Organisers 

Artionka Capiberibe, [email protected] 

Beatriz Labate, [email protected] 

Abstract 

Challenges and controversies surround the debate on Indigenous reciprocity. The historical genocide of Indigenous peoples and other colonial tactics such as suppression of Indigenous languages, practices, and traditions have created a legacy of oppression that cannot be erased nor overcome by any form of reparation. Nevertheless, we are witnessing a rise in initiatives dedicated to promoting reciprocity towards Indigenous people. Although these projects are often criticized as new forms of colonialism, there have been serious attempts to establish updated parameters and definitions for the notion of Indigenous reciprocity, acknowledging Indigenous traditions and their autonomy to stipulate their own goals and priorities regarding the implementation of projects and employment of funds. Following the growing global interest in Indigenous plant medicines, rituals, and traditions, these initiatives are gaining prominence in the Psychedelic Renaissance. Considering these issues, the present panel addresses pressing issues, such as: Can “Indigenous Reciprocity” be seen as the result of a dialog between Indigenous cosmologies and Western theories of human rights, historical reparation, and decoloniality? In what ways do colonial legacies continue to impact efforts to establish reciprocal relationships? What does the global psychedelic movement propose to build reciprocal relations with the Global South? How do the proposals of Indigenous reciprocity affect their community structures? How can actors with different worldviews unequally positioned in political and economic terms establish a reciprocal relationship that improves upon purely market-based exchanges and promotes new forms of social justice? 

Organizers 

Elizabeth Ewart, [email protected] 

João Paulo Denófrio, [email protected] 

Abstract 

Initially, the Jê peoples became known for the complexity of their social organisations. In the 1960s, the central question was how peoples considered technologically simple could possess such intricate social structures. Despite Jê mythology being fundamental to Lévi- Strauss’ mythological analyses, and even though two entire books featuring parts of their mythology were published, the Jê were ultimately characterised as more sociological than cosmological. This perception may have stemmed from an early focus on the sociology of these peoples, which established a tradition of studies centred on social organisation. As a result, the emphasis on sociological themes led to less theorisation on other subjects, such as shamanism, witchcraft, spirits, dreams, mythology, and the cosmos. Although these topics have been present since the early constitution of the Jê ethnographic corpus, over the past two decades, they have begun to receive increased theoretical and conceptual attention. This roundtable seeks to deepen this growing movement, which combines participant observation with close listening, allowing the metaphysical thinking of these peoples to emerge in a collaborative dialogue with our own. 

Organisers 

Nathaly Pinto, [email protected]

Tuija Veintie, [email protected]

Abstract 

Communitarianism is a way of knowing and being of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon basin. This collective approach aligns with the predominant research paradigm of co-creation, and includes elders, youth, leaders, men and women, as well as the territory as active participants. Within this framework, community members share responsibilities and identities, and build capacities and knowledge across various social, educational and political spheres. Historically, Indigenous communal processes have been central to resisting colonial and neoliberal ideologies and sustaining Indigenous knowledge production. However, in research settings communitarianism is often treated as an implicit background rather than an explicit methodology for working with Amazonian communities. This panel discusses communitarianism, communal processes and practices, along with co-creation as tools for developing sustainable, collaborative research approaches that counter extractivist, problem-solving methods and the instrumentalization of participation in research involving Amazonian communities and territories. The panel invites presentations from researchers working with amazonian communities, with focus on epistemic justice, and socio-environmental, decolonial, and participatory approaches to knowledge construction as well as Indigenous scholars, activists and leaders, reactualizing and mobilizing communitarian practices to modern contexts, particularly in education, political activism, and knowledge production. 

Organizers 

James Andrew Whitaker, [email protected]

Elisa Frühauf Garcia, [email protected]

Mark Harris, [email protected]

Abstract 

This panel aims to read the “silences” that are often present in historically-focused scholarship on lowland South America. It will include anthropologists and historians and will examine histories and historiographies throughout the region. It will question the use of a variety of different sources, including archival documents, ethnographic data, and material objects, in uncovering and revealing new perspectives in relation to historical narratives. It will ask what has been left out of prior historical accounts and will explore ways to advance the co-creation of  historical knowledge. It will also identify these collaborations in the past. It will consider how different sources and interpretations sometimes obfuscate or even erase Indigenous people and their voices. In particular, this panel will examine the historical and contemporary strategic agency and goals of Indigenous people in their relations with other Indigenous and non- Indigenous groups. It will contribute to a growing historiographical turn towards Indigenous agency in historical scholarship in lowland South America. It will identify gaps in historical narratives with a central focus on the injustices suffered by Indigenous people and the violent erasures of their cosmologies, lands, and lives. We encourage paper proposals from anthropologists and historians engaged with these topics. We especially welcome proposals from Indigenous scholars working in lowland South America. 

Organizers 

Claudia Augustat, [email protected]

Matthias Lewy, [email protected]

Abstract 

This panel discusses co-creation practices within ethnographic collaborations and in the context of ethnographic and world culture museums as a potential path to resocialization. Resocialization is understood as the possibility of (re-)integrating taxonomically relevant entities—items of material and immaterial culture—into social and ecological systems. We welcome contributions that reflect on collaborative work experience in ethnographic research, archival work, exhibitions, or other contexts that explore the merits as well as respective limitations of resocialization processes. For such limitations, we have to consider Indigenous lifeworlds: For example, concepts about death and the afterlife of persons and things can confine the possibilities of resocialization. In the same vein, magic and sorcery, especially when it comes to sound and song, may restrict public accessibility and modes of use for collected recordings. Cosmologies and associated modes of existence of entities reveal the boundaries of resocialization through understanding the interactions among human and non-human collectives. On the other hand, we aim to highlight the value of co-creation processes in collaborative work in order to achieve resocialization processes and make them visible. In addition to contributions from archive and exhibition contexts, we especially welcome discussions of resocialization processes from outside of the museum, as for example, the resocialization of landscapes and ecosystems. Approaches extending beyond the museum open new perspectives for deepening and extending the concept of resocialization. 

Organizers 

Nehemías Pino, [email protected]
Theodor Borrmann, [email protected]  

Abstract 

Livelihoods and their social imaginaries are constantly changed with the emergence of new economic opportunities, desires, needs, and pressures in our field sites. Along the Napo River in Ecuador, for example, Guayusa leaves have amplified their uses from a forest infusion that gathers family, tradition, desires and time in the dusk to become a source of cash, and along the Atacuari River in Peru, trees cease being a habitat for toucans to become valued timber. Different production and productivity patterns of course draw further transformations in their wake and ultimately affect all relations between humans (e.g., ourselves), beyond-humans (e.g., forest masters), and non-humans (e.g., machines). In this panel, we wish to discuss these complex transformations and ask how changes in livelihoods impact contemporary ecological relations and their political implications among different actors. As such, we wish for instance to explore how the economic pressure for monocultures may change relations with plants and other beings in the forest gardens, how the availability of chainsaws may influence relations with river and forest environments close to human settlements, or how the green economy may impact kinship relations and land ownership. 

Organizer
Jenny García Ruales, [email protected]

Abstract 

Nuestro objetivo es establecer una red colaborativa que documente y analice casos de estudio sobre la creación y formulación de los derechos de la naturaleza en marcos legales existentes y sus diversas trayectorias e implementaciones. Esta red contemplará las múltiples concepciones y sentidos de justicia, los planes de vida comunitarios, y las distintas manifestaciones del derecho, incluyendo las percepciones y normatividades que se conciben en torno a la vida de peces, animales del bosque, ríos y plantas, así como las formas de vida que trascienden fronteras nacionales. Un componente crucial de nuestro análisis será la identificación y discusión de los desafíos, equivocaciones y dilemas que surgen en el proceso de formular e implementar estos derechos, enfocándonos en victorias, fracasos y embotellamientos. Examinaremos las tensiones entre diferentes regímenes normativos, las complejidades en la traducción de conceptos y prácticas Indígenas al marco jurídico estatal (e internacional) y viceversa, así como los retos prácticos en la generación, aplicación y cumplimiento de estas normativas. El panel busca tender puentes entre la antropología y el derecho, explorando cómo la etnografía amazónica puede enriquecer las prácticas legales en materia de derechos de la naturaleza. Invitamos contribuciones que documenten estos procesos a través de diversos medios: litigios estratégicos, análisis de sentencias judiciales, intervenciones artísticas, militancia, y trabajo etnográfico. Este diálogo interdisciplinario aspira a fortalecer tanto la comprensión teórica como la aplicación práctica de los derechos de la naturaleza. 

