Governance and Risk

40.5%

According to the interviewees, the main risks associated with the energy transition are not technological or geopolitical, but institutional. Governance risks (76.2%) and social risks (59.5%) are perceived as more decisive than concerns about foreign dependence or political interference.

Interviewees frequently described unstable institutions, overlapping mandates, and policy discontinuity as the most serious threats to investment. Social risks, in turn, are associated with the exclusion of communities from decision-making, which generates recurrent conflicts over land use and benefit distribution. In this context, projects financed or built by Chinese companies often emerge as focal of tension not because of their country of origin, but because they operate in environments where safeguards are weak or inconsistent.

It should be noted that technological dependence was rarely considered a dominant risk. Only 40.5% of interviewees mentioned it, and most interpreted it as an economic rather than a strategic issue. Chinese technology is viewed as accessible and affordable, and the associated dependence is perceived as inherent to the development of capabilities that the region does not produce locally, rather than as a specific risk stemming from the supplier’s origin. For many South American actors, technological dependence is structural and expected; in sectors linked to the energy transition, it simply happens to fall on China, but could just as well fall on any other foreign supplier. This contrasts with debates in the Global North, where China’s role is often framed in security terms. In South America, according to the evidence gathered, a reading of pragmatic interdependence predominates.