Nationalizing lithium, negotiating power: a historical-materialist policy analysis of Mexico’s lithium reform
The global race to secure lithium as a critical resource for decarbonization and the transition to renewable energy has sparked renewed debate on extractivism-driven development in Latin America. While Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia have pursued various strategies to control the lithium supply chain,...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
June 2026
|
| In: |
The Extractive Industries and Society
Year: 2026, Volume: 26, Pages: 1-10 |
| ISSN: | 2214-7918 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.exis.2026.101860 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2026.101860 Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X26000110 
|
| Author Notes: | Rafael Hernández Westpfahl, Rosa Lehmann, Roberto De Anda Márquez |
| Summary: | The global race to secure lithium as a critical resource for decarbonization and the transition to renewable energy has sparked renewed debate on extractivism-driven development in Latin America. While Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia have pursued various strategies to control the lithium supply chain, Mexico's recent nationalization policies are a distinct case of a latecomer. In 2022, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador's government declared lithium a strategic resource, established the state owned company LitioMX, and reformed the mining law to ensure national sovereignty over its extraction. Despite its symbolic importance to AMLO’s neodevelopmentalist agenda, however, the reform has yielded limited results. Lithium extraction remains stalled, and major projects are tangled in legal disputes. This paper analyzes Mexico’s lithium reform through the lens of materialist state theory to conceptualize the state as a condensation of social forces. We argue that the implementation of the reform reflects the shifting balance of competing interests within the state arena, including domestic mining groups, critical civil society, and international actors, such as the U.S. automotive sector. By examining the negotiation processes and competing interests surrounding lithium policy, we understand nationalization not as a singular act of sovereignty, but rather as an unstable and contested process of selectively integrated claims. Our analysis contributes to literature on extractivism, resource politics, and state theory by revealing how tensions within the state influence the trajectory of nationalization projects in dependent economies amid changing geopolitical and ecological conditions. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Online verfügbar: 31. Januar 2026 Gesehen am 12.03.2026 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 2214-7918 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.exis.2026.101860 |