Organizers 

Eliran Arazi, [email protected]
Diana Rosas Riaño, [email protected] 

Abstract 

Since the 1970s, Amazonianists have combined research with advocacy for Indigenous rights, emphasizing revalorization of Indigenous cultures. While invaluable, this approach has sometimes silenced internal conflicts and power asymmetries deemed detrimental to Indigenous struggles or their public image. To maintain a positive portrayal, power imbalances—such as those between genders—and internal conflicts among factions and ethnic groups are often downplayed. In land struggles and collaborations with environmental organizations, Indigenous Amazonians are frequently depicted as “ecologically noble” or “radical others” in harmony with nature, minimizing evidence of interspecies rivalries or human attempts to dominate nonhumanity. Even reflexive ethnography may downplay tensions with interlocutors, emphasizing and reinforcing the superiority of the former in these power dynamics, and ignoring the two-directional nature of power in fieldwork. Paradoxically, these often-muted power dynamics may be seen by research participants as fundamental to their identities, well-being, and social reproduction. This panel aims to reclaim the complexity of power dynamics within Indigenous societies and in their interactions with nonhuman and non-Indigenous agents, including anthropologists. We ask: What is gained and what is lost when representing or neglecting field conflicts? How do nuanced accounts of ethnographic complexity align with advocacy? How can the two-way power relations between researchers and researched communities shape anthropological knowledge? Finally, how can Indigenous theories of conflict and power asymmetry challenge and enrich ethnographic representations? We invite proposals that foreground conflict and power asymmetries, emphasize polyphony over ideals of harmony, and explore the epistemic value of the tension between advocacy and ethnographic complexity. 

Organizers 

Laura R. Graham, [email protected] 

Rosanna Dent, [email protected]

Renato Athias, [email protected] 

Abstract 

Increasingly, anthropologists and community members are working with digital media to deepen their interactions, drawing on everything from digitized historical materials to game design and development to ground scholarly and community projects. Digital technologies offer a world of possibilities for supporting the virtual repatriation of ethnographic objects and products of scholarly research to their places of origin, revealing the wealth of ethnographic detail these objects and materials hold for contemporary communities. This panel discusses collaborative projects with Indigenous Peoples, considering the potentials and risks of working with digital media as well as epistemological questions posed by working together through digital forums. 

We address questions such as: What are the constraints, both innate and chosen, related to what and how we work with community members and digital materials? How do digitally mediated projects reinforce or transform power dynamics of collaborative research? What techniques do anthropologists and scholars put into practice to delineate our roles and make strategic choices about creating spaces that we do not control? What are the community’s refusals and what are our own refusals within these projects? How do language, voice and image shape our digital work as well as our (imagined) audiences? Where and how do questions of justice arise in this work and what are the practical strategies for engaging with these questions and goals? Panelists seek to promote and advance debates about digital return and the contributions that Anthropology makes to these processes, which are diverse and distinct from what is called “repatriation.” 

Organizers 

Elena Alvarez, [email protected]

Christine Hunefeldt, [email protected]

Abstract 

For centuries, Indigenous Peoples have thrived in the Amazonian varied ecological regions, co- producing in a diverse range of landscapes and living in a respectful relationship with nature. In the last decades (if not centuries), however, attacks against communities have increased throughout the Amazon basin. Agricultural expansion, illegal logging, and mining, together with drug trafficking, have led to the expansion of problematic economies and the murder of indigenous peoples defending their territories and resources.Ineffective governmental support has led defenders, their organizations, and communities to propose communitarian strategies and innovative measures to protect what the world sees as a critical biome. In the case of Peru, deforestation, forest degradation, and other forest and land-use change activities contribute to over half of Peru’s greenhouse gas emissions and threaten the country’s economy. Efforts to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in the Amazon rainforest are critical to regulating global carbon and climate. Peru is highly susceptible to climate-related natural disasters, including floods, droughts, landslides. Herein we will discuss the policy developments to deal with deforestation, climate change, illicit activities, and agricultural production, as in the case of coca and cacao; presenters will also deal with the evolution of public policies and its effectiveness; also, policies geared toward the defense of common territories and enhance some dimensions of Indigenous Peoples’ environmental action. The Amazon basin and its people deserve much better. Is this feasible or wishful thinking? 

Organizers 

Elena Perino, [email protected]  

Raphaël Preux, [email protected]

Abstract 

La producción de archivos es una etapa esencial en la economía del conocimiento etnográfico. Es un testimonio de la autenticidad de la experiencia del investigador, una representación metonímica de una cultura para uso de un público no nativo y un material de investigación. Pero ¿cómo dan sentido a esta producción las personas documentadas en estos archivos? Este panel propone reflexionar sobre esta cuestión a partir de las recientes investigaciones realizadas en las tierras bajas de la América del Sur, que han producido nuevos archivos o han iniciado procesos de digitalización o restitución de archivos existentes. Nuestro objetivo es reunir a investigadores que hayan trabajado con personas de las sociedades indígenas, para poner en común nuestras reflexiones sobre estos temas generales: ¿Qué tienen que decir nuestros interlocutores sobre los archivos que los conciernen? ¿De qué manera sus palabras revelan historias silenciadas, cuestionan el conocimiento etnográfico o critican sus premisas? ¿Cómo documentan estas experiencias y testimonios la relación de nuestros entrevistados con el pasado, el cambio social, la investigación académica, o el patrimonio? ¿Cómo ponen de relieve las prácticas de restitución las modalidades de poder dentro de estas sociedades? ¿Qué medios podemos poner en común para garantizar que las prácticas de restitución ayuden a documentar o hacer emerger las narraciones autóctonas o a delegar el futuro de estos archivos a nuestros interlocutores? 

Organizers 

Fernanda Gallegos, [email protected]

Nehemías Pino, [email protected]

Felipe Roa, [email protected]

Stine Krøijer, [email protected]

Abstract 

In Silent Spring (1962), Rachel Carson brought public attention to the environmental damage caused by pesticides, illustrating how agricultural fields and natural landscapes were losing vitality, and how the world was becoming quieter due to excessive agrochemical use. Building on this, our panel explores the many forms of silence emerging from environmental disruptions and ecological apocalyptic scenarios in lowland South America. We consider both sudden, dramatic events—such as wildfires and floods—and slower ecological disasters, like species extinction, droughts, soil erosion, and landscape degradation where some voices, sounds, and noises are amplified, while others are silenced. Whose voices are lost? What stories remain untold? And which soundscapes have fallen silent? Drawing on ethnographic cases from Lowland South American communities, this panel opens a space to discuss how silence reveals itself in fieldwork. First, we invite papers that examine how silence can offer insights into silenced forms of dominance in environmental disruptions and end-of-the-world scenarios, both  in lived experiences and within the political, ontological, and cosmological debates surrounding these events or processes. Second, we welcome reflections on our positionality as anthropologists, addressing the ethical and theoretical dilemmas and responsibilities that arise when we encounter silence. Finally, we encourage contributions on collaborative research and co-creation, questioning how we can amplify silenced perspectives while critically assessing our role in knowledge production. Together, these discussions aim to illuminate the complex ways in which power and silence are interwoven in ecological world-endings we currently inhabit. 

