Multi-criteria analysis of competitiveness and attractiveness factors in leading copper mining companies in Peru

Bibliographic Data

ID13068571
AuthorsMarco Antonio Cotrina-Teatino (0000-0003-3801-0370, National University of Trujillo, corresponding author), Jairo Jhonatan Marquina Araujo (0000-0002-5880-8227, National University of Trujillo), Jairo J Marquina-Araujo, Johnny Henrry Ccatamayo-Barrios (National University of San Marcos), Jose N Mamani-Quispe (0000-0001-7803-7936, Universidad Nacional del Altiplano), Moises Bartolome Guia-Pianto (Los Andes Peruvian University), Solio Marino Arango-Retamozo (0000-0003-3594-0329, National University of Trujillo), Joe Alexis González Vásquez (0000-0001-7816-0977, National University of Trujillo), Joe A Gonzalez-Vasquez, Yasmin Jiovani Franco-Lezama (National University of Trujillo), Carlos Gilmer Ortiz-Echeverria (National University of Trujillo)
Year2025
Volume25
Pages101819-101819
Publication date2025-11-22
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Extractive Industries and Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2214-790X • E-ISSN: 2214-7918
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.exis.2025.101819
OpenAlexW4416530825
LanguageEN
References cited29

This study presents a transparent and replicable multi-criteria analysis of the attractiveness and competitiveness of Peru’s four leading copper mining companies: Cerro Verde, Antamina, Southern Peru, and Quellaveco. A total of nine factors and 32 subfactors were defined using 1–5 rubrics, converted into 0–100 indices, weighted via the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), with all matrices showing consistency ratios (CR) below 0.10, and the companies were positioned within the GE–McKinsey matrix. Results show that Southern Peru leads in competitiveness (84.8), followed by Quellaveco (79.6), Antamina (77.4), and Cerro Verde (64.6). In attractiveness, Quellaveco (76.1) and Antamina (76.0) rank highest, ahead of Cerro Verde (71.9) and Southern Peru (70.5). All companies are located within the offensive growth quadrants, albeit through different strategic pathways: operational scale leadership (Southern), digitalization and life-cycle management (Quellaveco), technological-commercial balance (Antamina), and managerial strength with socio-environmental challenges (Cerro Verde). A ± 20 % sensitivity analysis showed minimal variation ( ≤ ± 2.1 points), confirming the robustness of the rankings. The positive correlation between competitiveness and attractiveness ( r = 0.77) supports internal coherence. The study’s core contribution is a replicable evaluation model combining rubrics, AHP, and GE–McKinsey, useful for both corporate strategy and policy design in the copper mining sector

Attractiveness · Copper mine · Mining industry · Position (finance · Bioeconomy and Sustainability Development · Global Trade and Competitiveness · Mining and Resource Management

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access