Voices from the land: Lithium mining may threaten a precious resource — water (commentary) – Mongabay

Report on the Socio-Environmental Impacts of Lithium Mining on Indigenous Communities in Argentina and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Introduction and Context

This report analyzes the concerns raised by Clemente Flores, president of the El Angosto Indigenous community, regarding large-scale lithium mining in the Salinas Grandes and Laguna de Guayatayoc Basin in northern Argentina. The operations pose a significant threat to the traditional lifestyles of over 30 Indigenous communities and conflict with multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The communities advocate for a development model that respects their rights, culture, and environment, rather than one that sacrifices them for global energy transition demands.

Conflict with SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation and SDG 15: Life on Land

The primary conflict arises from the mining industry’s impact on water resources, directly challenging the objectives of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 15 (Life on Land).

• Threat to Water Security: Lithium extraction is a water-intensive process that threatens the scarce and precious water resources of the Puna Plateau, an extremely arid ecosystem. This jeopardizes the fundamental right to clean water for local populations.
• Disruption of Communal Management: Indigenous communities practice communal water management, a system that regulates agriculture, livestock, and cultural customs. Large-scale water extraction by mining companies undermines this sustainable practice and threatens the communities’ food security and way of life.
• Ecosystem Degradation: The salt flats form an endorheic reservoir, a closed ecosystem critical for local biodiversity. Mining activities risk irreversible damage to this fragile environment, contradicting the goals of protecting terrestrial ecosystems under SDG 15.

Challenges to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions)

The approach of mining companies and the state’s response highlight significant failures in upholding principles of equality, justice, and institutional integrity.

1. Lack of Consultation and Consent: Despite Argentina’s adherence to ILO Convention 169, communities report a lack of free, prior, and informed consultation. Corporate engagements often create social division and conflict rather than fostering inclusive participation, thereby increasing inequalities (SDG 10).
2. Inadequate Legal and Institutional Frameworks: Communities lack formal property titles for their ancestral lands, leaving them legally vulnerable. Furthermore, environmental impact studies have reportedly ignored the existence of these communities, and access to information, as guaranteed by the Escazú Agreement, is not being fulfilled, indicating weak institutional performance (SDG 16).
3. The Paradox of a Just Transition (SDG 13): The narrative that lithium mining is essential for climate action (SDG 13) is challenged. The communities argue they are being sacrificed to “save others,” which creates a profound injustice and contradicts the principle of a just and equitable transition to renewable energy.

Community-Led Solutions for Sustainable Development (SDG 8 and SDG 11)

In response to these threats, the Indigenous communities have proposed and enacted solutions that align with a holistic vision of sustainable development.

• Promotion of Sustainable Livelihoods: The communities wish to strengthen their traditional economic activities, including livestock farming, agriculture, crafts, and tourism. This approach supports sustainable economic growth (SDG 8) while preserving cultural heritage and ensuring community resilience (SDG 11).
• Development of a Consultation Protocol: The creation of the “Kachi Yupi — Traces of Salt” protocol is a proactive measure to establish a clear, community-led procedure for consultation and consent. This initiative aims to build stronger, more just institutional engagement (SDG 16) and protect their cultural identity.
• Advocacy and Awareness: Through documentaries and podcasts, the communities are actively raising awareness to ensure their perspectives are included in the global conversation, advocating for a development model that is both environmentally sustainable and socially just.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty – The article discusses the livelihoods of Indigenous communities, which are based on traditional activities like farming and tourism, and how these are threatened by mining.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation – The core issue is the potential impact of large-scale lithium mining on scarce water resources in an arid ecosystem, which is essential for the communities’ survival.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth – The article contrasts the communities’ desire for sustainable development through livestock farming, agriculture, and tourism with the economic model proposed by multinational mining companies.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – The article highlights the systemic injustice faced by Indigenous peoples, whose rights, culture, and way of life are being sacrificed for the benefit of others under the guise of a global energy transition.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production – The article questions the sustainability of extracting minerals for renewable technologies if it involves unsustainable water use and harms local communities, pointing to a need for responsible production patterns.
• SDG 15: Life on Land – The protection of the arid Puna Plateau ecosystem, a unique terrestrial environment, is central to the communities’ concerns about the environmental impact of lithium extraction.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions – The article details the communities’ struggle for justice, including issues of land tenure, lack of access to information, and the failure of the state to ensure proper consultation as mandated by international agreements.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  • Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property. The article directly addresses this through the community’s struggle for land tenure: “the communities have legal recognition of their possession, but we do not have property titles.”

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  • Target 6.4: By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity. The article highlights extreme water scarcity in the Puna Plateau (“it practically never rains year-round”) and the fear that mining companies will “take away water,” threatening the community’s existence.
  • Target 6.5: By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels. The communities practice a form of integrated management (“we manage [water] communally”), which is threatened by external mining operations that do not consider the local ecosystem’s balance.
  • Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management. The communities are actively fighting to be included in decisions about their water resources, a right that is being denied.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  • Target 8.9: By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products. The communities explicitly state their desire to strengthen their existing sustainable activities, including “livestock farming, agriculture, crafts and tourism,” as an alternative to large-scale mining.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status. The article is a plea for the inclusion of Indigenous communities, with the author stating, “we want to be included among those who will be saved — not sacrificed to save others.”
  • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices. The communities are fighting for their rights to be recognized and for their consultation protocol to be respected, challenging the current practice where companies can enter their territory without their consent.

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  • Target 15.1: By 2024, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands. The entire conflict is centered on protecting the “extremely arid ecosystem” of the Salinas Grandes and Laguna de Guayatayoc Basin from the impacts of mining.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. The article details the failure of this target, noting that company “consultations” are often just promises of jobs and that the communities had to design their own protocol (“Kachi Yupi — Huellas de la Sal”) for “free, prior and informed consultation and consent.”
  • Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements. The author states that “access to information guaranteed by the Escazú Agreement… is not being fulfilled” and that environmental impact studies fail to even mention the existence of their communities.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicators for Water Management (SDG 6)

  • Level of water stress: The article implies high water stress by describing the region as an “extremely arid ecosystem” with less than 0.2 cm of rain per year and noting that “water is running out.”
  • Degree of participation of local communities: The lack of “free, prior and informed consultation” and the communities’ need to file a lawsuit and create their own consultation protocol are clear indicators of low participation.

• Indicators for Inequality and Inclusion (SDG 10)

  • Proportion of population reporting discrimination: The entire opinion piece is a testimony of perceived discrimination, where Indigenous communities feel they are being “sacrificed to save others.”
  • Social cohesion: The article mentions that company actions lead to “conflicts in the community” and “harms and breaks down community relations,” serving as a negative indicator of social cohesion.

• Indicators for Land Rights (SDG 1)

  • Proportion of population with secure tenure rights to land: The article provides a direct indicator by stating that communities “have legal recognition of their possession, but we do not have property titles,” indicating insecure land tenure.

• Indicators for Justice and Institutional Strength (SDG 16)

  • Adherence to international agreements: The article explicitly states that recommendations from the U.N. Special Rapporteur have “not yet been fulfilled” and that rights under the Escazú Agreement and ILO Convention 169 are not being respected.
  • Transparency in decision-making: The fact that environmental impact studies “did not mention the existence of our communities” is a clear indicator of a lack of transparency and inclusive decision-making.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: news.mongabay.com