Silencios del fin del mundo: Reflexiones Antropológicas sobre Entornos Perturbados en las Tierras Bajas Sudamericanas

En Silent Spring (1962), Rachel Carson atrajo la atención pública al daño ambiental causado por el uso de pesticidas, ilustrando cómo los campos agrícolas y los paisajes naturales estaban perdiendo vitalidad, y cómo el mundo se estaba convirtiendo en un entorno más silencioso debido al uso excesivo de agroquímicos. Con base en esa reflexión, nuestro panel explora las muchas formas en las que el silencio emerge a partir de las disrupciones ambientales y escenarios apocalípticos en las tierras bajas latinoamericanas. Nuestra aproximación toma en consideración tanto eventos repentinos y dramáticos—como incendios e inundaciones—y desastres ecológicos lentos, como la extinción de especies, las sequías, la erosión del suelo, y la degradación de paisajes donde algunas voces, sonidos y ruidos son amplificados, mientras otros son silenciados. Ante este contexto, nos preguntamos: ¿De quiénes son las voces que se pierden? ¿Qué historias permanecen sin ser contadas? ¿Y cuáles paisajes sonoros han devenido silenciosos? Recogiendo casos etnográficos de comunidades en las tierras bajas sudamericanas, este panel abre un espacio para discutir cómo el silencio se revela durante el trabajo de campo. En primer lugar, invitamos contribuciones que examinen cómo el silencio puede ofrecer ideas sobre las formas sutiles de dominación en el contexto de disrupciones ambientales y escenarios del fin del mundo, tanto a través de experiencias vívidas, y dentro de debates políticos, ontológicos y cosmológicos rodeando estos eventos o procesos. En segundo lugar, damos la bienvenida a reflexiones en torno a nuestra posicionalidad como antropólogos, abordando los dilemas éticos y teóricos, así como las responsabilidades que surgen cuando nos encontramos con el silencio. Por último, alentamos aportes que propongan ideas en torno a la investigación colaborativa y la co-creación, cuestionando cómo podemos amplificar perspectivas silenciadas a la vez que evaluamos nuestro rol en la producción de conocimiento. Juntas, estas discusiones buscan iluminar las formas complejas en las cuales el poder y el silencio se entrelazan en fines del mundo ecológicos que hoy habitamos. 

Silêncios no Fim do Mundo: Reflexões Antropológicas sobre Ambientes Perturbados nas Terras Baixas da América do Sul

Em Silent Spring (1962), Rachel Carson chamou a atenção do público para os danos ambientais causados pelo uso de pesticidas, ilustrando como os campos agrícolas e as paisagens naturais estavam perdendo vitalidade e como o mundo estava se tornando um ambiente mais silencioso devido ao uso excessivo de agroquímicos. Com base nessa reflexão, nosso painel explora as várias maneiras pelas quais o silêncio emerge de perturbações ambientais e cenários apocalípticos nas terras baixas da América Latina. Nossa abordagem leva em consideração tanto eventos repentinos e dramáticos—como incêndios e inundações— quanto desastres ecológicos lentos, como extinções de espécies, secas, erosão do solo e degradação da paisagem, em que algumas vozes, sons e ruídos são amplificados, enquanto outros são silenciados. Diante desse cenário, perguntamos: de quem são as vozes perdidas, cujas histórias permanecem não contadas e cujas paisagens sonoras se tornaram silenciosas? Reunindo casos etnográficos de comunidades das planícies sul-americanas, este painel abre um espaço para discutir como o silêncio se revela durante o trabalho de campo. Em primeiro lugar, convidamos contribuições que examinem como o silêncio pode oferecer percepções sobre formas sutis de dominação no contexto de perturbações ambientais e cenários de fim do mundo, tanto por meio de experiências vívidas quanto dentro dos debates políticos, ontológicos e cosmológicos que cercam esses eventos ou processos. Em segundo lugar, são bem-vindas as reflexões sobre nossa posição como antropólogos, abordando os dilemas éticos e teóricos e as responsabilidades que surgem quando nos deparamos com o silêncio. Por fim, incentivamos contribuições que proponham ideias sobre pesquisa colaborativa e cocriação, questionando como podemos ampliar perspectivas silenciadas e, ao mesmo tempo, avaliar nossa função na produção de conhecimento. Juntas, essas discussões buscam iluminar as formas complexas pelas quais o poder e o silêncio estão entrelaçados nas extremidades do mundo ecológico que habitamos hoje. 

Organizers 

Ana Gabriela Salvador Irigoyen, [email protected] 

Ana Maria Durán Calisto, [email protected]

Paulina Cepeda Pico, [email protected]

Jaime Paucar Cabrera, [email protected]

Abstract 

Demographic growth in ancestral or environmentally protected territories in Ecuador is continuous, accelerated and unequal. Regulations based mainly on economic power and land speculation impose regulations that fail to adequately respond to the community collective needs. The communal forms of life are being transmuted and the lack of understanding this phenomenon in the planning process, increases its segregation. Collective construction processes in territorial planning, allows us to rethink our ways to co-habit the territory, identifying and re-evaluating original practices, that benefit the intrinsic needs of human beings. Understanding ancestral terms and practices such as the ája (Shuar poly-cultural system), the jea (collective housing), and the Sumak kawsay “Life in harmony with nature” (term used by Indigenous cultures throughout the Andean region), allow us to create comprehensive and holistic territorial guidelines, that help apply complex and rich interconnections and transformations within societies, including more-than-human actors. The “Life Plans”, implemented in the Ecuadorian Amazon, renew the notion of space culture, agroecological expressions, and international migration processes. These plans include constituent elements such as the Territory, Bioeconomy, Pluri-diversity, Worldview, Autonomy and Governance, and the ̈Sacred Basins ̈. Identifying our own planning processes is imperative through inclusive and  collaborative approaches, allowing the creation of contextual sustainable planning tools and methodologies, recognizing short- and long-term needs and actions. 

Organizers 

Natalia Buitron, [email protected]

Luiz Costa, [email protected]

Abstract 

This panel examines ownership and autonomy as a crucial theoretical nexus in lowland South American anthropology. Whilst ownership or mastery has emerged as a fundamental cosmological operator in Amazonian socio-logics, autonomy has developed through a distinct theoretical genealogy, from Clastres through Rivière to Overing. Recent scholarship on magnification, singularisation, and productiveness reveals an intriguing dynamic: enhanced selfhood necessitates relations of ownership with others, suggesting that autonomous persons must be owners of others, while dependent persons are owned by others—conditions that frequently coexist within the same individual. We explore the proposition that Amazonian autonomy might better be understood as ‘alter-onomy’, where the foundations of personhood are constituted not by the individual as an ‘unmoved mover’ but through the interplay of submission of others and submission to others which creates heteronomous persons that may display greater capacity for leadership, decision-making, food production and procurement, shamanic power, and other attributes. The panel invites papers examining the (non)complementarity of autonomy and ownership across various domains: Are they two facets of the same phenomenon, mutually denying dynamics, or different stages in a developmental cycle? Of particular interest is how these dynamics manifest in relations of power, morality, and inter-group politics, especially in encounters between indigenous collectives and state-like figures. We welcome ethnographic and theoretical analyses exploring these themes through the lenses of kinship, history, shamanism, morality, social change, and political economy. 

