Lithium Sovereignty and the Identity of Soil

This analysis examines how indigenous ontologies like Pachamama or “Mother Earth” transform lithium extraction from a resource dispute into a clash of worldviews.

The global transition shift to a low-carbon economy has transformed the ‘Lithium Triangle’, the salt flats of Bolivia, Chile, and Argentina, into a theater of ontological competition. While the Global North views lithium as a critical ‘decarbonization solution’ necessary for planetary survival, local actors in the Andes mountain regions increasingly characterize this demand as ‘green extractivism’ (UCL Blogs, 2026). This essay argues that lithium sovereignty is not solely a matter of state revenue, but is deeply embedded in the ‘identity of the soil.’ By comparing the state-led industrialization of Bolivia with the hybrid-consultative model of Chile, this analysis reveals how indigenous ontologies, specifically the concept of Pachamama or “Mother Earth” are reshaping the geopolitical risk landscape of the 21st century.

Conventional international relations theories often treat natural resources as inherent objects of state power. However, qualitative analysis suggests that lithium extraction occurs within a ‘clash of worldviews’ (Moreno-Brieva and Romero-Puente, 2026). On one side lies the Neoliberal Paradigm, which interprets the salt flats (salares) as ‘empty deserts’ or mining deposits. On the other lies the Andean Ontology, where salt flats are viewed as living, hydrosocial systems essential to the physical and cultural survival of indigenous peoples (Frontiers, 2023). For indigenous communities, the salt flats are not just sources of brine but are manifestations of Pachamama. Consequently, negotiation strategies are not only about financial compensation but about maintaining ‘ontological security’, or the protection of a way of life that is inseparable from the land (Frontiers Planet Prize, 2026).

Furthermore, a case study of Bolivia and the rhetoric of decolonization is prevalent. Bolivia has historically pursued the most radical form of resource nationalism in the region. Under the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS), lithium was framed not just as an economic asset, but as a tool for ‘national decolonization’ (ResearchGate, 2021). The state-owned company, Yacimientos de Litio Bolivianos (YLB), sought a monopoly over the entire value chain, from raw extraction to battery manufacturing. However, a qualitative shift has occurred by the present day. The transition from the Arce administration to a more market-receptive leadership under President Rodrigo Paz showcases a move away from absolute protectionism due to economic stagnation (Mining Technology, 2026). Despite this shift, the Evista legacy ensures that any negotiation with multinational corporations must still satisfy the ‘identity of the soil.’ Indigenous leaders in the Potosí region continue to demand that lithium projects respect the ‘rights of nature,’ using the threat of social mobilization to ensure that state-led industrialization does not repeat the extractive traumas of the colonial silver era (bti-project.org, 2026).

In contrast to Bolivia’s state monopoly, Chile has historically operated under a market-centric regime. However, under the Boric administration and subsequent governments, a hybrid model has emerged. The 2023 National Lithium Strategy attempted to reconcile neoliberal efficiency with social responsibility, mandating state participation in strategic salt flats (Baker Institute, 2024). The niche qualitative factor in Chile is the Lickanantay (Atacameño) agency. Unlike the broad state-level rhetoric in Bolivia, Chilean indigenous groups have developed sophisticated legal and consultative protocols. For instance, recent deals in the Salar de Atacama have included ‘intergenerational funds’ held in trust for indigenous communities until 2060 (Climate Home News, 2026). Yet, this has also led to internal fractures as qualitative research shows that ‘green’ framing is often used by state actors to make extraction seem ‘inevitable,’ thereby pressuring communities into agreements that may compromise long-term ecosystem integrity (UCL Blogs, 2026).

The primary difference between the two nations lies in the institutionalization of indigenous ontology.

● Bolivia utilizes Pachamama as a macro-political shield for state control, making lithium a symbol of national sovereignty.

● Chile treats indigenous ontology as a micro-political negotiation factor, leading to complex, multi-tiered financial and environmental agreements between corporations, the state, and local councils (Gibson Dunn, 2026).

In both cases, multinational green-energy corporations can no longer rely on simple environmental impact assessments. They must now navigate ‘Indigenous-led protocols’ that prioritize water cycles and sacred sites over lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE) quotas. The findings suggest that the global ‘Green Transition’ faces a legitimacy crisis if it continues to prioritize decarbonization at the expense of Andean ontological security. For the Atlas Institute, the strategic takeaway is clear: Lithium sovereignty is shifting from state-led control to community-led veto power. Sustainable policy solutions must move beyond ‘rent capture’ toward ‘territorial dignity.’ Policymakers and investors who fail to account for the ‘identity of the soil’ will find their projects stalled not by technical failures, but by a fundamental clash of meanings. The future of the world’s battery supply depends on diplomacy that can speak the language of both the market and the salares.

Reference List

Baker Institute (2024) Chile’s New Lithium Strategy: A Market Boost or Miss?, 17 July [Online]. Available at: https://www.bakerinstitute.org/research/chiles-new-lithium-strategy-market-boost-or-miss (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

bti-project.org (2026) Bolivia Country Report 2026, 1 April [Online]. Available at: https://bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report/BOL (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Climate Home News (2026) Landmark deal to share Chile’s lithium windfall fractures Indigenous communities, 18 March [Online]. Available at: https://www.climatechangenews.com/2026/03/18/landmark-deal-to-share-chiles-lithium-windfall-fractures-indigenous-communities/ (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Frontiers (2023) Water or mineral resource? Legal interpretations and hydrosocial configurations of lithium mining in Chile, 9 May [Online]. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/water/articles/10.3389/frwa.2023.1075139/full (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Frontiers Planet Prize (2026) Extractivism, Local and Indigenous Knowledge, and Justice: Rethinking the Energy Transition in the Andean Salt Flats, 22 April [Online]. Available at: https://www.frontiersplanetprize.org/news/thoughtpieceargentina2026 (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Gibson Dunn (2026) Chile’s Lithium Regime Under President Kast: Pro-Investment Tone, but the State-Centric Model Still Governs, 23 March [Online]. Available at: https://www.gibsondunn.com/chiles-lithium-regime-under-president-kast-pro-investment-tone-but-the-state-centric-model-still-governs/ (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Mining Technology (2026) New president, new policy: Bolivia’s shift against lithium protectionism, 30 January [Online]. Available at: https://www.mining-technology.com/features/new-president-new-policy-bolivias-shift-against-lithium-protectionism/ (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

Moreno-Brieva, F. and Romero-Puente, J.D. (2026) ‘Lithium and green extractivism in Chile: Discourses and practices during Gabriel Boric’s government’, ResearchGate [Online]. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403183376 (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

ResearchGate (2021) The evolution of resource nationalism: The case of Bolivian lithium [Online]. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351621591 (Accessed: 26 April 2026).

UCL Blogs (2026) Chile’s Lithium Paradox: Green Transition or Green Extractivism?, 23 March [Online].Available at: https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/americas-blog/2026/03/23/chiles-lithium-paradox-green-transition-or-green-extractivism/ (Accessed: 26 April 2026).