regional conflict represents a plausible geopolitical wild card that could shift the probability, timing, and trajectory of all four scenarios developed in this study (Ramirez & Wilkinson, 2016; Saritas & Smith, 2011).
Depending on how actors respond, regional conflict may function either as a constraining force or as a catalyst for transformation. In the former case, infrastructure disruptions, investment uncertainty, and reduced international engagement may reinforce the Static Ore Chain scenario. In the latter case, increased emphasis on domestic innovation, technological self-reliance, industrial collaboration, and strategic upgrading may strengthen the transition toward the From Ore to More scenario. The ultimate outcome will depend less on the conflict itself than on the adaptive capacity of institutions, firms, and policymakers.
Step 6: Scenario Evaluation and Ranking
To discriminate among futures, an expert panel rated each scenario on a four-point Likert scale (encoded 0–3) for likelihood of realization, flexibility under stress, and alignment with governance goals; scores were averaged across raters and criteria to form a composite index and then ranked. Consistent with digitization trajectories and the maturation of domestic knowledge-based firms, From Ore to More recorded the highest composite average (2.8; rank 1), indicating both perceived feasibility and policy fit. Intelligent Bottleneck followed closely (2.7; rank 2), reflecting confidence in NICICO’s Industry 4.0 uptake even if ecosystem diversification lags. Islands of Innovation scored a moderate 1.6 (rank 3), signaling skepticism about scaling innovation without a smart core. Static Ore Chain ranked last with 0.9 (rank 4), underscoring low perceived feasibility and weak alignment. Read together, these scores substantiate the expert view that Industry 4.0 adoption and diversification of knowledge-based enterprises are the decisive axes for credible upgrading. For ongoing monitoring, each criterion is tied to measurable signposts, such as NICICO’s digital CAPEX share, the number and variety of certified KBE partners, export-market access milestones, and diffusion of LCA/traceability standards. Periodic reviews can nowcast the unfolding future and trigger no-regret or contingent actions defined in Step 8. The comparative evaluation scores and rankings of the four scenarios are presented in Table 4.
Table 4: Comparative Evaluation and Ranking of the Proposed Scenarios
Step 7: Consequences Mapping (Futures Wheel)
To move from narrative plausibility to implementation relevance, the study maps first-, second-, and third-order effects of each scenario across environmental, economic, and institutional dimensions. For instance, under From Ore to More, immediate gains in predictive maintenance, energy and water efficiency, and recovery rates propagate to lower unit emissions, higher product quality, deeper standards compliance, stronger supplier capabilities, and ultimately to systemic shifts, including greater circularity via traceable secondary flows, improved export competitiveness, and institutional learning that elevates innovation-system functions. Equivalent consequence chains are articulated for other scenarios to surface rebound effects, skills bottlenecks, vendor lock-in, or governance overload ex ante, clarifying where complementary policies on skills, data interoperability, finance, and environmental regulation must co-evolve.
Step 8: Strategies, Stress-Tests, and Robust Actions
Scenario-specific strategies are derived and then wind-tunnel tested across all futures to isolate robust actions and define contingent options with explicit triggers. Robust moves that are valuable in every future, include institutionalizing interoperability and data standards, expanding digital CAPEX with open modular architectures, transparent accreditation of knowledge-based partners, codifying LCA/traceability requirements along the chain, and performance-based procurement and finance. Contingent options pivot on signposts: if sanctions relaxation strengthens, export-oriented clusters and technology-transfer partnerships are accelerated; if carbon-pricing signals rise, low-carbon power contracts and efficiency retrofits are prioritized; if ecosystem diversification stalls, targeted incentives and a copper technology park are activated to catalyze SME entry, supplier upgrading, and university–industry consortia. Linking narratives to signposts, consequence maps, and stress-tested portfolios turns scenario work from static storytelling into an adaptive strategy system capable of steering Iran’s copper industry from ore to more under conditions of uncertainty.
Discussion
This study examined how collaboration between a state-owned anchor (NICICO) and knowledge-based enterprises (KBEs) can reshape Iran’s copper value chain under deep uncertainty. Using the GBN intuitive-logics framework, we derived four distinct futures: Static Ore Chain, Islands of Innovation, Intelligent Bottleneck, and From Ore to More. These futures were derived from two pivotal uncertainties: Industry 4.0 adoption at NICICO and diversification of KBEs along the chain. Expert elicitation (Table 4) indicates From Ore to More as the most plausible and governance-aligned pathway (composite average = 2.8; rank 1), followed by Intelligent Bottleneck (2.7; rank 2), with Islands of Innovation (1.6; rank 3) and Static Ore Chain (0.9; rank 4) trailing. Substantively, these scores confirm that digital transformation and entrepreneurial ecosystem breadth are the decisive axes of credible upgrading in Iran’s context.
