MappingBack was born in October 2017 with the organization of a three-day workshop in Montreal. This workshop brought together 35 participants from three communities of interest into a collective exchange over the place and possibilities of mapping in indigenous‐extractives conflicts: The first were representatives and members of First Nations with an engagement with, and interest in, the representation of territory; the second were cartographers, both researchers and practitioners; and the third community was made of university-based researchers with expertise on extractivism.
Together these participants inquired into forms of cartographic expressions that can represent the multiple issues, perceptions, meanings, histories, and emotions that are at stake when industrial extraction enters Indigenous territories. They also explored how maps could be used for purposes of resistance and resurgence, including for education, historical memory, and ancestral knowledge and oral histories, assertions of territorial rights, community visioning and life-plans, and decision-making.
Members were Aldegundo Gonzalez Alvarez, Amanda, deGray, Anja Novkovic, Annie Lalancette, Annita Lucchesi, Anthony, Georgekish, Benoit Ethier, Brian Thom, Christian Coocoo, Daviken Studnicki-Gizbert, Denis Wood, Emory Shaw, Genevieve Reid, Gerald Ottawa, Iokiñe Rodriguez, Darrin Jensin, José Alavez, Josie Auger, Justine Gagnon, Leah Temper, Lena Weber, Mace Marion, Melanie Chaplier, Miguel Melin Pehuen, Molly Roy, Nafisa Sarwath, Pablo Mansilla Quiñones, Pedro Nola Flores, Philip Rekacewicz, Sébastien Caquard, Steve DeRoy, Tom McGurk, and Tracey Osborne Steering Committee Members: Annita Lucchesi, Daviken Studnicki-Gizbert, Leah Temper, Sébastien Caquard, and Tom McGurk and Heather Elliott.
The goal of the workshop was (1) to begin building a nucleus of cartographers, researchers, and communities interested in working together on developing new forms of spatial expression dedicated to embodying and expressing Indigenous perspectives about places; and (2) to serve as a launching pad for creating a network through which Indigenous communities and accomplices could either share their experiences and expertise related to mapping resource conflicts or could access experiences, stories, and mapping tactics developed by others to fight back against extractive industries.
Mapping has long been used as a tool for colonial dispossession; MappingBack seeks to reverse this by using mapping as a tool to fight back. Our understanding of extractivism was extensive and ranged from forms of natural resource extraction to the systemic extraction of living entities, such as human beings, animals, and plants, from Indigenous territories. Our understanding of mapping capacity and support was also broad and was directly dependent on the skills of the members of this work. At the time, these skills included Indigenous ways of mapping, geospatial technologies (e.g., Geographic Information Systems, satellite images analysis), web design, participatory mapping experience, and the organization of alternative mapping workshops.
The issues to be addressed
First Nations, cartographers and university researchers were invited to work together for addressing three main issues: (1) the different dimensions of extractivism and the dynamics and conflicts that unfold in the fields of culture, ontology, temporality, ecology, health, and economics when extraction invades a homeland; (2) the representational strategies and languages that express indigenous spatial world-views, narratives and symbolic meanings attached to contested territories and; (3) the social process through which these spatial histories and memories were shared, co-created and on the life of the maps presented, including tensions and synergies identified in the process of co-production.
The methodology and structure of the workshop to address these issues
To address the issues described above, the workshop was organized in two parts of one and a half day each. During the first half the participants presented issues, needs and possible solutions related to the mapping of extractive conflicts on indigenous homelands. This first part enabled participants to lay out different aspects of the issues at stake as well as to present their own needs and potential solutions to address them. This first part also enabled the participants to start to know each other in preparation to the second part of the workshop.
The second half of the workshop consisted of a collaborative exercise (termed a charrette borrowing from design language) in which six teams of First Nations representatives, cartographers and researcher-activists worked together to produce a set of sketch maps on different issues and projects identified prior to the workshop in collaboration with the participants. In preparation to the workshop each participant was invited to submit a short mapping proposal focusing either on a specific extractive project, a specific territory/area, or a more general question about representation/ mapping related to the main themes of indigenous territories and extractives. In this proposal, the participants were also invited to reflect on the potential audience and use of the map they would like to see created and, on the data, and materials needed to create them (e.g. paper, clay, paints, computer program). We received 10 proposals that we reorganized into six topics:
1. Mapping issues related to water and fluidity (Can we think cartographically like water?) applied the Mapuche territory (Chile).