Organizers 

Lorena Romero Leal, [email protected]

Richard Kernaghan, [email protected]

Abstract

¿Cómo se entretejen los desafíos éticos y estéticos que plantean las formas en que nos aproximamos a la complejidad cultural y ambiental de la Amazonia? Desde una perspectiva  estética ¿de qué maneras podemos abordar los silencios y las respuestas éticas que guían los modos de escucha que escogemos? Con este panel proponemos examinar cómo las/os etnógrafas/os e historiadoras/es negociamos los silencios resultado de violencias colonizadoras, silencios que perduran a través de huellas traumáticas, marcando los paisajes y corporalidades de la amazonia. En nuestras presentaciones, buscamos evaluar los actos de silencio y escucha que median nuestros procesos de investigación entre seres humanos y no humanos, para entender mejor cómo estos actos se terminan filtrando en las interpretaciones y representaciones derivadas de los trabajos de campo. Aquí pondremos énfasis en la potencia de las imágenes (no sólo las fotografías sino aquellas que surgen de relatos, regresan en las memorias o se revelan a través de los sueños) para reconocer lo que se calla y para dar atención a lo que quiere y no quiere expresarse. ¿Cómo usamos y negociamos el silencio al guiarnos éticamente y al plasmar alternativas estéticas? ¿Cuáles son nuestros propios silencios y porque nos sentimos (in)cómodos con ellos? 

Silence, listening, image: the challenges of responding to the Amazonian complexity  Abstract

How does it interweave the ethical and aesthetic challenges posed by the ways in which we approach the cultural and environmental complexity of the Amazon? From an aesthetic perspective, how can we address the silences and ethical responses that guide the ways in which we listen? With this panel, we propose to examine how ethnographers and historians negotiate the silences that result from colonial violence, silences that endure through traumatic traces, marking the landscapes and corporalities in the Amazon. In our presentations, we seek to evaluate the acts of silence and listening that mediate our research processes between human and non-human beings to understand better how these acts end up filtering into the interpretations and representations derived from fieldwork. Here, we will emphasize the power of images (not only photographs but those that emerge from stories, return in memories, or are revealed through dreams) to recognize what is kept silent and to give attention to what wants and does not want to be expressed. How do we use and negotiate silence when guiding ourselves ethically and shaping aesthetic alternatives? What are our silences, and why do we feel (un)comfortable with them? 

Silêncio, escuta, imagem: os desafios de responder à complexidade amazônica Organizadores 

Como se entrelaçam os desafios éticos e estéticos que surgem nas formas de nos aproximarmos da complexidade cultural e ambiental da Amazônia? Sob uma perspectiva estética, de que maneiras podemos abordar os silêncios e as respostas éticas que motivam os modos de escuta que escolhemos? Com este painel, propomos examinar como etnógrafos/as e historiadores/as negociamos os silêncios originados por violências colonizadoras, silêncios que perduram através de rastros traumáticos que marcam as paisagens e corporalidades da Amazônia. Em nossas apresentações, buscamos avaliar os atos de silêncio e escuta que mediam nossos processos de investigações entre seres humanos e não-humanos, para entender melhor como esses atos acabam se filtrando das interpretações e representações derivadas dos trabalhos de campo. Aqui, enfatizamos a potência das imagens (não apenas das fotografias, mas também daquelas que emergem de relatos, regressam às memórias ou se revelam por meio dos sonhos) para reconhecer o que se cala e para dar atenção ao que se deseja ou não deseja ser expresso. Como usamos e negociamos o silêncio ao nos guiarmos eticamente e ao capturar alternativas estéticas? Quais são os nossos próprios silêncios e por que nos sentimos (des)confortáveis com eles? 

Organizers 

Bartira S. Fortes, [email protected]

Marcia F. Camargo, [email protected]

Juliana Porsani, [email protected]

Beatriz Lima Ribeiro, [email protected]

Abstract 

This panel explores co-creation as a pathway for Indigenous peoples to resist silences, reclaim narratives, and assert their rights. As co-production of knowledge with Indigenous peoples becomes increasingly prominent in academia, it raises critical questions about power relations,  epistemological hierarchies, and the diverse positionalities of researchers – ranging from outside, in-between, and inside perspectives in their relationships with Indigenous communities. The panel will critically engage with these complexities, emphasizing how co-creative methodologies navigate the intersections of positionality, decoloniality, and epistemic justice. By examining the intricacies of power dynamics and the silences that stem from historical injustices and extractive research paradigms, this panel aims to uncover the potentialities of co-creation as a means of advancing ethical research practices in the Amazon and beyond. Discussions will center on how research can facilitate co-creation to influence policy-making processes to advance Indigenous rights and climate justice. We invite contributors to share empirical experiences and critical reflections that emphasize the process of unsilencing Indigenous perspectives within co-creative frameworks. 

Organizers 

Anahi Sy, [email protected]

Verónica Azpiroz Cleñan, [email protected]

Abstract 

Este panel se orienta a explorar en epistemes indígenas el potencial para repensar las relaciones entre salud, historia, cuerpos y territorios. La perspectiva decolonial invita a explorar epistemes no occidentales que reconfiguran la relación salud-enfermedad y los territorios. Las poblaciones indígenas latinoamericanas, recrean epistemes e incluso ontologías donde animales, plantas, ríos, piedras, paisajes y astros, adquieren atributos que permiten vislumbrar vínculos entre humanos y no humanos. Con estos no humanos se habla, se piensa, se actúa, se sana. Nos preguntamos cómo registrar esos vínculos, cómo decir lo que aún no ha sido nombrado o decidir éticamente dejarlo en silencio. Desde esta perspectiva, los territorios habitados por pueblos indígenas son “incubadoras ontológicas” donde se juega la identidad y la raíz común del paradigma del buen vivir. Es en esos territorios donde la medicina ancestral indígena se ofrece como la forma de sanar las heridas coloniales, donde los elementos terapéuticos que ofrece el territorio entran en diálogos singulares con humanos y no humanos, constituyéndose espacios de co-creación de conocimiento plural. Este panel convoca al diálogo interepistémico entre investigadores indígenas e investigadores no indígenas que impulsan procesos de investigación plurilingües en torno a los siguientes interrogantes ¿Qué formas puede tomar la co-creación entre actores humanos-no humanos y más-que-humanos en el ámbito de la salud? ¿Cómo abordar los “silencios” impuestos desde la violencia colonial en la salud? ¿Qué padecimientos trajo la colonia en los territorios indígenas? ¿Cómo se narra el trauma del genocidio indígena?¿Cómo recrear una decolonialidad para el buen vivir colectivo? 

Organizers 

Anne-Marie Colpron, [email protected]  

Joana Miller, [email protected]

Abstract 

Durante o último colóquio da SALSA, a conferência de abertura colocou em diálogo, nas palavras do antropólogo João Paulo Barreto, « uma antropóloga não indígena e um antropólogo indígena » para refletir sobre os desafios que estão implicados nessas diferentes posições. Esse painel propõe perseguir esta reflexão mobilizando uma ideia central que foi apresentada durante aquela conferência: a ideia de não tentar capturar e nivelar os conhecimentos a partir da lógica clássica da ciência, mas, ao invés disso, colocar em evidência as assimetrias em jogo. Assim, tomando como ponto de partida as experiências do trabalho de campo e mobilizando a literatura produzida por intelectuais indígenas, propomos colocar em evidência diferentes modos de compor os mundos para investigar as questões éticas e políticas que daí resultam. Mais do que procurar reproduzir as visões científicas objetivantes, a proposta deste painel é a de explorar a multiplicidade de vias/vozes que problematizam o regime do mundo comum para imaginar projetos de alianças cosmopolíticas (Stengers 2007). Em resposta ao apelo intelectual de Ailton Krenak (2020), que nos convida a mobilizar « outros discursos » para « alargar nossos horizontes existenciais », esse painel propõe mobilizar pesquisas feitas nas terras-baixas sul-americanas para investigar as seguintes questões: como a multiplicidade de mundos se manifesta nas nossas pesquisas de campo? Como abordar essa diversidade evitando a linguagem da metáfora ou da representação, dito de outro modo, sem reproduzir o privilégio ocidental do que é A realidade? Como as ontologias indígenas nos permitem abrir um caminho para modos alternativos de recolocar os problemas contemporâneos? Como fazer convergir as nossas pesquisas de campo com as vozes de intelectuais, líderes e xamãs indígenas que reivindicam outros mundos possíveis sem reduzi- los ao nosso mundo? 