Our findings both align with and extend prior research. At the operational level, environmental performance studies show substantial variance across copper operations due to differences in ore grade, energy mix, water use, and emissions control. This variance implies large eco-efficiency headroom when governance and technology align (Northey et al., 2013; Rönnlund et al., 2016). Long-term scenarios anticipate persistent demand growth and rising energy requirements for copper production to mid-century (Elshkaki et al., 2016), with clean-energy deployment itself being mineral-intensive (Guo et al., 2024). More recent modeling suggests secondary copper can become the dominant source if recycling rates achieve ambitious thresholds; otherwise cumulative demand–supply gaps remain large, especially in transport and power subsystems (B. Li et al., 2025). Our From Ore to More pathway operationalizes these macro insights at firm-and-system level: Industry 4.0 (IoT, AI, and Data platforms) tightens process control and traceability, enabling lower unit emissions, higher recovery, and credible LCA reporting, which are preconditions for export access and circularity. Conversely, Static Ore Chain illustrates how low digital maturity and thin KBE participation lock the system into low-value segments with weak environmental performance and poor resilience.
Theoretically, the paper contributes by bridging foresight with innovation systems and global value chain (GVC) perspectives. First, we extend the Functions of Innovation Systems (ISF) logic (Hekkert & Negro, 2009) into a resource-based sector by showing how guidance of the search, market formation, and legitimation can be engineered through signposts (Step 6) and robust actions (Step 8). In Intelligent Bottleneck, for example, strong digital capability at the anchor without KBE diversity yields a modernization trap; ISF suggests targeted policies to strengthen entrepreneurial experimentation and resource mobilization among SMEs to unlock diffusion. Second, we integrate GVC upgrading theory (Gereffi & Fernandez-Stark, 2016) by mapping how each scenario repositions Iran across functional stages (from extraction to advanced fabrication/services) and by stress-testing strategies against trade/standards dynamics. The Islands of Innovation scenario exemplifies an ecosystem-led push constrained by a non-digital anchor. Under this condition, innovation remains niche and struggles to scale, consistent with upgrading bottlenecks observed in resource economies (Pietrobelli & Staritz, 2018). Third, at the foresight-methods frontier, we build on and operationalize the basic GBN scenario-thinking process by formalizing wild cards and weak signals in Step 5, signposts in Step 6, futures-wheel consequence chains in Step 7, and wind-tunnel testing and robust actions in Step 8. This extension addresses long-standing critiques that scenario work can remain narrative-heavy yet decision-light (Cordova-Pozo & Rouwette, 2023; Destatte, 2010; Floyd & Zubevich, 2010; Scearce & Fulton, 2004; Schwartz, 1996).
For Iran-specific implications, the results indicate that a viable path “from ore to more” hinges on co-evolution of technology, institutions, and markets. On technology, open, modular digital CAPEX at NICICO combined with product-passport/traceability infrastructures lowers information asymmetries and enables recycling flows. This is an essential lever in a world of border carbon adjustments and LCA-based procurement (Guo et al., 2024; Rönnlund et al., 2016). On institutions, credible evaluation and accreditation systems for KBEs reduce transaction costs and foster trust, particularly salient in sanction-affected, state-led contexts (EY, 2022). On markets, export-oriented clusters and standards compliance are preconditions for access and price premia (Kang et al., 2023). These levers correspond closely to the policy actions identified through the stakeholder process (items 1–12): decisive managerial commitment to KBE integration across the chain; strategy redesign and knowledge-sharing; explicit roadmaps for high-tech product development and role clarity; digital needs marketplaces and open calls; coordination across the presidency, VP for Science and Technology, IMIDRO, NICICO subsidiaries, chambers, and the Value Chain Development Company; fiscal and risk-sharing instruments (tax, ownership-rights adjustments, insurance/guarantees); a Copper Science & Technology Park; vendor-list reform to prioritize certified KBEs; precise needs assessment for complex copper products and modularization of macro-projects; international branding/partnership avenues to navigate sanctions; fit-for-purpose cooperation models; and rigorous control/audit to sustain strategy execution.
