The Green Imperialism: How the Decarbonisation Consensus Perpetuates Neo-Colonial Exploitation of Global South Resources

Introduction: The Paradox of Green Extraction

In the urgent global race toward decarbonization, a disturbing pattern has emerged that threatens to perpetuate centuries of colonial exploitation under the guise of environmental progress. Chile and Indonesia, as the world’s leading suppliers of critical minerals including lithium, copper, and nickel, find themselves at the epicenter of what scholars Breno Bringel and Maristella Svampa term the “Decarbonisation Consensus” - a global agreement to transition from fossil fuels while maintaining the extractive logic of capitalist systems. This framework, while marketed as sustainable development, effectively reinforces ecological unequal exchange and creates new forms of green colonialism where Global South nations bear the environmental costs of powering Global North transitions.

The Geopolitical Landscape of Critical Minerals

The International Energy Agency’s 2025 report reveals staggering growth in demand for critical minerals, with lithium consumption surging by nearly 30% in 2024 alone, far exceeding the 10% average growth rate of the 2010s. Nickel, cobalt, graphite, and rare earth elements experienced 6-8% growth, primarily driven by energy applications including electric vehicles, batteries, and renewable infrastructure. Chile dominates global copper production with 24% of world output and ranks second in lithium production at approximately 30%, while Indonesia produces over 60% of the world’s nickel supply.

These statistics underscore a fundamental reality: the green energy revolution is fundamentally a mineral-intensive endeavor, and the geographical distribution of these resources places Global South nations in a position reminiscent of historical colonial relationships. The very infrastructure marketed as saving the planet depends on extractive processes that threaten local ecosystems and communities in resource-rich developing nations.

Divergent Governance Approaches: Chile’s Caution vs Indonesia’s Intervention

The article reveals fascinating contrasts in how Chile and Indonesia are navigating this new geopolitical landscape. Chile has adopted what the IEA describes as a “cautious institutionalist trajectory,” maintaining regulatory continuity and private-sector participation while seeking greater strategic state control. The controversial alliance between state-owned Codelco and SQM for lithium extraction in the Atacama Salt Flat exemplifies this approach, though it has faced scrutiny due to SQM’s history of political corruption scandals and environmental concerns.

Indonesia, conversely, has embraced a more interventionist, neo-developmentalist strategy. Through successive regulations since 2009, Indonesia implemented bans on exporting raw and unprocessed ores, forcing companies to conduct processing and manufacturing onshore before export. This bold move aimed to capture more value domestically and reduce dependence on raw mineral exports, though it has triggered legal challenges from the European Union through the World Trade Organization.

The Human and Environmental Costs of Green Extraction

Behind the statistics and policy discussions lie profound human and ecological consequences. In Chile, copper mining and processing have created long-term socio-environmental struggles, particularly in the northern regions, with similar patterns emerging in lithium extraction in the delicate Salt Flat ecosystems. Researcher Axel Poque González has extensively documented how these activities displace communities, consume vast water resources in arid regions, and disrupt fragile ecosystems.

Indonesia faces parallel challenges in its tropical ecosystems, where nickel mining and processing have raised concerns about deforestation, water pollution, and impacts on indigenous livelihoods. The irony is stark: an industry supposedly dedicated to environmental salvation relies on highly carbon-intensive processes, with Indonesia’s nickel sector heavily dependent on coal power. Civil society groups have even called for Tesla to halt investments due to these environmental concerns.

The Decolonization of Climate Action: A Moral Imperative

This analysis reveals the uncomfortable truth that our current approach to decarbonization represents not a break from extractivist capitalism but merely its reorganization under a green banner. The Decarbonisation Consensus preserves the core-periphery dynamics that have characterized North-South relations for centuries, where Global South nations supply raw materials while bearing the environmental and social costs, and Global North nations capture the value-added benefits.

The European Union’s legal challenge against Indonesia’s export restrictions exemplifies this neo-colonial mindset. While Western nations preach free trade when it serves their interests, they resist Global South attempts to move up the value chain and capture more benefit from their own resources. This hypocrisy reveals the fundamentally unequal power dynamics underlying the global economic system.

Toward a Truly Just Energy Transition

A genuine energy transition must begin by questioning the prevailing social metabolism that treats infinite growth as inevitable and natural resources as expendable. The experiences of Chile and Indonesia demonstrate that current approaches merely shift environmental burdens rather than eliminating them. We must challenge the assumption that the Global South should sacrifice its ecosystems and communities to enable continued overconsumption in the Global North.

South-South cooperation presents a promising alternative framework, though the current geopolitical landscape remains complicated by China’s dominant role in low-carbon technology and ongoing tensions with Western powers. Nevertheless, resource-rich Global South nations must leverage their strategic position to demand greater value capture, technology transfer, and genuine partnerships rather than extractive relationships.

Conclusion: Sovereignty in the Green Economy

The green energy transition, as currently configured, risks becoming the latest chapter in the long history of Global North exploitation of Global South resources. Chile and Indonesia stand at a crossroads: will they continue serving as exporters of raw materials bearing socio-environmental costs, or will they seize this moment to redefine their roles in the global economy?

The answer lies in rejecting the false choice between development and environmental protection and instead pursuing sovereignty-based approaches that prioritize local communities, ecological integrity, and equitable value distribution. The climate crisis demands global cooperation, but not at the expense of perpetuating colonial patterns of exploitation. A truly sustainable future must be built on justice, equity, and respect for the sovereignty of all nations, particularly those whose resources power our collective transition.

This moment calls for courageous leadership from Global South nations to contest the Decarbonisation Consensus and advocate for a transition that doesn’t merely change energy sources but transforms the underlying power dynamics and economic relationships that have created both the climate crisis and global inequality. The future of our planet depends on building an energy system that serves humanity rather than exploiting it.