Juan Andrés Medel, an associated researcher at the Chair of Security and Globalization at the Institute for International Studies of the University of Chile, stated during a conversation organized by the Society of Industries that illicit economies in Latin America are altering conditions for investment and economic development. ^[1] Gustavo Campos, vice-dean of Economics and Government at the University of Chile, wrote an opinion piece on September 5, 2026, analyzing the institutional lessons of the September 4, 2026, constitutional plebiscite. ^[2] Estimates suggest that between 3% and 4% of Latin America's GDP is related to organized crime activities. ^[3] Juan Andrés Medel warned that illegal mining in Peru is likely to escalate due to the interest of criminal organizations and the behavior of international gold prices. ^[4] Research cited by Juan Andrés Medel indicates that the relationship between corrupt public officials and organized crime can occur when officials seek out criminal organizations, often because they are already corrupt. ^[5] Gustavo Campos argued that the plebiscite demonstrated the importance of agreements, noting that durable constitutions are those where different majorities can recognize each other even when they lose. ^[6] Gustavo Campos claimed that the plebiscite marked the loss of 'baroque constitutionalism,' the idea that a constitution must contain answers for a wide variety of social demands and identities. ^[7] Gustavo Campos stated that the 62% rejection result of the plebiscite was transversal and contingent rather than constituting a new political cleavage in Chilean politics. ^[8]