The wild card/weak signal architecture further improves readiness. Breakthroughs in conductive composites, sanctions reconfiguration, grid instability, or step-changes in carbon pricing are translated into branch points, while signposts such as NICICO’s digital CAPEX share, KBE diversity, export-access milestones, and traceability adoption enable periodic nowcasting of the unfolding future. The futures wheel clarifies first- to third-order effects, including rebound energy use, skills bottlenecks, vendor lock-in, and governance overload. This allows targeted mitigations (skills pipelines, data interoperability, competitive procurement, environmental regulation) to co-evolve with technological change. In short, scenario work becomes an adaptive strategy system rather than static storytelling.
Limitations must be acknowledged. Judgments rest on expert panels and Iran-specific institutional diagnostics; transferability requires sensitivity to local political economy. While we triangulated qualitative and quantitative tools (interviews, thematic analysis, t-tests, fuzzy TOPSIS, MICMAC) and added validation (Delphi elements, backcasting), future research should quantify dynamics via system-dynamics or agent-based models for recycling/urban-mining pathways (H. Li et al., 2025) and undertake comparative analyses with peer producers (Chile, Peru, Kazakhstan, Mongolia). Nonetheless, by integrating foresight with ISF and GVC in a high-stakes, resource-based setting, this paper demonstrates how the combination of Industry 4.0, KBE ecosystems, and institutional credibility can jointly deliver sustainable upgrading.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates how foresight and scenario planning can support policy reform in a resource-dependent industry facing technological, institutional, and geopolitical uncertainty. The findings indicate that sustainable upgrading of Iran’s copper value chain requires the coordinated development of NICICO’s digital capabilities, a diverse knowledge-based enterprise ecosystem, and credible governance arrangements. Progress in only one of these dimensions is unlikely to generate systemic transformation. Sustainable upgrading therefore depends on the alignment of technological investment, institutional capacity, and market development.
The distinctive value of the foresight approach lies not in selecting a single preferred future, but in strengthening preparedness and adaptive decision-making. By combining scenario narratives with wild cards, weak signals, signposts, consequence mapping, and cross-scenario stress tests, the study distinguishes robust actions that remain valuable across different futures from contingent measures that should be activated only when specific conditions emerge. Robust priorities include interoperable digital infrastructure, transparent accreditation and procurement mechanisms for knowledge-based enterprises, traceability and life-cycle assessment capabilities, and stronger collaboration among industry, universities, and domestic innovation actors. Other measures, including international partnerships, export-oriented upgrading, and technology-transfer initiatives, should be adjusted according to regulatory conditions, sanctions, and access to global markets.
More broadly, the study shows how scenario planning can be transformed from a narrative exercise into an adaptive policy system. Signposts enable decision-makers to monitor which future is emerging, consequence mapping reveals indirect effects and potential bottlenecks, and stress testing supports the revision of policy portfolios as conditions change. In this way, foresight contributes to policy learning by making industrial strategy more responsive, monitorable, and capable of adjustment. For Iran and comparable resource-rich economies, the path from primary production to sustainable value creation requires synchronized progress in technology, institutions, and markets. The framework developed in this study makes that path more visible, actionable, and adaptable under conditions of uncertainty.
