Livelihood alterations and Indigenous Innovators in the Ecuadorian Amazon

Abstract

This article approaches livelihood alterations in Indigenous communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon as means of adaptation and resistance to socio-environmental impacts brought along by the expansion of global capitalism. The cases comprise collective Indigenous endeavors in typically capitalist sectors - tourism and mining - illustrated by the experiences of Kichwa community tourism in Shiripuno in the central Amazon, and sustainable mining in the southern Amazonian Shuar community of Congüime (Kenkuim). The aim is to unravel these emerging livelihood strategies in relation to Indigenous ethno-cultural identity. Methodologically, we rely on comparative and ethnographic work in the field with Indigenous actors, and on a theoretical framework anchored in the concepts of innovators, cultural boundary changes (Fredrik Barth), social fields of force (William Roseberry), and intercultural regimes (Fernando Galindo and Xavier Albó). In both empirical cases - Indigenous-controlled tourism and mining - communities are framing their ethnic identity to engage with, and positively reposition themselves in relation to the wider society. We hold that these endeavors must be comprehended as highly innovative, and that indigeneity and cultural boundaries can be strengthened by socio-cultural changes toward livelihoods previously considered as “unauthentic” or “non-Indigenous”. We also argue that these new livelihood orientations have (purposely) altered gender relations within the communities in benefit of women. Additionally, our cases suggest that cultural strengthening and gender empowerment, among other positive outcomes, requires a nuanced apprehension of indigeneity as a partly floating concept and instrument gaining ground amid the increasing interconnectedness of ancient traditions and capitalist modernity.

Indigenously controlled tourism as struggle for autonomy: the Pataxó Jaqueira Reserve in Brazil

“…Although definitions of «indigenous tourism» vary, it is usually understood as the type of tourism involving indigenous peoples, i.e., centered on indigenous culture and/or controlled by indigenous peoples (De Burlo 2000, Hinch & Butler 2007, Volkman 1990, Zeppel 2006. Indigenous control is emphasized by scholars who deem it to be the keystone for the success of indigenous tourism -essential not only to reduce the risk of project discontinuation, which tends to happen when projects are spearheaded by outsiders but also to enable indigenous people to obtain desired benefits (Manyara & Jones 2007, Lalander et al 2023, Mtapuri & Giampiccoli 2013, Pereiro 2016, Thimm & Karlaganis 2020, Thomson-Carr 2013, Zeppel 2006)-. As stated by Bresner (2014, p. 136), «control over their participation in tourism is sometimes the difference between continued colonization and exploitation, on the one hand, and sovereignty, self-determination, and empowerment, on the other».…”