Undoing disaster colonialism: a pilot map of the pandemic's first wave in the Mapuche territories of Southern Chile

Abstract

PurposeThe authors use media research and crowdsourced mapping to document how the first wave of the pandemic (April–August 2020) affected the Mapuche, focussing on seven categories of events: territorial control, spiritual defence, food sovereignty, traditional health practices, political violence, territorial needs and solidarity, and extractivist expansion.Design/methodology/approachResearch on the effects of the pandemic on the Mapuche and their territories is lacking; the few existing studies focus on death and infection rates but overlook how the pandemic interacts with ongoing processes of extractivism, state violence and community resistance. The authors’ pilot study addresses this gap through a map developed collaboratively by disaster scholars and Mapuche journalists.FindingsThe map provides a spatial and chronological overview of this period, highlighting the interconnections between the pandemic and neocolonialism. As examples, the authors focus on two phenomena: the creation of “health barriers” to ensure local territorial control and the state-supported expansion of extractive industries during the first months of the lockdown.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors intersperse our account of the project with reflections on its limitations and, specifically, on how colonial formations shape the research. Decolonising disaster studies and disaster risk reduction practice, the authors argue, is an ongoing process, bound to be flawed and incomplete but nevertheless an urgent pursuit.Originality/valueIn making this argument, the paper responds to the Disaster Studies Manifesto that inspires this special issue, taking up its invitation to scholars to be more reflexive about their research practice and to frame their investigations through grounded perspectives.

The C-word: how critical cartography, critical GIS and critical data studies can repoliticise disaster-related maps

“…The participatory mapping tradition understands this process as a means to support positive social change, legitimising knowledge by historically marginalised groups (Elwood, 2006). At its best, this approach can help to subvert the God trick of disaster science by contributing to historicise and politicise knowledge about disasters (Carraro et al, 2022), diffracting official risk maps through indigenous knowledge (Camacho and Matus, 2021) and providing a much needed "trusted ground" for dialogue collaboration between actors (Gaillard and Mercer, 2013). In practice, however, the emphasis of participatory mapping exercises tends to be less on questioning or reframing existing knowledge, and more on tangible results.…”