Connecting the Empire: New Research Perspectives on Infrastructures and the Environment in the (Post)Colonial World

Abstract

In the academic debate on infrastructures in the Global South, there is a broad consensus that (post)colonial legacies present a major challenge for a transition towards more inclusive, sustainable and adapted modes of providing services. Yet, relatively little is known about the emergence and evolution of infrastructures in former colonies. Until a decade ago, most historical studies followed Daniel Headrick's (1981) "tools of empire" thesis, painting-with broad brush strokes-a picture of infrastructures as instruments for advancing the colonial project of exploitation and subordination of non-European peoples and environments. This paper explores new research perspectives beyond this straightforward, 'diffusionist' perspective on technology transfer. In order to do so, it presents and discusses more recent studies which focus on interactive transfer processes as well as mechanisms of appropriation, and which increasingly combine approaches from imperial history, environmental history, and history of technology.There is much to gain from unpacking the changing motives and ideologies behind technology transfer; tracing the often contested and negotiated flows of ideas, technologies and knowledge within multilayered global networks; investigating the manifold ways in which infrastructures reflected and (re)produced colonial spaces and identities; critically reflecting on the utility of large (socio)technical systems (LTS) for the Global South; and approaching infrastructures in the (post)colonial world through entangled histories of technology and the environment. Following David Arnold's (2005) plea for a "more interactive, culturally-nuanced, multi-sited debate" on technology in the non-Western world, the paper offers fresh insights for a broader debate about how infrastructures work within specific parameters of time, place and culture.

Infrastructures as colonial beachheads: The Central Arizona Project and the taking of Navajo resources

“…The use and diffusion of material and technology was built on colonial difference and in the interest of empire-making (Akhter, 2015;Headrick, 1981;Meehan, 2014). Although recent work within postcolonial states highlight the messy, non-linear ways in which colonial infrastructures shape and are shaped by communities (van der Straeten and Hasen€ ohrl, 2016), in settler-colonial countries like Canada and the United States, infrastructures are almost always colonial. The doctrine of discovery and other conquest claims remain foundational for U.S. and Canadian sovereignty (Asch, 1997;Miller, 2010;Williams Jr, 2005).…”

Histories of Technology and the Environment in Post/Colonial Africa: Reflections on the Field

“…Yet, despite their merits as progressive pioneers of the field, the "Tools of Empire" school is still caught up "in a modernist view of the world, framing Western technologies and actors as the decisive driving forces in the invention and spread of artefacts and systems. As a consequence, it largely interprets global technological (ex)change as dissemination from the top, implicating linear power relations with the colonized as passive recipients" [39] (pp. 363-364).…”

Drawing together: making marginal futures visible through collaborative comic creation (CCC)

“…As much as mapping practices can enable a "dictatorship by cartography" (Varadarajan, 2007), they can also be used as a contentious and potentially emancipatory practice opposing the power relations depicted and reproduced by conventional maps. Cowen calls for a queering of logistics through "countercartographies" (Cowen, 2014), and Cattoor and Perkins (2014) describe "re-cartographies", emphasising the significance of a "situated and historicized narrative approach to all mapping" (Cattoor and Perkins, 2014:166, emphasis in original).…”