2. Mapping overlapping territories and administrative structures and how they evolve over time applied to the Atikamekw territory (Canada).
3. Mapping the story of resistance against mining at multiple times and scales and from different perspectives and places applied to the Ngobé (XX) and Bugle (XX) territories.
4. Mapping extractives flows of resources and money in relation to ancestral territories applied to the Maseual (Mexico) and Pemon (Venezuela) territories.
5. Mapping stories of oil extraction in relation to climate justice.
6. Mapping time according to first nation concepts of time applied to Eeyou Istchee (Wemindji, Canada) and Dene (Canada) territories.
The outcomes of the Workshop
Sketch Maps
A first material outcome from the workshop was the production of sketch maps and of the process of their production. We firmly believe that the process is as important as the outcome in Indigenous mapping. In fact, the process cannot be dissociated from the outcome. This combination - spatial expression/mapping process description - is a fundamental dimension of this project since it enables Indigenous communities to express their unique relationships to the land in non-conventional cartographic forms, while explaining the meaning of these spatial expressions beyond their cultural environment. Each group was asked to document its process and to reflect on it and on the potential life of the maps created.
Mapping outcome and process of Group 2.
Authors: B. Thom, M. Chaplier, G. Ottawa, S. Caquard, B. Éthier et E. Shaw.
Based on a presentation of the Atikamekw situation, we collectively identified two main objectives that could be achieved through mapping: (1) to gain recognition for family and interfamily political structures on Atikamekw territory, and (2) to raise public awareness of the multiplicity of administrative layers and the impact this has on maintaining ancestral activities. To achieve these two objectives, we produced two maps.
The first map (TOP) shows the intertwined territorial regimes on the Atikamekw territory. It is a map drawn on paper and tracing paper with felt pens and colored pencils. It features successive layers that overlap to represent the main stages in the fragmentation of the territory from the pre-contact period to today's vacation leases. The layers are based on existing maps, but do not represent exact information (rather a schematization of this information). In the end, this map represents more of a sketch, a draft, an intention, rather than a finished document.
The second map represents the Atikamekw lands and territorial relations using Google Earth. The map begins with the territorial indication for the Communauté Atikamekw superimposed with the territories of the three main contemporary communities. These clan territories are self-defined through a series of maps previously prepared by the Atikamekw Nation. We became concerned about how while family hunting territories fully occupy Atikamekw spaces, they also are a visual representation that divides, which separate families who are deeply connected. We next represent les lieux de rassemblement – major camps where families would gather prior to striking out across the lands to their territories. Wanting to complicate the bordered territories further, we created a lary of Atikamekw oteno – landmarks of major cultural significance to Atikamekw peoples, whose stories and histories famously relate. Finally, we worked to imbue the landscape with the language of the Atikamekw peoples, pulling together data based on the remarkable indigenous place names inventories the community has been collecting for several decades. Our map worked to assert indigenous territory, jurisdiction, and land title. It works to recognize Atikamekw peoples as having inherent rights as indigenous peoples in their lands. It grapples with Atikamekw social orders in their own terms (indeed much time was spent talking about kindship systems and social structures, in order to help inform representational decisions behind the maps). It complicates state defined notions like « Band Membership » and « Indian Status », through emplacing Atikamekw Nationhood and social orders into cartographic space completely outside Indian Reserve lands. The map works to transcend scale – from Nation to clan to family to individuals whose lives and memories and itineraries are embodied in the places represented in the map.
Mapping outcome of Group 6 “Five Years Gone: Impacts from extractive developments on Indigenous land use activities”.
Authors: Steve DeRoy, Amanda Degray, Anthony Georgekish, Anja Novkovic, Geneviève Reid, and Philippe Rekacewicz.
“This project explored the concept of time and how to represent it. We examined conventional mapping approaches and chose to take a non-western approach using a 3-dimentional model (...).
