Inherited legacies of ecological imperialism in central Mexico

Morehart, Christopher T.

doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.007

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this context, ecological imperialism refers to the colonial subjugation of the economic, political, and social institutions of a society for the purpose of making lands and natural biophysical resources accessible and amenable to the agenda of the imperialist, ecological or otherwise. More pertinently, ecological imperialism is seen as the "translation" of conquered spaces into state imperialism by filtering local customs, institutions, and land use practices through a grid of laws and recording technologies (Scott 1998) that shape contemporary power dynamics and systems (Morehart 2018).…”

Section: Economic Imperialismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ecological imperialism, the period of massive transfers of natural resources as well as access to them and their benefits, from the colonized to the colonizer, carries on in many ways. There is a mutated form of exchange between, on the one hand, the existing political and economic elite and, on the other hand, Indigenous communities (Clark and Foster 2009; Morehart 2018). However, the concerns of Marxist analysts such as Clark and Foster that attempt to extend Crosby’s work need to be substantially expanded.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ecological Imperialism: A Georgist Alternative

Balce¹,

Subramaniam²

2022

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological imperialism has created property law and economic systems that function to dispossess Indigenous peoples from their traditional lands, territories, and resources. An application of Henry George’s perspectives on economic efficiency and individual liberties suggests that exchanges affecting Indigenous traditional areas are potentially inefficient and unjust if they fail to incorporate Indigenous perspectives of traditional wealth and connections to traditional space. In such circumstances, any loss of traditional lands and resources could be economically inefficient for the Indigenous community concerned, as the land or resource given up may be more valuable than any land or monetary compensation offered. Equally, this loss would deny the liberty of members of the community to associate and determine the use of their lands and resources in accordance with their own priorities. To an extent, this view is harmonious with the current international framework on Indigenous peoples’ rights. Accordingly, participatory legal protections that integrate two perspectives are suggested to prevent unjust exchanges of traditional Indigenous areas and to avoid the contemporary effects of ecological imperialism. Those two perspectives are: i) Georgist conceptions of economic efficiency and individual liberties; and ii) international Indigenous rights standards of free, prior, and informed consent and consultation. Despite the challenges in attaining the universal acceptance and implementation of the alternative represented by these perspectives, its further investigation is nonetheless potentially beneficial.

show abstract

Section: Economic Imperialismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Imperialism: A Georgist Alternative

Balce¹,

Subramaniam²

2022

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The debate about the Anthropocene might end in an impasse. Focused as it is on chronological markers and definitions of human agency, the debate too often precludes an inquiry into the long‐term ecological histories and the ideologies of economic growth and accumulation that have produced the current environment (Bauer and Ellis, 223; Morehart , 110; Morrison ). As Morrison (, 196) suggests, part of the problem may be that environmental historians and natural scientists have not yet agreed on an “analytical vocabulary” that adequately describes the processes that they study (also Given ).…”

Section: Socionature and Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though a bit clunky, the term “socionature” does well to describe how many archaeologists are seeing the environment as a dynamic process that both reflects past human projects and affords future human actions (Morrison a). Archaeological studies of socionatural histories are shedding light on the long‐term legacies of human land‐modification projects, such as terrace construction or reservoir excavation (Morehart ; Rosenzweig and Marston ; see also Håkansson and Widgren ). For instance, Morehart () details the landscapes that Aztec and then Spanish empires inherited from antecedent peoples in central Mexico, in part to argue against facile representations of traditional premodern and extractive European political ecologies.…”

Section: Socionature and Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Archaeological studies of socionatural histories are shedding light on the long‐term legacies of human land‐modification projects, such as terrace construction or reservoir excavation (Morehart ; Rosenzweig and Marston ; see also Håkansson and Widgren ). For instance, Morehart () details the landscapes that Aztec and then Spanish empires inherited from antecedent peoples in central Mexico, in part to argue against facile representations of traditional premodern and extractive European political ecologies. He demonstrates that such representations often overlook the complex and highly situated interplay of past investment and land infrastructure that might obstruct even the most ambitious forms of ecological imperialism.…”

Section: Socionature and Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

New Digs: Networks, Assemblages, and the Dissolution of Binary Categories in Anthropological Archaeology

Kosiba

2019

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropological archaeology has long been a process of categorization. The history of the subdiscipline could be rendered in terms of an ongoing project to create, critique, and then refashion the categories by which archaeologists understand and explain social and ecological processes. Despite ever-changing theoretical tides, many archaeologists have continued to adhere to a lingua franca that demarcates their object of study, whether "the past," "nature," complexity, material culture, or historical knowledge. In 2018, strong currents in archaeological scholarship have both challenged and washed out the boundaries of many of these epistemological mainstays. This was more than a postmodern exercise to question metanarratives of history or to destabilize supposed social universals. The recent scholarship develops innovative theoretical perspectives and sophisticated methodological tools to shed light on the varied human interactions, practices, and projects that were previously occluded by research too sharply focused on bounded categories such as periods, polities, adaptations, and meanings. Furthermore, archaeologists are now more than ever critically examining the colonial institutions that they perpetuate and seeking to establish new common ground with Indigenous communities. A decidedly archaeological perspective seems to be taking shape.This is a view that sees social life from the ground up in terms of complicated relationships between people, things, and other organisms that cannot be reduced to catchall categories. [year in review, archaeology, archaeological theory, current issues, Indigenous archaeology, environmental anthropology] RESUMEN La arqueología antropológica ha sido durante mucho tiempo un proceso de categorización. La historia de la subdisciplina podría ser descrita en términos de un proyecto continuo de crear, criticar y luego rehacer las categorías a través de las cuales los arqueólogos entienden y explican los procesos sociales y ecológicos. A pesar de las mareas teóricas siempre cambiantes, muchos arqueólogos han continuado adhiriéndose a una lengua franca que demarca su objeto de estudio, ya sea "el pasado", "naturaleza", complejidad, cultura material o conocimiento histórico.En 2018, corrientes fuertes en la investigación arqueológica han tanto retado como difuminado los límites de muchos de los pilares epistemológicos. Esto fue más que un ejercicio posmoderno para cuestionar metanarrativas de la historia o para desestabilizar supuestos universales sociales. La reciente investigación desarrolla perspectivas teóricas innovadoras y herramientas metodológicas sofisticadas para arrojar luz sobre las variadas interacciones humanas, prácticas y proyectos que estuvieron previamente ocluidos por investigación excesivamente enfocada en categorías delimitadas tales como períodos, unidades políticas, adaptaciones y significados. Además, los arqueólogos ahora están más que nunca examinando críticamente las instituciones coloniales que perpetúan y buscando establecer un nuevo terreno común con las c...

show abstract

Hellenistic agricultural economies at Ashkelon, Southern Levant

Marston

Birney

2021

Veget Hist Archaeobot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inherited legacies of ecological imperialism in central Mexico

Cited by 8 publications

References 44 publications

Ecological Imperialism: A Georgist Alternative

Ecological Imperialism: A Georgist Alternative

New Digs: Networks, Assemblages, and the Dissolution of Binary Categories in Anthropological Archaeology

Hellenistic agricultural economies at Ashkelon, Southern Levant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About