611. Indigeneidad y territorio: los aymaras y quechuas en el Norte de Chile

Abstract

El siguiente artículo explora desde la geografía los conceptos de indigeneidad y territorio y los aplica a procesos recientes de auto-identificación aymara y quechua; y la construcción de etno-territorios en el Norte de Chile, para entender a ambos fenómenos dentro de un proceso global de diferenciación y politización étnica. Para ello, utiliza etnografías, entrevistas y análisis de estadísticos que ilustran los procesos y estrategias de las comunidades aymaras y quechuas para articularse en el contexto del extractivismo minero y políticas interculturales neoliberales. De esta manera, los poblados andinos vuelven a repoblarse en dinámicas de negociación/resistencia altamente creativas.

Ageing in Context: An Ecological Model to Understand Social Participation Among Indigenous Adults in Chile

“…However and taking into account that satisfaction with social participation was assessed in this study as participation in activities of daily living (Power et al, 2005), especially in the community, this represented a broader analysis of how older adults are carrying on their daily activities, many of which are related to maintaining their ethnic group through indigenous cultural practices, but study participants placed the greatest emphasis on keeping connected and active in their community. Co-construction and co-participation in the community – ayllu for the Aymara and lovche for the Mapuche – means being part of a system of economic, political, social and territorial organisation based on reciprocal relationships and cooperation in the different stages of the life cycle that facilitate the perpetuation of indigenous settlements (Romero -Toledo & Sambolín, 2019; Tereucán-Angulo et al, 2016).…”

Reflections on a failed participatory workshop in Northern Chile: Negotiating boycotts, benefits, and the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous people

“…Against this backdrop, we aimed to explore the ways in which indigenous Aymara and Quechua women leaders were situated in relation to the mining industry, having observed differences between the discourse of male indigenous leaders confronting mining companies and extractivism, and that of indigenous women, who are becoming more prominent as community leaders. For example, we had noted that indigenous women leaders articulated a particular concern with conserving or reinvigorating Andean village communities as a means of ensuring the physical and cultural reproduction of their communities for future generations, in the face of the threat posed by ongoing extractive activities ( Romero Toledo and Jenkins, 2017 ; Romero Toledo and Sambolin, 2019 ). We aimed to explore how we might develop participatory methodologies in partnership with indigenous women community leaders to understand their concerns in relation to large scale resource extraction.…”

“…Understanding the neoliberal context of Chile is crucial in making sense of this scenario, and in the literature it is possible to identify three interconnected elements that contribute to this phenomenon: 1) the global struggle for indigenous recognition and rights, led by institutions such as the UN and ILO; 2) the increased agency of indigenous groups at the national and local levels, and their growing ability to articulate their demands in the context of the transition to democracy ( Bengoa, 2009 ; Clifford, 2013 ); 3) the neoliberal multicultural policies promoted by the Chilean state and the production of indigenous subjects who are then able to apply for local development projects that create particular territories, discourses and practices related to the reproduction of neoliberalism and post-dictatorship democracy ( Postero, 2007 ; Merlan et al, 2009 ). Finally, in our own experience, it is also important to recognise the way in which large extractives companies create particular mechanisms to deal with indigenous communities, focused on indigenous recognition and social responsibility, whilst simultaneously engaging in an ongoing process of negotiation, not only for critical resources such as water and land, but also about how territories are represented, and the kinds of economic activities that can be developed ( Hale, 2004 ; Romero-Toledo and Sambolín, 2019 ).…”

“…Mining companies have created special departments to deal with indigenous communities, with an emphasis on mitigating risk via economic compensation – through projects focused on social issues (e.g. grants for digital connection, community centre renovations, support for folkloric bands) and the direct transfer of money ( Romero Toledo and Sambolin, 2019 ), also known as “social investment”. In this context, indigenous communities’ opposition to mining, and the ensuing process of negotiation with mining companies, provides an opportunity to overcome poverty, to have access to services and to modernise old villages and roads, in a scenario characterised by a lack of state support and investment.…”