A Comparative Legal Analysis of Chile and Argentina in the Global Energy Transition
DOI:
Abstract
The global transition toward renewable energy has significantly increased the demand for lithium, a critical mineral essential for battery technologies used in electric vehicles and energy storage systems. As two major lithium-producing countries in South America, Chile and Argentina play a strategic role in the global supply chain for energy transition technologies. However, lithium extraction activities have raised growing concerns regarding environmental sustainability, water scarcity, and the rights of indigenous communities living in high-altitude salt flat ecosystems. This study examines how legal frameworks governing lithium extraction incorporate principles of environmental justice and public participation. Using a normative juridical and comparative legal approach, this research analyzes statutory regulations, environmental governance mechanisms, and policy frameworks in Chile and Argentina. The study finds three main issues. First, lithium governance regimes in both countries are primarily oriented toward economic development and strategic resource policy rather than environmental justice considerations. Second, while both countries formally recognize indigenous consultation mechanisms, the implementation of participatory governance remains limited in practice. Third, environmental governance institutions face structural challenges in addressing cumulative ecological impacts in fragile salt flat ecosystems. Comparative analysis shows that Chile has developed stronger institutional oversight and environmental regulatory mechanisms, whereas Argentina adopts a more decentralized governance structure that places greater authority at the provincial level. These differences produce varying degrees of environmental accountability and community participation in lithium governance. This research argues that strengthening environmental justice principles and participatory governance mechanisms is essential to ensure that the global energy transition does not create new forms of environmental inequality in lithium-producing regions.
Downloads
Views : 16
Downloads : 6
References
A. Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature, Oxford Univ. Press, 2007.
M. Sovacool and S. Dworkin, Global Energy Justice: Problems, Principles, and Practices, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015.
N. Simcock, “Procedural justice and the implementation of community wind energy projects: A case study from South Yorkshire, UK,” Land Use Policy, vol. 59, pp. 467- 477, Dec. 2016
J. Jenkins, D. McCauley, S. Heffron, H. Stephan, and M. Rehner, “Energy justice: A conceptual review,” Energy Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 11, pp. 174 -182, Jul. 2018.
N. J. Bennett, H. Govan, and T. Satterfield, “Ocean grabbing,” Marine Policy, vol. 57, pp. 61–68, Jul. 2015.
M. Hamwi and I. Lizarralde, “Energy entrepreneurship business models innovation: insights from European emerging firms,” in Proc. BIEE Oxford 2018 Research Conf., Oxford, UK, Sep. 2018.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, UNECE, Aarhus, Denmark, 1998.
J. G. de Freitas, “Nature in law: the environment and sustainable development in Portugal’s democratic political-legal framework,” População e Sociedade, vol. 41, pp. 10–23, Jun. 2024.
S. O. Funtowicz and J. R. Ravetz, “The Emergence of Post-Normal Science,” in Science, Politics and Morality, R. von Schomberg, Ed., Theory and Decision Library, vol. 17. Dordrecht: Springer, 1993.
J. Dwyer and D. Bidwell, “Chains of trust: Energy justice, public engagement, and the first offshore wind farm in the United States,” Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 47, pp. 166-176, 2019.
S. Monteiro and B. Aibar-Guzmán, “Determinants of environmental disclosure in the annual reports of large companies operating in Portugal,” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 185–204, 2010.
J. Galan, F. Galiana, D. J. Kotze, K. Lynch, D. Torreggiani, and B. Pedroli, “Landscape adaptation to climate change: Local networks, social learning and co-creation processes for adaptive planning,” Global Environmental Change, vol. 78, 102627, Jan. 2023.
P. Chamusca, “Measuring and addressing territorial cohesion: A framework for regional development in Portugal,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 7, 2025.
F. Fabbri, S. Ruitton, and S. Rober, “Marine spatial planning initiatives off the coast of large coastal cities: An assessment in the Northwestern Mediterranean,” Ocean & Coastal Management, vol. 270, 107898, Nov. 2025.
J. De Macedo Vitorino, F. Vidigal, and R. Coelho, “Portuguese Government approves final offshore wind seabed areas,” Mondaq, Portugal, Apr. 16, 2025.
Sociedade Portuguesa para o Estudo das Aves (SPEA), Seabirds and Offshore Wind Development in Portugal: Final Report, SPEA, Lisboa, 2024.
Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera (IPMA), Cumulative Impacts of Offshore Wind Development in Portugal: Environmental and Fisheries Assessment, IPMA, Lisboa, 2024.
E. Biber and J. Eagle, “When does legal flexibility work in environmental law?,” Ecology Law Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 787–840, Jan. 2015.
A. Olawole and A. T. Esther, “Regulatory framework and standardization: A contemporary literature review,” International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 5407–5421, Jul. 2025.
S. Abdullah, A. Markandya, and P. A. L. D. Nunes, “Introduction to economic valuation methods,” in Research Tools in Natural Resource and Environmental Economics, 2011.
IPMA, “Cumulative impacts of offshore wind projects on migratory species, sediment flows, and fisheries,” Internal Report, 2024.
A. Mendonça, W. Leal Filho, and F. Alves, “Public participation and climate change governance: Between political approach and local actors’ perspective in two Macaronesian territories,” Frontiers in Environmental Science, vol. 11, 2023.
B. Brouwer, R. van Bergem, S. Renes, L. M. Kamp, and T. Hoppe, “Does local ownership matter? A comparative analysis of fourteen wind energy projects in the Netherlands,” Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 120, Art. no. 103891, 2025.
J. Ramírez, “Impacts of neoliberal wind energy investments on environmental justice and human rights in Mexico,” in Business and Development Studies: Issues and Perspectives, P. Lund-Thomsen, M. W. Hansen, and A. Lindgreen, Eds. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2019.
V. Ramos, G. Giannini, T. Calheiros-Cabral, P. Rosa-Santos, and F. Taveira-Pinto, “Legal framework of marine renewable energy: A review for the Atlantic region of Europe,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 137, Article no. 110608, 2021.
