EL PAÍS offers the América Futura section openly for its daily and global informative contribution on sustainable development. If you want to support our journalism, subscribe here.
Read more Time of tragedy, time of solidarity
The energy transition has become one of the great challenges of recent years. In a scenario marked by the climate crisis and increasing geopolitical competition, countries of the Global North are fighting for access to the so-called ‘critical minerals’ to guarantee their energy security and, perhaps with more effort, to drive technological development and supply industries they consider strategic, such as artificial intelligence and the military industry.
Behind this race to control the supply chain of minerals like lithium, copper, nickel, and graphite, a question arises: who pays the cost of this transition and who benefits from it?
In 2024, the United Nations Secretary-General created a Panel on Critical Minerals for the Energy Transition, composed of 23 member states, two regions — the European Union and the African Union — and 14 non-state members. After key discussions, the panel developed a document with seven principles for a fair and equitable transition in the value chain of minerals for the energy transition.
The first refers to respect for human rights throughout the supply chain and the second to the integrity of the planet, its environment, and biodiversity. The message was clear: decarbonization cannot be built by reproducing the same inequalities that for decades characterized the exploitation of natural resources. Communities and countries rich in these must be at the center.
This was precisely the discussion that recently regained prominence during a high-level plenary session at the United Nations, where governments, international organizations, companies, indigenous peoples, and civil society organizations debated how to advance towards international cooperation that guarantees a transparent, sustainable, and fair energy transition.
Much of these minerals for the transition are found in countries of the Global South, about 50% of them in or near indigenous territories; they are also where most of the environmental impacts, social tensions, and territorial conflicts associated with their extraction are concentrated.
For decades, Latin America occupied the role of raw material exporter in the global economy and imported products with high added value. That model consolidated economies dependent on the volatility of international prices, limited their industrial development, and deepened inequalities. Today the same pattern repeats: we are again in the position of supplier of strategic minerals while the Global North concentrates technology, innovation, industrialization, and profits.
Our countries maintain economies highly dependent on natural resource exports, have little productive diversification, and face a reduced fiscal margin due to high levels of indebtedness. The result is a vicious circle: more extraction to generate foreign currency and meet financial obligations, greater pressure on ecosystems, and an increase in human rights violations in the different territories of the region.
Latin American governments
In a complex global scenario, marked by increasingly intense geopolitical disputes over access to and control of strategic minerals, various actors compete to consolidate their position in the global supply chains associated with these. The responses of Latin American governments to this race for minerals are not homogeneous, but common trends are beginning to be seen in different countries.
In Chile, there has been concern about an acceleration in the approval of mining projects, the weakening of environmental protection instruments, and a growing alignment of mining policy with the strategic interests of the United States, particularly around copper, cobalt, lithium, and rare earths. In Bolivia, reforms have also been promoted that relax environmental assessment procedures, reduce requirements for certain extractive activities, and prioritize attracting investments in sectors such as mining, presenting the acceleration of projects as a necessary response to reactivate the economy.
In Argentina, the national government promoted in 2024 the Incentive Regime for Large Investments (RIGI), granting broad fiscal, regulatory, and customs benefits to large extractive projects under the promise of attracting investments, generating employment, and promoting economic development. Two years later, without evaluating this regime or discussing what investments the country needs and under what conditions, the government proposes advancing with a ‘Super RIGI,’ deepening a scheme where incentives for companies are increasingly greater, while environmental and social obligations become increasingly smaller.
Although these are different political and institutional contexts, these cases show how economic urgency and geopolitical competition can displace environmental safeguards, reduce spaces for public participation and indigenous consultation, and subordinate long-term planning to the rapid capture of investments.
This context demands a new conception of international cooperation, based on justice, equity, and respect for human rights and ecosystems. It is necessary to advance towards true justice with the planet, promoting sufficiency in resource use and reducing overconsumption, especially by higher-income countries, which generate disproportionate demand on countries and territories of the Global South.
Secondly, genuine cooperation is required, in which Global North countries are willing to share knowledge, technical capacities, and financial resources to help close existing gaps. Finally, any strategy related to minerals for the transition must guarantee full respect for human rights in the territories, ensuring effective participation of local communities, protection of ecosystems, and the establishment of exclusion zones for mining activity.
Latin America has the historic opportunity to build its own agenda. To advance in an energy transition that is not limited to supplying minerals to the world but contributes to improving the quality of life of its populations, diversifying its economies, and strengthening its autonomy. A key element to reverse this situation is to have long-term plans that transcend government changes and become true state policies.
We need leadership capable of looking beyond the next investment or the next electoral cycle. Leadership that protects common goods and prioritizes the public interest over market urgencies and promotes an energy transition based on social justice, ecosystem protection, and international cooperation, in which Global South countries also have something to gain.
Read more Three devices that can help prevent forgetting children inside the car
