首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      


Biofuels and the politics of mapmaking
Authors:Kate J Neville  Peter Dauvergne
Institution:1. School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia;2. School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia;3. Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA;4. Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand;1. UMR 7209, Archéozoologie, Archéobotanique: Sociétés, Pratiques et Environnements, CNRS, MNHN, Sorbonne-Universités, 55 Rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France;2. School of Culture, History and Language, College of Asia & the Pacific, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia;3. UMR 7041, ArScAn - Ethnologie Préhistorique, Maison de l''Archéologie et de l''Ethnologie René Ginouvès, CNRS, 21, Allée de l''Université, 92023 Nanterre Cedex, France;4. School of Archaeology and Anthropology, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia;5. UFR 03, Histoire de l''Art et Archéologie, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 3, Rue Michelet, 75006 Paris, France
Abstract:On a world scale companies and governments are acquiring tracts of land from rural communities across the developing world in what some describe as a global “land grab.” Yet looking into local settings reveals that negotiations and arrangements are often piecemeal and halting, with little resemblance to a coordinated seizure of land. Conflicting maps, overlapping territorial claims, and unclear acquisition processes are creating land disputes, mistrust, and ambiguity. Resulting cycles of contention are enabling companies to obtain—even appropriate—some land. Still, in at least some locales the process is doing more to undermine development opportunities for all parties.To probe into these local politics of mapmaking, this article draws on fieldwork from 2010 to 2011 in Tanzania's Rufiji District, located in the lower floodplain of the Rufiji River. Companies, one might surmise, should be able to exploit information asymmetries to wrest control of land from local villagers. Interviews, primary documents, and field observations reveal, however, that this is not occurring as much as one might expect along the lower Rufiji River. The politics of such land acquisitions, we argue, would seem to be better understood in terms of cycles of contentious politics, as an ongoing process in which movements and counter-movements vie for control through the strategic use of images, maps, and discourse.This research extends the understanding of the processes changing global agriculture and energy production by bridging the frames of the “politics of mapping” and “cycles of contention” to more fully reveal how and why control over land and resources is shifting in the global South.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号