References
Abdelbary, I., & Elshawa, R. H. (2023). Economic sanctions as a foreign policy tool: A case study of the Iran–West conflict. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2854425/v1
Amer, M., Daim, T. U., & Jetter, A. (2013). A review of scenario planning. Futures, 46, 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2012.10.003
An, Z., Yan, J., An, H., Tan, J., Han, Y., Li, H., Yang, J., & Ramakrishna, S. (2023). Resource, environmental and economics research for primary and secondary copper: A bibliometric and systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 425, 138671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138671
Atlantic Council. (2019). Sanctions and domestic constraints cripple Iran’s startups. Atlantic Council – IranSource. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/sanctions-and-domestic-constraints-cripple-irans-startups/
Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410100100307
Ayoubi, L., & Salehi, K. (2025). Achieving saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review. Qualitative Research in Behavioral Sciences. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.22077/qrbs.2025.8429.1069
Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S., Markard, J., Sandén, B., & Truffer, B. (2015). Technological innovation systems in contexts: Conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.003
Bishop, P., Hines, A., & Collins, T. (2007). The current state of scenario development: An overview of techniques. Foresight, 9(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680710727516
Bradfield, R., Wright, G., Burt, G., Cairns, G., & Van der Heijden, K. (2005). The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. Futures, 37(8), 795–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2005.01.003
Chen, C.-T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
Cheratian, I., Goltabar, S., & Farzanegan, M. R. (2023). Firms persistence under sanctions: Micro-level evidence from Iran. The World Economy, 46(9), 2408–2431. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13378
Cordova-Pozo, K., & Rouwette, E. A. (2023). Types of scenario planning and their effectiveness: A review of reviews. Futures, 149, 103153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103153
De Paula, D., Marx, C., Wolf, E., Dremel, C., Cormican, K., & Uebernickel, F. (2023). A managerial mental model to drive innovation in the context of digital transformation. Industry and Innovation, 30(1), 42–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2022.2072711
Destatte, P. (2010). Foresight: A major tool in tackling sustainable development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(9), 1575–1587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.004
Elshkaki, A., Graedel, T. E., Ciacci, L., & Reck, B. K. (2016). Copper demand, supply, and associated energy use to 2050. Global Environmental Change, 39, 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.006
EY. (2022). Critical minerals supply and demand challenges mining companies face. Ernst & Young. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https://www.ey.com/en_us/mining-metals/critical-minerals-supply-and-demand-issues
Floyd, J., & Zubevich, K. (2010). Linking foresight and sustainability: An integral approach. Futures, 42(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2009.08.001
Gereffi, G., & Fernandez-Stark, K. (2016). Global value chain analysis: A primer (2nd ed., pp. 1–34). Duke Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness.
Ghazinoori, S. S. (2012). Science and technology policy in the form of general and specific policies. Rahyaft, 22(50), 1–15.
Godet, M. (2000). The art of scenarios and strategic planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 65(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(99)00120-1
Godet, M. (2001). Creating futures: Scenario planning as a strategic management tool. Economica.
Gordon, T. J. (2012). Cross-impact analysis. In Futures research methodology version 3.0. The Millennium Project.
Guo, J., Zhu, K., & Cheng, Y. (2024). Deployment of clean energy technologies towards carbon neutrality under resource constraints. Energy, 295, 131012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.131012
Hafezi, R., Malekifar, S., & Akhavan, A. (2018). Analyzing Iran’s science and technology foresight programs: Recommendations for further practices. Foresight, 20(3), 312–331. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-10-2017-0064
Hekkert, M. P., & Negro, S. O. (2009). Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: Empirical evidence for earlier claims. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(4), 584–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2008.04.013
Inayatullah, S. (2004). The Causal Layered Analysis Reader: Theory and Case Studies of an Integrative and Transformative Methodology. Taipei: Tamkang University Press.
Inayatullah, S. (2009). Questioning Scenarios. Journal of Futures Studies, 13(3), 75–80.
International Copper Association (ICA). (2017). Copper applications technology roadmap. Retrieved from https://internationalcopper.org
International Copper Association (ICA). (2023). The pathway to net zero. Retrieved February 17, 2024, from https://copperalliance.org/resource/copper-pathway-to-net-zero
International Copper Study Group (ICSG). (2023). The world copper factbook 2023. Retrieved October 26, 2023, from https://icsg.org/copper-factbook
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2019). Future of solar photovoltaic. Abu Dhabi: IRENA. Retrieved October 20, 2023, from https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Nov/Future-of-Solar-Photovoltaic
Kang, X., Wang, M., Chen, L., & Li, X. (2023). Supply risk propagation of global copper industry chain based on multi-layer complex network. Resources Policy, 85(A), 103797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103797
Koppelaar, R. H. E. M., Pamidi, S., Hajósi, E., Herreras, L., Leroy, P., Jung, H.-Y., Concheso, A., Daniel, R., Francisco, F. B., & Parrado, C. (2023). A digital product passport for critical raw materials reuse and recycling. Sustainability, 15(2), 1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021405
Li, B., Wang, L., Zhang, L., Wu, H., & Yuan, Z. (2025). Navigating copper demand–supply dynamics for China’s energy transition: Pathways to sustainable supply. Energy, 330, 136913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.136913
Li, H., Wu, Y., Gu, Y., Yang, H., Bian, Z., Song, H., Zhou, G., & Yuan, Q. (2025). Sustainability assessment of multi-life cycle recycling of copper based on the economic, resource and carbon criteria. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 54, 476–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2025.01.016
Liu, L., Song, W., & Liu, Y. (2023). Leveraging digital capabilities toward a circular economy: Reinforcing sustainable supply chain management with Industry 4.0 technologies. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 178, 109113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2023.109113
London Metal Exchange (LME). (2022). Reports and data. Retrieved October 26, 2023, from https://www.lme.com/Market-data/Reports-and-data
Madani, K. (2021). Have international sanctions impacted Iran’s environment? World, 2(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.3390/world2020015
Meyerowitz, D., Lew, C., & Svensson, G. (2018). Scenario planning in strategic decision-making: Requirements, benefits and inhibitors. Foresight, 20(6), 602–621. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-04-2018-0036
Middle East Institute. (2025). Iran’s unrealized economic potential. Middle East Institute Reports. https://www.mei.edu/publications/irans-unrealized-economic-potential
Millett, S. M. (2003). The future of scenarios: Challenges and opportunities. Strategy & Leadership, 31(2), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570310472787
MiningVisuals. (2025, May 18). Charted: Copper Production 1970–2024. https://www.miningvisuals.com/post/charted-copper-production-1970-2024
Misra, S., Jain, A., Kaushik, M., & Banerjee, C. (Eds.). (2023). Futuristic technology perspectives on entrepreneurship and sustainable innovation. IGI Global.
