• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador Denisse Elizabeth Rodriguez Quinonez ORCID Identifier: 0000-0003-2278-8989 Doctor of Philosophy February, 2019 School of Geography Faculty of Science Submitted in total fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, School of Geography, The University of Melbourne Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 2 Abstract The Ecuadorian government has defined extractivism as the basis of the “strategy for accumulation, distribution and redistribution” to alleviate poverty and to secure development since 2013. The expansion of extractive activities, mining in this case, and the mechanisms adopted to translate extractive rents into development is called neoextractivism. This thesis examines an ongoing conflict in Kimsakocha, province of Azuay, ignited by neoextractivism and the incursion of mining in a life-sustaining and sensitive socio-ecosystem called the páramo (Andean wetlands). I argue that neoextractivism is not only a development model, but it also has the power to reconfigure existing socionatural configurations—conceived as ‘hydrosocial territories’—through asymmetrical power relations, legitimizing discourses and knowledge systems; while undervaluing its impacts on the interdependencies between peasant lifeways and the páramo. This has occurred when ‘other kinds of knowledges’ are neglected and demands for participation in environmental decision-making, or protest, are perceived by government officials as a threat to their authority over exploitation of natural resources as a means to support Ecuador’s economic growth. In consequence, development strategies based on large-scale exploitation of Nature cannot be analyzed independently from the potential modifications of the relationships between the state, Nature, society and the new actors it brings at play, in this case the mining industry. With this purpose, this thesis proposes an analytical framework informed by relational ontologies and political ecology (PE) for the study Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 3 of socio-ecological conflicts derived from resource-based development. It is based on the following premises: i) The territories of influence of resource extraction projects are socionatures: The territories where ‘resources’ are located are spaces where Nature and communities have developed in close interdependence, thus, extractivist projects are not bounded by physical limits of the mine site but these expand as far as society and Nature are engaged in those socionatures in general. ii) Development strategies based on resource-extraction are (hydro)territorial projects that reconfigure the relationships within socionatures: Extractivism is a political, economic, social and environmental project that interacts, even overlaps, with other projects lived and envisioned in the same territory. (Hydro)territorial projects reproduce the interests and values of all the actors or groups of actors involved; while discourses and knowledge systems are used to legitimize and impose dominant projects. iii) Impacts on socionatures cannot be understood if relational epistemologies are disregarded: The people actively co-producing socionatural configurations feel their actual or potential modifications. Only by being sensitive to the embodied knowledge emerging from the engagements between people and their socionatures, which are threatened to be modified by extractivism, can a PE approach get a deeper understanding of socio-ecological conflicts. I conclude that resource conflicts are not only struggles over control of, access to and decision-making over resources, or only over meanings and knowledges either, but they are also struggles over different relationships co-producing different Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 4 worlds. Relational ontologies offer insights over these multiple ways of living in and co-producing plural worlds and PE as an epistemological and analytical approach is sensitive of these understandings. Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 5 Declaration I, Denisse Elizabeth Rodriguez Quinonez declare that, i) The thesis comprises only my original work towards the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, ii) Due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used; and iii) The thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit of 100.000 in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 6 Preface This research was supported by the Melbourne Research Scholarship Program of the University of Melbourne Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 7 Acknowledgments This thesis would not have been possible without the inspiration of the hombres y mujeres luchadores of Kimsakocha, who against all odds continue defending the Yaku mamita. More than participants of this research, they have been ‘maestros’ teaching me of different ways of seeing and experiencing the world. I am truly grateful to Professor Simon Batterbury, the main supervisor of this thesis, for allowing me to be independent and to explore every approach I found suitable for my analyses; but overall, for giving me the peacefulness of knowing that I always counted with the unconditional support of a great human being. I am also indebted to Dr. Erin Fitz-Henry and Dr. Lisa Palmer for their co-supervision and insightful comments. I wish also to extend my gratitude to cartographers Chandra Jayasuriya and Diego Andrade for their contribution. This roughly four years’ journey was enlivened by the inspiration, support and joy brought by Dr. Paula Satizábal, Dr. Julia Loginova and Dr. Marcela Chávez. Thank you my doctoritas. Finally, I dedicate this work to my family: Beatriz, Tom and Tommy, who are the sources of the infinite love and energy that keeps me in motion, always searching for new challenges. Denisse Elizabeth Rodríguez Quiñónez Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: The case of the páramo of Kimsakocha, Ecuador 8 Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 12 Problem statement .......................................................................................................................12 Research questions .......................................................................................................................15 Relevance of the study ....................................................................................................... 17 Description of the area of study ..................................................................................... 17 The population in the areas of influence, and peasant lifeworlds ...............................18 Páramos and peasant communities in Kimsakocha: relationships of reciprocity ........ 22 The páramo of Kimsakocha .......................................................................................................29 The mining conflict in Kimsakocha .........................................................................................37 Literature review ................................................................................................................ 43 Kimsakocha in the literature ....................................................................................................44 Theoretical framework ...............................................................................................................50 Neoextractivism in hydrosocial territories: Introduction of the chapters ..... 56 Chapter 2: Methods ............................................................................................................. 59 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 59 Fieldwork ............................................................................................................................... 63 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 66 Research design .............................................................................................................................67 Methods .............................................................................................................................................68 Interviews.................................................................................................................................................... 68 Informal group discussions .................................................................................................................. 72 Participant observation ......................................................................................................................... 72 Document analysis ................................................................................................................................... 73 Data handling .......................................................................................................................

Load more

  298

Copy Link