260317 Chaves Agudelo Final Thesis

(RE) MEANINGS OF NATURE IN A NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIZED MODERN WORLD: THREE CASES OF COLOMBIAN INDIGENOUS ETHNICITIES (PIJAO, COFAN AND MUISCA- CHIBCHA) Judy Marcela Chaves Agudelo ORCID Identifier: 0000-0003-1915-626X Doctor of Philosophy November 2016 School of Geography Submitted in total fulfillment of the requirements of the degree 1 “Judge your success by what you had to give up, in order to achieve it” Author unknown Family, friends, food, sunlight… Colombia 2 Ñutse jpa afachuma Welcome to this reading (Cofán language) Quyca chibcha muyqyui guamox, suna cho bohoza asgue quycan We are inhabitants of valleys and mountains, good paths in our territories [through this reading] (Muisca languange) Lumax emex eramex lumax kunkix ojamax arax ueños angolax kex lumbix guazabarax nasex We brothers and sisters, based on our fraternity, must listen to our grandparents’ wise words, grandparents of our warrior origins as the house of our ancestors, of Mother Earth (Pijao language) 3 ABSTRACT This thesis analyses to what extent, and how, discourses of ‘nature’ held by three Colombian ethnicities have hybridized with those of a growing national adoption of neoliberal, globalized modern foundations. ‘Neo-liberalization’, ‘globalization’ and ‘modernization’ affect all fields of Colombian reality, and have been materialized in indigenous territories. Indigenous struggles are fighting and 'contesting’ modernity. I demonstrate that modernity and globalization, being ongoing processes, have impacted indigenous realities since the XVI century, and that the neo- liberalization of the Colombian economy during the 1990s implied a deeper penetration in indigenous localities. These political transitions, and the Colombian embrace of multiculturalism, have synergistically permeated indigenous social realities. I present examples of the ruling of neoliberal policies in Colombia across social, cultural, economic, and environmental policies, focussing on three groups: Muisca-Chibcha, Cofán and Pijao. I show that these societies have made a ‘territorial defence’, advocating for territorial and cultural autonomy. Territory constitutes something ‘defended’, in indigenous struggles. Constant incursions of the dominant global modernity challenge indigenous people’s worldviews, creating a tension that is expressed in incessant cultural hybridization of subsumed discourses, alongside social practices. This is a political reality that causes indigenous communities to reframe and re-voice what it is they are doing in order to maintain both their socio-cultural knowledge and political lifelines. Hybridization occurs when they harness the law (e.g. rights associated with multiculturalism), and therefore adopt foreign terms (e.g. ‘ cabildo’, ‘territory’, ‘resguardo’ ) and legal mechanisms (e.g. previous consultation), as part of their advocacy. In this study, I point out that in general terms, at least four –ongoing- cycles of hybridization led by Cofán, Muisca-Chibcha and Pijao ethnicities have been crucial in contesting the neoliberal globalized modern world. The most influential is the construction of territory as a hybrid term, central in indigenous advocacy. Emergent constructions of territory (territories) encompass material and immaterial meanings of ‘nature’: material or territory itself in the sense of the physical place inhabited and immaterial or ‘Mother Nature’ in regards to the spirituality associated with their existence in that place. 4 The other three cycles of hybridization are the hybridization in ways of organizing, and the insistence on maintaining collective practices; the hybridization of identities and the strategic moving of these in order to gain benefits; and the hybridization of legal mechanisms to protect spirituality through what I call ‘hybrid inventive advocacies’. Therefore, I propose that hybridization is also a tool of empowerment for indigenous individuals, groups, and even ethnicities in their reaction to the ‘neoliberal globalized modern world’, as it affects them. 5 DECLARATION This thesis is my own original, unaided work in fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Due acknowledgement has been made in the text of all other material used. This thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit of 100,000 in length, inclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. 6 PREFACE Chapter/paper 5 of this thesis comprises the multi-authored publication: “Chaves-Agudelo, J. M., Batterbury, S.P.J, & Beilin, R. (2015). We Live From Mother Nature: neoliberal globalization, commodification, the “war on drugs”, and biodiversity in Colombia since the 1990s. SAGE Open, 5 (3), doi:10.1177/2158244015596792”. In this publication I am the first author. I attach to the online submission of the thesis, the ‘Co-author authorisation’ and ‘Declaration for a thesis with publication’ forms, addressing the authorization of the other authors to include the paper in the thesis, and my contribution of over 60% of the content in the publication. This work was supported by the Colombian Administrative Department of Science, Technology and Innovation (COLCIENCIAS), Scholarship Program “Francisco José de Caldas” (Grant 20110315), and two studenships granted by the Faculty of Science at the University of Melbourne during 2016. 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Construction of knowledge is always a collective process and I am immensely grateful to a large number of people that attributing proper recognition to all in these pages is impossible. However, I am profoundly thankful to Dr. Simon Batterbury –School of Geography- and Dr. Ruth Beilin –School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences- at the University of Melbourne, who have been the supervisors of this journey. They encouraged me along the path, especially in moments when I found myself caught in personal and academic challenges during these four years of doctorate studies. Also, they motivated my critical thinking and made me push forward my own boundaries in too many ways during this process and with no doubt the experience has strengthen myself personal- and professionally. I thank their patience with my Spanglish as well. I also extent my gratitude to Dr. Dora Carias and to Imogen Williams for their assisting with translations of interviews; to the cartographer Chandra Jayasuriya at the School of Geography for the elaboration of maps; to Sophie Pascoe for her reading of the concluding chapter; to Dr. Nohra León at the Colombian National University for her valuable insights to this work during my stay in Colombia. I thank also my colleagues and to the academic staff at the School of Geography whose insights during debates made the production of ideas an ongoing interesting process; particularly to the Political Ecology discussion group which ran during 2015. I am also grateful to the Latin American academic networks in Melbourne involving Melbourne, Deakin, Monash, RMIT and La Trobe universities; the presentation of this work in different events provided a discussion of Latin American realities despite our physical distance to them. This work was supported by the Colombian Administrative Department of Science, Technology and Innovation (COLCIENCIAS), Scholarship Program “Francisco José de Caldas” (Grant 20110315), and two studenships granted by the Faculty of Science at the University of Melbourne during 2016. My gratitute towards these institutions is enormous. Also I am indebted to the unconditional support of my family, this work was largely possible for the unlimited love of my parents, Nubia and Carlos, and my siblings, Julian, Diana and Sebastian, my sister in law, Yovana, and my nephew, Manuel; I am grateful also to the other members of my family, but to name them here would require a good quantity of space as we 8 constitute a typical numerous Latin American family; their love and support exponentially enlarged the motivations for continuing the path. Also, my extended family, friends in Colombia and Australia, were crucial during this process. Last but not least, I am profoundly beholden to the indigenous persons of Cofán, Muisca- Chibcha and Pijao ethnicities who made this analysis possible with their responses and active participation in the study until today. There are not enough words to thank their hospitality, and their teachings. After taking this journey, I consider myself to be a more complete and reflective person. 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. 4 DECLARATION ............................................................................................................ 6 PREFACE ..................................................................................................................... 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY AND METHODS ....................................................... 21 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 21 2.2.1 Discourse, discursive meaning, structuralism and post-structuralism .......... 21 2.2.2 Critical Discourse Analysis – CDA, re-contextualization and cultural hybridization .......................................................................................................

Load more