The coloniality of collaboration: sources of epistemic obedience in data-intensive astronomy in Chile

Abstract

Data collaborations have gained currency over the last decade as a means for data-and skills-poor actors to thrive as a fourth paradigm takes hold in the sciences. Against this backdrop, this article traces the emergence of a collaborative subject position that strives to establish reciprocal and technical-oriented collaborations so as to catch up with the ongoing changes in research. Combining insights from the modernity/coloniality group, political theory and science and technology studies, the article argues that this positionality engenders epistemic obedience by bracketing off critical questions regarding with whom and for whom knowledge is generated. In particular, a dis-embedding of the data producers, the erosion of local ties, and a data conformism are identified as fresh sources of obedience impinging upon the capacity to conduct research attuned to the needs and visions of the local context. A discursive-material analysis of interviews and field notes stemming from the case of astronomy data in Chile is conducted, examining the vision of local actors aiming to gain proximity to the mega observatories producing vast volumes of data in the Atacama Desert. Given that these observatories are predominantly under the control of organisations from the United States and Europe, the adoption of a collaborative stance is now seen as the best means to ensure skills and technology transfer to local research teams. Delving into the epistemological dimension of data colonialism, this article warns that an increased emphasis on collaboration runs the risk of reproducing planetary hierarchies in times of data-intensive research.

From copper mining to data extractivism? Data worth making at Chile’s Data Observatory Foundation

“…This implies asking its inhabitants what the returns of such data extractive operations are, and whether these returns are valuable enough to them to be worth the production of data. In this regard, it may be worth exploring proposals like that of Lehuedé (2021) regarding a move toward forms of data governance based on “collective autonomy.”…”

Engineering Territory: Space and Colonies in Silicon Valley

“…For example, scholarly work has considered how technology corporations' power is embedded within continuing (Aouragh and Chakravartty 2016;Au 2022;Madianou 2019) or new (Kwet 2019; Oyedemi 2021) forms of colonialism, or whether new communications infrastructure and technology such as platforms have created a kind of informational imperialism (Fuchs 2010;Jin 2013;Winseck 2017). Other works on contemporary data practices have used colonialism as a framing device with which to consider the role of data in the evolution of capitalism (Couldry and Mejias 2019;Thatcher, O'Sullivan, and Mahmoudi 2016) or considered how data colonialism interacts with other forms of coloniality (Lehuedé 2023;Ricaurte 2019). There have also been some compelling critiques of the data colonialism framework, which historicize how data practices are entangled within existing colonial relationships (Calzati 2021;Gray 2023).…”