Incommensurable dialogues: accounting for (dis)encounters 

At the last SALSA Biennial Conference, the opening lecture brought together – to quote anthropologist João Paulo Barreto –, “a non-indigenous anthropologist and an indigenous anthropologist”, to reflect on the challenges implied by these different positionalities. Our panel wishes to pursue this reflection around a central idea that was then brought up, namely to highlight the asymmetries at play, rather than seeking to capture and smooth knowledge in the classical logic of science. The aim is to detail different ways of composing worlds, and to explore the ethical and political issues involved, drawing on fieldwork experience and the literature produced by indigenous intellectuals. Indeed, rather than seeking to adhere to objective scientific goals, the intention is to explore the multiplicity of voices/ways that effectively problematize the regime of the shared world, in order to imagine projects for cosmopolitical alliances (Stengers 2007). In response to  indigenous intellectual Ailton Krenak's (2020) call to mobilize “other narratives” in order to “broaden our existential horizons”, this panel aims to mobilize research carried out in the South American Lowlands and consider the following questions: How does the multiplicity of worlds manifest in our fieldwork, and how does it effectively challenge us? How can we deal with this multiplicity avoiding the language of metaphor or representation, i.e., without reproducing the Western privilege of what THE reality is? How do indigenous ontologies open the way to alternative ways of reframing contemporary issues? How can we effectively couple our field research with the voices of indigenous intellectuals, leaders and shamans, who claim other possible worlds, without reducing them to our own? 

Diálogos inconmensurables: dar cuenta de los (des)encuentros 

En el último coloquio de SALSA, la conferencia inaugural reunió, como lo presentó el antropólogo João Paulo Barreto, “a una antropóloga no indígena y a un antropólogo indígena”, para reflexionar sobre los retos que implican estas diferentes posicionalidades. Nuestro panel propone proseguir esta reflexión movilizando una idea central que planteó João Paulo Barreto, a saber, la de no intentar capturar y allanar los conocimientos
basándose en la lógica clásica de la ciencia, sino más bien destacar las asimetrías que están en juego. Tomando como punto de partida las experiencias de trabajo de campo y movilizando la literatura producida por los intelectuales indígenas, nos proponemos destacar diferentes formas de componer mundos para explorar las cuestiones éticas y políticas implicadas. En lugar de intentar reproducir visiones científicas objetivadoras, se
trata de explorar la multiplicidad de voces/vías que problematizan eficazmente el régimen del mundo común, con el fin de imaginar proyectos de alianzas cosmopolíticas (Stengers 2007). En respuesta al llamado del intelectual indígena Ailton Krenak (2020) que invita a movilizar “otras narrativas” con el fin de “ampliar nuestros horizontes existenciales”, este panel propone movilizar las investigaciones realizadas en las tierras bajas sudamericanas para sondear las siguientes preguntas: ¿Cómo se manifiesta la multiplicidad de mundos en nuestra investigación de campo y como nos enfrenta a desafíos? ¿Cómo abordar esta multiplicidad evitando el lenguaje de la metáfora o la representación, es decir, sin reproducir el privilegio occidental de lo que es LA realidad? ¿Cómo pueden las ontologías indígenas abrir el camino a formas alternativas de replantear los problemas contemporáneos? ¿Cómo podemos combinar eficazmente nuestra investigación de campo con las voces de intelectuales, líderes y chamanes indígenas que reclaman otros mundos posibles, sin reducirlos al nuestro?  

Jan David Hauck, [email protected]

Alejandro Erut, [email protected]

Francesca Mezzenzana, [email protected]

Abstract 

Over the past years there has been an increase in anthropological research on the relationships of humans with nonhuman or other-than-human beings. Motivated partly by the ecological crisis and the desire to recalibrate the ways in which we understand and engage with those with whom we share the environments we inhabit, much of this research strives to take seriously non-Western, especially Indigenous ways of knowing in efforts at advancing decolonizing research agendas, theories, and methodologies. At the center of this research has been how nonhuman entities are conceptualized, including questions of personhood, intentionality, and Theory of Mind. But categories such as human, animal, plant, living being, abiotic kind, and the like are often still understood to be static or absolute, and distinctions between them still based on Western understandings of species. This runs counter to many Indigenous cosmologies that have frequently been described as “relational” (Bird-David 1999; Ingold 2011), in which the categories of humanity and nonhumanity are “conditions” (Descola 1994, 93) and subject to change depending on relational configurations (Viveiros de Castro 1998). Taking them requires us to rethink our research agendas and the questions we ask. If sameness and difference are products of processes of familiarization or differentiation, and if cross-species mutuality is established through feeding and interacting in loving, caring, and playful ways (Vilaça 2002; Fausto 2007; Santos Granero 2009; Costa 2017), then ontological questions of conceptualization need to be thought together with questions of ethical responsibility, empathy, and relations of care (Mezzenzana and Peluso, 2023). This panel seeks contributions that discuss these issues through empirical ethnographic case studies or a theoretical, comparative lens. Among the questions the panel asks are:

• How do understandings of personhood, humanity, agency, or intentionality impact everyday practices of relating to other-than-human entities?
• What everyday practices and interactions shape understandings of and feelings towards other-than-human entities?
• How are particular relations with nonhumans or other-than- humans sustained and how can they change?
• How do broader ecological or socioeconomic changes impact the relations of different communities with other inhabitants of their environment?

Relacionarse con otros en mundos más-que-humanos: Conceptualizaciones, relaciones e interacciones 

En los últimos años ha habido un creciente interés desde la antropológica en el abordaje de las relaciones de los seres humanos con seres no-humanos o más-que-humanos. Motivada parcialmente por la crisis ecológica y el deseo de recalibrar las formas en que entendemos y nos relacionamos con aquellos con quienes compartimos los entornos que habitamos, este campo de investigación se esfuerza por tomar en serio e incorporar las formas de conocimiento no occidentales, especialmente las indígenas como intento de avanzar en agendas de investigación, teorías y metodologías descolonizadoras. Esta investigación abre el interrogante de cómo se conceptualizan las entidades no humanas, incluidas las cuestiones de la personalidad, la intencionalidad y la teoría de la mente. Pero categorías como humano, animal, planta, ser vivo, tipo abiótico y similares a menudo todavía se entienden como estáticas o absolutas, y las distinciones entre ellas todavía se basan en la comprensión occidental de las especies. Esta perspectiva estática va en contra de muchas cosmologías indígenas que con frecuencia se han descrito como “relacionales” (Bird-David 1999; Ingold 2011), y en donde las categorías de humanidad y no humanidad son “condiciones” (Descola 1994, 93) sujetas a cambios en función de estas configuraciones relacionales (Viveiros de Castro 1998). En este sentido, el esfuerzo de abordarlas nos obliga a replantearnos nuestras agendas de investigación y las preguntas que nos hacemos. Si la igualdad y la diferencia son productos de procesos de familiarización o diferenciación, y si la reciprocidad entre especies se establece a través de la alimentación y la interacción de manera amorosa, cariñosa y lúdica (Vilaça 2002; Fausto 2007; Santos Granero 2009; Costa 2017), entonces las cuestiones ontológicas de la conceptualización deben pensarse junto con las cuestiones de responsabilidad ética, empatía y relaciones de cuidado (Mezzenzana y Peluso, 2023). Este panel busca contribuciones que discutan estos temas a través de estudios de caso etnográficos empíricos o una lente teórica y comparativa. Entre las preguntas que hace el panel se encuentran: 

• ¿Cómo impacta la comprensión de la personalidad, la humanidad, la agencia o la intencionalidad en las prácticas cotidianas de relacionarse con entidades no humanas?
• ¿Qué prácticas e interacciones cotidianas dan forma a la comprensión y los sentimientos hacia las entidades no humanas?
• ¿Cómo se sostienen las relaciones particulares con los no humanos o con otros no humanos y cómo pueden cambiar?
• ¿Cómo impactan los cambios ecológicos o socioeconómicos más amplios en las relaciones de las diferentes comunidades con otros habitantes de su entorno? 