Molitor, G. T. T. (2009). Scenarios: Worth the Effort? Journal of Futures Studies, 13(3), 81–92.
NICICO. (2023). Copper production statistics. National Iranian Copper Industries Company. Retrieved October 23, 2023, from https://en.nicico.com
Northey, S., Haque, N., & Mudd, G. (2013). Using sustainability reporting to assess the environmental footprint of copper mining. Journal of Cleaner Production, 40, 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.09.027
Student. (1908). The probable error of a mean. Biometrika, 6(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/6.1.1
Pietrobelli, C., & Staritz, C. (2018). Upgrading, interactive learning, and innovation systems in value chain interventions. The European Journal of Development Research, 30(3), 557–574. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-017-0112-5
Ramirez, R., & Wilkinson, A. (2016). Strategic Reframing: The Oxford Scenario Planning Approach. Oxford University Press.
Recycling Today. (2025, March 9). Copper market navigation stress lingers. https://www.recyclingtoday.com/news/copper-production-2024-analysis-2025-recycling-pricing-volatility-tariffs-economy/
Reuer, J. J., & Lahiri, N. (2013). Searching for alliance partners: Effects of geographic distance on the formation of R&D collaborations. Organization Science, 25(1), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0805
Rönnlund, I., Reuter, M., Horn, S., Aho, J., & Aho, M. (2016). Eco-efficiency indicator framework implemented in the metallurgical industry: Part 2—A case study from the copper industry. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21(10), 1581–1593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1123-8
Saritas, O., & Aylen, J. (2010). Using scenarios for roadmapping: The case of clean production. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(7), 1061–1075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.01.004
Saritas, O., & Smith, J. E. (2011). The big picture: Trends, drivers, wild cards, discontinuities and weak signals. Futures, 43(3), 292–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2010.11.007
Scearce, D., & Fulton, K. (2004). What if?: The art of scenario thinking for nonprofits. Global Business Network.
Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. World Economic Forum.
Schwartz, P. (1996). The art of the long view: Planning for the future in an uncertain world. Doubleday.
U.S. Geological Survey. (2022). Mineral commodity summaries 2022. https://doi.org/10.3133/mcs2022
Van der Heijden, K. (1997). Scenarios, strategies, and the strategy process (Nijenrode Research Paper Series, No. 1997-01). Nijenrode University Press.
Wilkinson, A. (2009). Scenario Practices: In Search of Theory. Journal of Futures Studies, 13(3), 107–114.
Wilkinson, A., & Eidinow, E. (2008). Evolving practices in environmental scenarios: A new scenario typology. Environmental Research Letters, 3(4), 045017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/3/4/045017
Wilkinson, A., & Kupers, R. (2013). Living in the Futures. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 118–127.
Wulf, T., Meißner, P., & Stubner, S. (2010). A scenario-based approach to strategic planning: Integrating planning and process perspective of strategy. Working Paper, Leipzig Graduate School of Management. Retrieved October 28, 2023, from https://www.uni-marburg.de/de/fb02/professuren/bwl/strategy/forschung/publikationen-1/ap-no-6-scenario-based-approach-to-strategic-planning.pdf
Zhang, W., Jiang, Y., Zhou, W., & Pan, W. (2023). Antecedents of knowledge-seeking intentions and efforts within new product development teams: Empirical evidence from knowledge-based Chinese companies. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(2), 356–382. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2021-0617