Community Protocols as Tools for Collective Action 195
as described by communities themselves in the protocol, which led them to lose
any trust that had been built. They thus moved into a more contentious stage
of mobilization. At the time of writing, mobilization has become more difficult
with the problems posed by the global pandemic. Communities remain firm in
their new position against lithium.
Conclusions: Reflecting on Community Protocols and Their Role
in Local Community Collective Action
One of the purposes of this volume is to reflect on how community protocols
can lead to more legal pluralism. In this chapter, we have focused on different collective actions by the communities of Salinas Grandes and Laguna de
Guayatayoc: complaints brought before national and subsequently international
courts, the processes around a community protocol and other collective action
to acquire information, build alliances and finally protest. These different modes
of collective action, we argued, could be understood as strategic reactions to
contexts. In the latest moves to protest, the communities have reacted, among
other things, to a failed dialogue with the provincial government and the complete lack of respect for the community protocol among extractives companies.
In a perspective of a formal reading of legal pluralism linking “[…] the local
and the international legal levels, according to standards set out in customary,
national and international law […]” (Morgera et al., 2014, p. 157), the case was
not successful. If we consider a more elastic perspective, however, the case does
demonstrate some important aspects. First, the community protocol itself is a
clear expression of legal pluralism in its elaboration of a process for consultation
and consent that links national and international laws to a procedure rooted in
the communities’ worldview. Even if not formally recognized as expected (i.e.
for the dialogue involving decisions affecting Salinas Grandes´ communities),
the protocol remains a tool for legal pluralism, and has been introduced and
acknowledged by different authorities with different scopes. It was recognized
by the National Ombudsman as well as the provincial government initially.
Moreover, it was recently mentioned as a precedent by the Instituto Nacional
de Asuntos I ndígenas (INAI) the National authority for indigenous matters, in
a resolution that created – within the structure of the mentioned authority – a
specific area to strengthen consultation rights.
10
Reflecting on the case as a tool for collective action in a broader view can
inform an understanding as to why it stopped short of a more formal recognition
of legal pluralism. This can provide some ideas about what conditions might be
needed for formal legal pluralism to come about, as well as revealing in more
detail how the community protocol fed into logical decisions about which other
types of collective action to pursue in light of their understanding of the legal
and political context they found themselves within. To guide this reflection, we
draw on a framework commonly used in the political sociological literature on
collective action and social movements. Given the inherent political nature of
as described by communities themselves in the protocol, which led them to lose
any trust that had been built. They thus moved into a more contentious stage
of mobilization. At the time of writing, mobilization has become more difficult
with the problems posed by the global pandemic. Communities remain firm in
their new position against lithium.
Conclusions: Reflecting on Community Protocols and Their Role
in Local Community Collective Action
One of the purposes of this volume is to reflect on how community protocols
can lead to more legal pluralism. In this chapter, we have focused on different collective actions by the communities of Salinas Grandes and Laguna de
Guayatayoc: complaints brought before national and subsequently international
courts, the processes around a community protocol and other collective action
to acquire information, build alliances and finally protest. These different modes
of collective action, we argued, could be understood as strategic reactions to
contexts. In the latest moves to protest, the communities have reacted, among
other things, to a failed dialogue with the provincial government and the complete lack of respect for the community protocol among extractives companies.
In a perspective of a formal reading of legal pluralism linking “[…] the local
and the international legal levels, according to standards set out in customary,
national and international law […]” (Morgera et al., 2014, p. 157), the case was
not successful. If we consider a more elastic perspective, however, the case does
demonstrate some important aspects. First, the community protocol itself is a
clear expression of legal pluralism in its elaboration of a process for consultation
and consent that links national and international laws to a procedure rooted in
the communities’ worldview. Even if not formally recognized as expected (i.e.
for the dialogue involving decisions affecting Salinas Grandes´ communities),
the protocol remains a tool for legal pluralism, and has been introduced and
acknowledged by different authorities with different scopes. It was recognized
by the National Ombudsman as well as the provincial government initially.
Moreover, it was recently mentioned as a precedent by the Instituto Nacional
de Asuntos I ndígenas (INAI) the National authority for indigenous matters, in
a resolution that created – within the structure of the mentioned authority – a
specific area to strengthen consultation rights.
10
Reflecting on the case as a tool for collective action in a broader view can
inform an understanding as to why it stopped short of a more formal recognition
of legal pluralism. This can provide some ideas about what conditions might be
needed for formal legal pluralism to come about, as well as revealing in more
detail how the community protocol fed into logical decisions about which other
types of collective action to pursue in light of their understanding of the legal
and political context they found themselves within. To guide this reflection, we
draw on a framework commonly used in the political sociological literature on
collective action and social movements. Given the inherent political nature of