Relacionando-se com outros em mundos mais-que-humanos: Conceituações, relacionamentos e interações

Nos últimos anos, a pesquisa antropológica sobre as relações dos seres humanos com os seres não-humanos ou mais-que-humanos cresceu muito. Parcialmente motivado pela crise ecológica e pelo desejo de recalibrar as maneiras como entendemos e nos relacionamos com aqueles com quem partilhamos os ambientes que habitamos, este campo de investigação esforça-se por levar a sério formas de conhecimento não-ocidentais, especialmente dos povos Indígenas, como uma tentativa de avançar agendas, teorias e metodologias de investigação descolonizadoras. Esta pesquisa abre a questão de como as entidades não humanas são conceituadas, incluindo questões de personalidade, intencionalidade e teoria da mente. Mas categorias como humano, animal, planta, ser vivo, tipo abiótico e semelhantes ainda são muitas vezes entendidas como estáticas ou absolutas, e as distinções entre elas ainda se baseiam na compreensão ocidental das espécies. Esta perspectiva estática vai contra muitas cosmologias indígenas que têm sido frequentemente descritas como “relacionais” (Bird-David 1999; Ingold 2011), e onde as categorias de humanidade e não-humanidade são “condições” (Descola 1994, 93) e sujeitas a mudanças dependendo de configurações relacionais (Viveiros de Castro 1998). O esforço para abordá-los obriga-nos a repensar as nossas agendas de pesquisa e as questões que nos colocamos. Se a igualdade e a diferença são produtos de processos de familiarização ou diferenciação, e se a reciprocidade entre as espécies se estabelece através da alimentação e da interação de forma carinhosa, afetuosa e lúdica (Vilaça 2002; Fausto 2007; Santos Granero 2009; Costa 2017), então questões ontológicas de conceituação devem ser pensadas em conjunto com questões de responsabilidade ética, empatia e relações de cuidado (Mezzenzana e Peluso, 2023). Este painel busca contribuições que discutam essas questões por meio de estudos de caso etnográficos empíricos ou de lentes teóricas e comparativas. Entre as perguntas feitas pelo painel estão:

• Como a compreensão da personalidade, da humanidade, da agência ou da intencionalidade impacta as práticas cotidianas de relacionamento com entidades não humanas? 
• Que práticas e interações cotidianas moldam a compreensão e os sentimentos em relação às entidades não humanas?
  Como são sustentadas relações específicas com não-humanos ou mais-que-humanos e como podem mudar? 
• Como é que as mudanças ecológicas ou socioeconómicas mais amplas impactam as relações das diferentes comunidades com outros habitantes do seu ambiente? 

Organizers 

Anne-Katrin Broocks, [email protected]

Axel Prestes Dürrnagel, [email protected]

Artur Sgambatti Monteiro, [email protected]

Claudia Pinzón Cuellar, [email protected]  

Abstract  

The transformation of forest conviviality (Illich 1973) is a significant contemporary phenomenon in the Amazon region. The expansion of new knowledge and practices in Capitalist frontiers (Tsing 2003) is giving rise to substantial alterations among people as well as between people and nature (e. g. de Almeida 2007), including for example large-scale agriculture, livestock, mining, organized crime or carbon credits commercialization. These turn forests into a ‘commodity’, silencing the needs of living forest bodies entrenched in the Colonial dualism between culture and nature (Haraway 1991, Latour 1993 [1991]). A changing climate additionally affect forests conviviality, causing interspecies violence, multispecies mobilities and (dis)appearances. The panel objective is therefore twofold: a) to examine the transformations in forest convivialities, and b) to explore the potential of knowledge co-creation in multispecies violence, death and survival within forests. We especially invite for the discussion of multispecies forests as “(colonial) mimicry” (Bhaba 1984:126) lifeworlds: lifeworlds that have been shaped by (post-) colonial influences, including epistemic and other forms of violence, and mimicked to the outside world as a form of protection (Broocks, Barragán-Paladines et al. (submitted)). We are interested in learning how co-creation could and should reveal ancestral practices that are concealed from the ‘postcolonial eye’ (Bhaba 1984:126) of politics and hegemonies, as well as from the gaze of science (ibid.). To do so, we invite diverse contributions from all methodological and theoretical entry points, empirical examples from the forests, artistic approaches, or novel experiments which may enable transformations towards mutuality, reciprocity and resistance. 

• Bhabha, H. (1984). Of mimicry and man: The ambivalence of colonial discourse. 
• de Almeida, M. W. B. (2007). “Narrativas agrárias e a morte do campesinato.” RURIS (Campinas, Online) 1. 
• Haraway, D. J. (1991). A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist- Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature New York, Routledge: 149-181. 
• Illich, I. (1973). Tools for Conviviality. New York, Harper & Row. 
• Latour, B. (1993 [1991]). We have never been modern. Cambridge, Harvard University Press. 
• Tsing, A. L. (2003). “Natural Resources and Capitalist Frontiers.” Economic and Political Weekly 38(48): 5100-5106. 

Organizers 

Casey High, [email protected]  

Suzanne Oakdale, [email protected]  

Abstract 

Whether in politics, education, work or urban migration, life in much of Amazonia today includes relationships that extend well beyond local Indigenous communities. This panel explores diverse cosmopolitan projects of co-creation in which Indigenous Amazonian people engage, contest and reconfigure external ideas and interests. Dealing with settler-colonial society, state  institutions or international actors often involves translating Indigenous concepts and values into a modernist language – whether that of extractivist development, environmental conservation, or Indigenous cultural heritage. The panel focuses on the challenges and creativity that come with a distinctly Amazonian cosmopolitanism, raising questions about what these engagements mean for Indigenous peoples, their potential consequences, and what voices might be silenced or ignored in this process. We invite papers that draw on these contexts to reflect on key concepts identified in regional ethnography, as well as dominant national and global discourses that are increasingly part of Indigenous practices of co-creation. Since anthropologists – and their own acts of translation – are often part of this process, we also raise the question of role our research and relationships in fieldwork should have in these Indigenous cosmopolitan engagements. 

Co-creaciones en el cosmopolitismo amazónico 

Ya sea en la política, la educación, el trabajo o la migración urbana, la vida en gran parte de la Amazonia actual incluye relaciones que se extienden mucho más allá de las comunidades indígenas locales. Este panel explora diversos proyectos cosmopolitas de co-creación en los que los indígenas amazónicos se comprometen, impugnan y reconfiguran ideas e intereses externos. Tratar con la sociedad colonial, las instituciones estatales o los actores internacionales implica a menudo traducir los conceptos y valores indígenas a un lenguaje modernista, ya sea del desarrollo extractivista, de la conservación medioambiental o del patrimonio cultural indígena. El panel se centra en los retos y la creatividad que conlleva un cosmopolitismo marcadamente amazónico, planteando cuestiones sobre lo que estos compromisos significan para los pueblos indígenas, sus posibles consecuencias y qué voces podrían ser silenciadas o ignoradas en este proceso. Invitamos a presentar trabajos que se basen en estos contextos para reflexionar sobre conceptos clave identificados en la etnografía regional, así como en los discursos dominantes nacionales y globales que forman parte cada vez más de las prácticas indígenas de co-creación. Dado que los antropólogos – y sus propios actos de traducción – son parte de este proceso, también planteamos la cuestión del papel que nuestra investigación y relaciones en el trabajo de campo deben tener en estas prácticas cosmopolitas indígenas. 

