Lithium has quickly emerged as one of the most critical raw materials of the 21st century. Dubbed "white gold", it is indispensable for rechargeable batteries, which power everything from smartphones and laptops to electric vehicles and renewable energy storage systems. As the world pushes toward decarbonization, demand for lithium has surged dramatically, with estimates suggesting global demand could increase five to sevenfold by 2035.
Much of this lithium lies beneath the soils, rocks, and salt flats of third-world countries — nations in Africa, South America, and Asia that are rich in resources but often face challenges of weak governance, fragile ecosystems, and political instability. This raises a pressing question: can these countries exploit their reserves sustainably without destabilizing global supply chains?
The Global Context: Why Lithium Matters
Lithium is central to achieving the targets of the Paris Agreement and the commitments of countries to transition toward renewable energy. Unlike fossil fuels, lithium is not burned, but rather stored and cycled in batteries, enabling cleaner forms of energy storage. However, lithium production itself is not without environmental consequences.
Key Insight
Hard-rock mining, as seen in countries like Zimbabwe, is highly energy-intensive and can generate toxic waste. Brine extraction, dominant in the South American "Lithium Triangle" of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, consumes vast amounts of water, threatening fragile desert ecosystems.
Wealthier nations in Europe and North America have implemented strict sustainability standards. The European Union, for instance, has established the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (2023), which requires imports to meet sustainability and traceability requirements. The United States, through its Inflation Reduction Act, also prioritizes sourcing from countries with high environmental and social standards.
For third-world countries, this means that meeting sustainability benchmarks is not only an environmental necessity but also an economic one — failure to do so could restrict market access, further entrenching inequalities in the global economy.
The Case of Zimbabwe: Boon or Burden?
Zimbabwe holds some of the largest hard-rock lithium deposits in Africa. In recent years, Chinese companies have invested heavily in its mining sector, and Zimbabwe has positioned lithium as a cornerstone of its economic recovery. However, rapid growth has sparked serious sustainability concerns.
Case Study: Bikita Minerals, Zimbabwe
At Bikita Minerals, the country's oldest and most significant lithium mine, local communities reported contamination of rivers and over-extraction of water from the Matezva Dam. Investigations confirmed these issues, leading to fines for pollution (Mail & Guardian, 2024; Oxpeckers, 2024).
More broadly, scholars argue that Zimbabwe's regulatory structures are underdeveloped. Mutlokwa and Okoloise (2025) highlight that the absence of public participation and weak enforcement of environmental justice mechanisms create tensions between companies and communities, undermining social stability and, by extension, the reliability of supply.
"The Zimbabwean case illustrates the tension at the heart of resource extraction in third-world nations: governments under economic pressure are eager to fast-track projects, but weak institutions mean environmental and social safeguards are often bypassed." — Environmental Governance Researcher
This strategy may produce short-term gains but risks long-term instability as local resistance, reputational damage, and trade restrictions mount.
Argentina and the Lithium Triangle: Courts as Environmental Gatekeepers
Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile collectively form the Lithium Triangle, which contains more than half of the world's known reserves. While Chile has relatively strong governance and regulatory frameworks, Argentina and Bolivia exemplify the struggles of third-world countries to balance sustainability with economic ambition.
In March 2024, Argentina's provincial court in Catamarca suspended new lithium permits in the Salar del Hombre Muerto basin, citing threats to rivers, groundwater, and Indigenous rights. The ruling required comprehensive environmental impact studies before further approvals (Reuters, 2024; AIDA, 2024).
This case is significant because it demonstrates how weak environmental governance at the national level can be challenged by courts and local activism. Yet, such interventions also create uncertainty for investors and global supply chains. If projects are delayed or halted due to poor planning and consultation, supply disruptions ripple across industries dependent on batteries.
Bolivia's experience further highlights these difficulties. Despite hosting some of the largest reserves in the world, Bolivia has struggled to develop its lithium sector due to political instability, lack of technology, and disputes with Indigenous communities over land and water rights. As a result, its supply contribution has been minimal, even as global demand surges.
Technological Promises and Pitfalls
One of the most discussed solutions for sustainable extraction in third-world countries is Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE), a process that could dramatically reduce water use compared to evaporation ponds. While DLE has been piloted in Argentina and is being promoted globally, its large-scale impacts remain uncertain.
Traditional Evaporation Ponds
- High water consumption
- Large land footprint
- Long extraction time (12-18 months)
- Environmental impact on salt flats
Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE)
- Reduced water usage
- Smaller environmental footprint
- Faster extraction process
- Uncertain long-term aquifer impacts
Hydrogeological systems in salt flats are complex, and extracting lithium without destabilizing aquifers is not guaranteed. Third-world countries may be tempted to embrace new technologies quickly to attract investment and compete with established producers. Yet, without strong regulatory oversight and baseline environmental studies, early adoption of untested technologies could create new risks.
The challenge is therefore not just technological but institutional — the governance structures of developing countries must be robust enough to regulate these methods before they are widely deployed.
The Supply Dilemma
The tension between sustainability and supply is most acute in third-world contexts. In the short term, imposing strong sustainability standards may slow down project approvals and deter investors, reducing the speed at which new supply enters global markets. However, neglecting sustainability can lead to even greater risks: environmental degradation, community protests, and legal challenges can halt projects altogether, as seen in Argentina and Zimbabwe.
Supply Chain Implications
Short-term Risks
Project delays, investor uncertainty, higher compliance costs
Long-term Benefits
Supply stability, market access, reduced reputational risk
In the medium to long term, sustainability may prove essential to supply stability. Global automakers and technology companies are increasingly under pressure to source responsibly. Tesla, BMW, and Volkswagen, for example, have all pledged to prioritize supply chains that meet environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria. This means that lithium from countries with weak sustainability records could become less competitive, reducing their market share and discouraging long-term investment.
Pathways to Sustainable Extraction in Developing Nations
For third-world countries to become reliable suppliers without sacrificing sustainability, several pathways are essential:
Independent Baseline Studies
Mandatory comprehensive studies of water resources, biodiversity, and social conditions before any mining begins.
Community Consent
Enforce Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for Indigenous and local communities, ensuring affected populations have a voice.
Environmental Bonds
Require environmental bonds and rehabilitation funds for long-term environmental management.
Equitable Revenue Sharing
Develop models that direct royalties and investments into local infrastructure, healthcare, and education.
Conclusion
Lithium extraction in third-world countries represents both an opportunity and a risk. If managed poorly, it can deepen inequalities, damage fragile ecosystems, and destabilize supply chains on which the global energy transition depends. Yet, if managed wisely, it offers a path toward sustainable development, where countries not only contribute to the global green economy but also ensure benefits for their own populations.
The Bottom Line
The cases of Zimbabwe and Argentina demonstrate that sustainability cannot be treated as a secondary concern. Courts, communities, and even international markets are increasingly demanding accountability. While the transition to sustainable extraction may slow short-term production, it is the only way to guarantee long-term supply stability.
For third-world countries, the challenge is clear: they must strengthen governance, enforce sustainability, and engage communities if they wish to transform their lithium reserves into both a national asset and a globally trusted supply source.