Co-Criações no Cosmopolitismo Amazônico 

Seja na política, na educação, no trabalho ou na migração urbana, a vida em grande parte da Amazônia hoje inclui relacionamentos que vão muito além das comunidades indígenas locais.  Este painel explora diversos projetos cosmopolitas de cocriação nos quais os povos indígenas da Amazônia se envolvem, contestam e reconfiguram ideias e interesses externos. Lidar com a sociedade colonialista, instituições estatais ou atores internacionais geralmente envolve a tradução de conceitos e valores indígenas em uma linguagem modernista, seja de desenvolvimento extrativista, conservação ambiental ou patrimônio cultural indígena. O painel enfoca os desafios e a criatividade que vêm com um cosmopolitismo distintamente amazônico, levantando questões sobre o que esses compromissos significam para os povos indígenas, suas possíveis consequências e quais vozes podem ser silenciadas ou ignoradas nesse processo. Convidamos artigos que se baseiem nesses contextos para refletir sobre os principais conceitos identificados na etnografia regional, bem como sobre os discursos nacionais e globais dominantes que fazem cada vez mais parte das práticas indígenas de cocriação. Como os antropólogos – e seus próprios atos de tradução – muitas vezes fazem parte desse processo, também levantamos a questão do papel que nossa pesquisa e nossas relações no trabalho de campo devem ter nesses práticas cosmopolitas indígenas. 

Organizers 

Vanesa Martín Galán, [email protected]

Jimena Bigá, [email protected]  

Abstract 

This panel explores the relationship between environmental degradation and the silences surrounding its understanding and response, paying particular attention to its impacts on Indigenous cultural heritages. Environmental degradation in many Indigenous communities reflects a long history of dispossession, exploitation, and subordinating inclusion rooted in capitalist and extractivist agendas. The expansion of industries like mining, agribusiness, and hydrocarbon extraction, along with progress-driven constructions like dams, has transformed Indigenous territories, disrupting the cultural-symbolic, and ecological landscapes integral to Indigenous heritages. Pollution, biodiversity loss, and altered natural cycles threaten both the present and future of Indigenous ways of knowing and being, diminishing the continuity of practices, stories, and values embedded in the land. Furthermore, increased connectivity with the state and dominant consumer patterns introduces new challenges, such as managing domestic waste, the loss of traditional food sources, and the erosion of conservation practices central to Indigenous cultural heritages. We seek to engage with the “silences” that shape, conceal, or reveal these struggles across academic discourses, political spheres, and domestic settings. Silences —whether externally imposed or internally maintained— can emerge as forms of resistance, care, or respect, and are sometimes disrupted by local and grassroots efforts or collaborations with external allies. By exploring these silences, we aim to deepen our understanding of contemporary forms of violence and harm, as well as the complex ways in which Indigenous cultural heritages and life projects are enacted—both through and despite anthropogenic pressures on their lands and communities.  

Organizers 

Enoc Merino Santi, [email protected]

Tito Merino Gayas, [email protected]  

Abstract

Esta propuesta invita a una reflexión profunda sobre las dinámicas de apropiación, expropiación y coautoría en el trabajo colaborativo entre la academia y los pueblos indígenas. Destaca la importancia de cuestionar cómo el conocimiento indígena es recogido, interpretado y compartido, examinar las prácticas que determinan si ese conocimiento es respetado o, por el contrario, utilizado de forma unilateral. La idea es explorar desde una perspectiva crítica el papel de los investigadores, la ética en el uso del saber indígena, los caminos hacia una verdadera coautoría que respeta y reconoce a las comunidades como protagonistas en la construcción de conocimientos sobre su propia realidad, en la forma en que desean transmitirlo, especialmente en investigaciones científicas de carácter social, de salud y los saberes en cuanto al manejo de los ciclos biológicos y fenológicos con visión de aprovechar los recursos sin destruir la naturaleza.

Organizers 

Andrea Zuppi, [email protected]

David Jabin, [email protected]

Abstract 

This panel wishes to bring to the fore the question of child circulation among lowland South American peoples. Historically, anthropologists have examined this question through the phenomenon of capture adoption through warfare, within the perspective of the so called “symbolic economy of alterity”. The emphasis put on adoption by capture has doubtlessly proved highly productive for the understanding of Amazonian social life. Yet, adoption by capture is but one of the ways in which children circulate among people of the region. Indeed, some recent studies have confirmed what has constantly been, even if only anecdotally, reported by various ethnographers: namely, that the circulation of children disjointed from acts of war is a widespread, varied and complex phenomenon that has not yet received the analytical attention it deserves. In order to further our understandings of the mechanisms and motivations driving child circulation between lowland South American people, this panel welcomes papers that contribute new insights on this topic in relation, for instance, to history, kinship, gender, mastery, asymmetrical relations of dependence, and language. We also encourage contributors to consider the movement of children beyond the boundaries of their social groups, including interactions, such as domestic service or other forms of labor, with rural populations and city dwellers. Finally, this panel is interested in articles that present new  ethnographic material capable of questioning the concepts of adoption and fosterage, normally used to describe child circulation practices but often failing to seize their full complexities. 

Circulación de niños en las tierras bajas sudamericanas: repensar conceptos y explorar la diversidad de prácticas 

En este panel se busca poner en primer plano la cuestión de la circulación de niños entre los pueblos de las tierras bajas sudamericanas. Históricamente, los antropólogos han abordado este tema a través del fenómeno de la captura de niños en contextos de guerra, en el marco de lo que se ha denominado la “economía simbólica de la alteridad”. La atención centrada en esta adopción por captura ha demostrado ser altamente productiva para comprender la vida social amazónica. Sin embargo, esta es solo una de las formas en que los niños circulan entre las personas de la región. De hecho, algunos estudios recientes han confirmado lo que ha sido reportado de manera constante, aunque a muchas como anecdótas, por diversos etnógrafos: la circulación de niños desvinculadas de la guerra es un fenómeno extendido, variado y complejo que aún no ha recibido la atención analítica que merece. Con el objetivo de profundizar nuestra comprensión de los mecanismos y motivaciones que impulsan la circulación de niños entre los pueblos de las tierras bajas sudamericanas, en este panel se busca reunir ponencias que aporten nuevas perspectivas sobre este tema en relación, por ejemplo, con la historia, el parentesco, el género, las relaciones de dominio, las relaciones de dependencia asimétrica, el lenguaje y otros aspectos. También alentamos a los participantes a considerar el movimiento de niños más allá de los límites de sus grupos sociales, incluyendo interacciones como el servicio doméstico u otras formas de trabajo con poblaciones rurales y habitantes de ciudades. Finalmente, este panel invita a presentar nuevos materiales etnográficos capaces de cuestionar los conceptos de adopción y crianza, que suelen utilizarse para describir las prácticas de circulación infantil, pero que a menudo no logran captar toda su complejidad. 

Circulação de crianças nas terras baixas da América do Sul: revisitando conceitos e descobrindo a diversidade de práticas

Este painel pretende trazer à tona a questão da circulação de crianças entre os povos das terras baixas da América do Sul. Historicamente, os antropólogos examinaram essa questão através do fenômeno da adoção por captura em contextos de guerra, dentro da perspectiva da chamada  “economia simbólica da alteridade”. A ênfase na adoção por captura sem dúvida se mostrou altamente produtiva para a compreensão da vida social amazônica. No entanto, a adoção por captura é apenas uma das formas pelas quais as crianças circulam entre os povos da região. De fato, estudos recentes confirmaram algo que tem sido constantemente, mesmo que apenas de forma anedótica, relatado por diversos etnógrafos: que a circulação de crianças desvinculada de atos de guerra é um fenômeno amplamente disseminado, variado e complexo, que ainda não recebeu a devida atenção analítica. Para aprofundar nosso entendimento sobre os mecanismos e motivações que impulsionam a circulação de crianças entre os povos das terras baixas da América do Sul, este painel convida artigos que contribuam com novos insights sobre este tema em relação, por exemplo, à história, parentesco, gênero, maestria, relações assimétricas de dependência, história e linguagem. Também encorajamos contribuições que considerem o movimento de crianças para além das fronteiras de seus grupos sociais, incluindo interações, como serviço doméstico ou outras formas de trabalho, com populações rurais e moradores urbanos. Por fim, este painel se interessa por artigos que apresentem novos materiais etnográficos capazes de questionar os conceitos de adoção e acolhimento, normalmente usados para descrever práticas de circulação de crianças, mas que muitas vezes não conseguem captar toda a sua complexidade. 

Organizers 

Ernst Halbmayer, [email protected]

Juan Camilo Niño Vargas, [email protected]

Thiago Mota Cardoso, [email protected]

Abstract 

Ontological anthropology revealed the complexity of the world arrangements shared by many indigenous societies, as well their supposed incommensurability with the notion of an objective and external nature opposed to human beings and available to them to be known, transformed and exploited. The proposal of the present symposium is to consider and explore these arrangements, not primarily as ontological schemas, but as cosmo-ecological knowledges and cosmo-political practices that relate or confront each other in concrete contexts. This panel invites contributions that 1.) Reveal the diversity of ontological and epistemic configurations, historically as contemporary, that distinguish these knowledges and practices 2.) Point out the different intellectual, scientific, artistic, legal and political formulations of these knowledges today, as well as the spaces for exploration, dialogue, debate and confrontation in which they participate with social movements, national states, multilateral organisations and other actors and entities. 3.) Explore ways of strengthening this situated knowledges in order to set more symmetrical dialogues into praxis and, thereby, to foster the impact of indigenous ontologies and epistemologies in addressing the current planetary ecological crisis.  

Organizers 

Oscar Espinosa, [email protected]

Diego Saavedra, [email protected]

Eduardo Fernández, [email protected]

Abstract 

A partir del 2020, la Amazonía peruana ha experimentado un incremento vertiginoso de las economías ilícitas. Actividades como la minería ilegal o el cultivo de hoja de coca para el narcotráfico han dejado huellas en los territorios indígenas y heridas profundas entre sus habitantes. A esto se suma el impulso de proyectos de infraestructura vial carentes de análisis de impactos ambientales y sociales rigurosos. Los silencios más difíciles siempre han ocurrido al momento de hablar de las amenazas territoriales, sea en la investigación académica o en las intervenciones de los aliados del movimiento indígena. Sin embargo, los pueblos indígenas organizados han (re)inventado formas de defensa de sus vidas y territorios. Este proceso implica el diálogo, la discusión y el consenso en torno a soluciones frente a la crisis, las cuales implican la redefinición conceptual y el ejercicio de derechos colectivos como el del territorio o el de consulta previa. Así, vienen consolidándose sistemas y formas organizativas como las guardias indígenas y gobiernos territoriales autónomos. Por ese motivo, el objetivo del panel es llevar a primer plano las respuestas indígenas frente a las amenazas territoriales desde los aportes de la academia, la sociedad civil y los representantes indígenas a cargo de estas nuevas organizaciones. A través del intercambio entre los participantes, se plantea un proceso de cocreación de herramientas para el diálogo entre los pueblos, con la institucionalidad estatal y con la academia, que permitan reconocer rutas para un futuro que asegure la existencia de los pueblos indígenas amazónicos peruanos. 

Organizers

Marco Ramírez Colombier, [email protected]

Luis Martín Piccini Acuña, [email protected]  

Abstract

Las ontologías indígenas hablan de una inversión del espacio terrestre y el subacuático en la constitución del mundo. En particular, varias comunidades amazónicas mantienen intensas relaciones con las gentes sumergidas habitantes del río, con quienes generan estrechas relaciones interespecíficas de parentesco, convivialidad y predación. Estas redes se expanden formando múltiples territorialidades, constituidas por redes transdimensionales y transtemporales de lugares habitados. Tomamos como punto de partida el punto de vista kukama (del tronco tupí-guaraní), que identifica vínculos entre diversas categorías de gentes:  aves-gente, peces-gente, animales-gente, plantas-gente, espíritus-gente e incluso, máquinas- gente. Estas redes generan “fricciones” con el mundo humano en forma de acciones políticas, patrones de migración, transmisión de conocimientos, cartografías de lugares encantados y entidades metahumanas o contiendas jurídicas con el Estado, por la defensa de su territorialidad en contra de empresas extractivistas. En este panel se compartirán experiencias de puesta en práctica de relaciones metahumanas por parte de las gentes amazónicas como acciones políticas con el objetivo de afirmar sus condiciones de dueños, ejercer su territorialidad y consolidar su autodeterminación, en defensa de los medios de vida que los sustentan. Así hacen frente a procesos de violencia sistémica que los silencian y a modelos extractivistas que contaminan su hábitat. Asimismo, se expondrán narrativas indígenas en otros contextos geográficos donde pueden encontrarse vínculos semejantes. Cada exposición propondrá una historia sumergida, un concepto usado por el pueblo kukama para referirse a la reemergencia colectiva y la reconstitución de estos vínculos, en un contexto político contemporáneo. 

Domínio, histórias submersas e relações metahumanas na Amazônia e além 

As ontologias indígenas falam de uma inversão do espaço terrestre e subaquático na constituição do mundo. Em particular, várias comunidades amazônicas mantêm intensas relações com os povos submersos habitantes dos rios, com os quais geram estreitas relações inter-específicas de parentesco, convivialidade e predação. Essas redes se expandem formando múltiplas territorialidades, constituídas por redes transdimensionais e transtemporais de lugares habitados. Tomamos como ponto de partida o ponto de vista kukama (do tronco tupi-guarani), que identifica vínculos entre diversas categorias de pessoas: aves-pessoas, peixes-pessoas, animais-pessoas, plantas-pessoas, espíritos-pessoas e até mesmo, máquinas- pessoas. Essas redes geram “fricções” com o mundo humano na forma de ações políticas, padrões de migração, transmissão de conhecimentos, cartografias de lugares encantados e entidades metahumanas ou contendas jurídicas com o Estado, pela defesa de sua territorialidade contra empresas extrativistas. Neste painel, serão compartilhadas experiências de implementação de relações metahumanas por parte dos povos amazônicos como ações políticas com o objetivo de afirmar suas condições de proprietários, exercer sua territorialidade e consolidar sua autodeterminação, em defesa dos meios de vida que os sustentam. Assim, enfrentam processos de violência sistêmica que os silenciam e modelos extrativistas que contaminam seu habitat. Também serão expostas narrativas indígenas em outros contextos geográficos onde podem ser encontrados vínculos semelhantes. Cada apresentação proporá uma história submersa, um conceito usado pelo povo kukama para se referir ao reemergir coletivo e à reconstituição desses vínculos, em um contexto político contemporâneo. 

Ownership, Submerged Histories, and Metahuman Relations in Amazonia and Beyond 

Indigenous ontologies often describe an inversion of terrestrial and underwater spaces in the constitution of the world. Many Amazonian communities engage in intense relationships with submerged beings who inhabit the rivers, forging close interspecific ties of kinship, conviviality, and predation. These networks expand to form multiple territorialities, constituted by transdimensional and transtemporal networks of inhabited places. This panel takes as its starting point the Kukama perspective (from the Tupí-Guaraní linguistic family), which identifies connections between various categories of gentes (persons): bird-persons, fish-persons, animal-persons, plant-persons, spirit-persons, and even machine-persons. These networks produce frictions with the human world that take the form of political actions, migration patterns, knowledge transmission, mappings of enchanted places, encounters with metahuman entities, and legal disputes with the State to defend indigenous territories against extractivist industries. The panel will share experiences demonstrating how Amazonian peoples enact metahuman relationships as political actions to affirm their ownership, exercise their territoriality, and consolidate their self-determination in defense of their livelihoods. These efforts confront systemic violence that seeks to silence them and counteract extractive models that pollute their habitats. Additionally, the panel will highlight indigenous narratives from other geographical contexts where similar connections can be found. Each presentation will propose a “submerged history,” a concept used by the Kukama people to refer to the collective re-emergence and reconstruction of these ties within contemporary political contexts.