As a team, we discussed various ways to visualize the information. (...) One of the concepts was a spiral diagram along a timeline. We drew concept diagrams on paper, and then built a mock 3-dimensional map. The 3D mock-up model was used to guide the final design of the map.
Based on the conceptual design and the considerations previously mentioned, we chose to show a yearly cycle of land use activities at the community level. The community cycle of activities was sourced from The Six Seasons of the Woodland Cree: A Lesson to Support Science 10 . Based on the length of the spiral design, we could fit 5 years of community activities. We used icons sourced from the Ethnographic Mapping Lab at the University of Victoria’s Indigenous mapping icons
We wanted to reflect industrial development along the spiral design using black labels to show when those developments had an effect on the community use activities. These black labels would shoot out from the spiral design to indicate an impact. The icons for the industrial activities were sourced from the Gerd Arntz web archive
Within the first year, we chose to show a full-set of community use activities with no industrial activities. As each year passes, industrial activities would be added, resulting in a decrease of community use activities. By the fifth year, there would be few community use activities to show how the industrial developments had a direct effect.
On the surface of the map, we chose to show the cycle of community use activities. We also wanted to show what the industrial activities look like using 3-dimensional images. The map required a title and credits to provide the map reader an understanding of what they were looking at. (....)
The physical map was an excellent opportunity to model out temporality. A logical next step would be to test this model in a digital format that allowed for interaction with the map elements. This way it gives the map-reader the ability to click on each of the elements to learn more about Indigenous land use and industrial activities. Another next step would be to evaluate this approach with Indigenous communities to determine whether this visualization is appropriate.”
https://www.stf.sk.ca/sites/default/files/unit-plans/s106_22.pdf
https://www.uvic.ca/socialsciences/ethnographicmapping/resources/indigenous-mapping-icons/index.php
Dimensions, Representations and Processes
Beyond the physical outputs and the networks made during the meeting, we began initial discussions on the creation of new cartographic languages that may emerge from such a project. While initial, in this section we share some insights along the three main axis we identified initially – Dimensions of extractivism; Representational strategies and Processes.
Dimensions of Extractivism – from territories to bodies
A further outcome of this workshop was to identify the multiple extractive dimensions to which Indigenous territories and communities have been exposed. These dimensions include obviously the mineral resources provided by the earth, as well as the energetic, vegetal, animal, human and cultural resources available in these communities. While initially the project envisioned extractivism in relatively narrow terms in relation to the extraction of natural resources from the territory, the workshop made evident the need for a broader conceptualization of extractivism and extractivist violence, one that stresses the links between colonialism, capitalism, exploitation, extraction and violence against indigenous bodies, particularly those of women. Feminist and indigenous scholars in Latin America under the banner Territorio y Feminismos have been creating resources and networks on this understanding of the body as the first territory impacted by extractivism, underlining the importance of sensory experiences, memories and the corporeal in understanding and resisting. Across both North and South America, the violence against the land with is mirrored by violence against the people. Of note is co-author Annita Luchessi’s work documenting missing and murdered women (Lucchesi 2016). While on the Bakken oil field in the Northern Plains, oil extraction and pipeline construction has had devastating impacts environmentally, while simultaneously increasing rates of racialized violence against Indigenous women and children. Within this broader understanding, the prison system can also be viewed as a type of extractivism, where bodies are extracted from the territory for labour. Thus extractivism can be conceived as dispossession and exploitation of bodies from the territory of people who are often literally planted in the soil with their placentas marking their home; but also as the extraction of the territorial body itself as in indigenous cosmo-visions the territory is also embodied and conceived to have head, legs and arms but also emotions.
Finally, we also discussed how the creation of maps can give rise to other forms of extractivism including the commercialization of culture, tourism, and academic extractivism.
Representation – Cyclical time and non-linear space
“The creation of this atlas is important in that it not only goes back in time, to today, but also identifies our relationship to the cosmos as more than just two dimensional – it connects us to the sun, the moon, the stars, and our relationship to these and to other elements of the sky, the earth, plants, animals…so we can provide together with our allies a better future for our children and those unborn.”
A major discussion in the workshop was how to map according to indigenous notions of time and space. In particular we discussed the need to move away from representations based on linear conventions and how to represent indigenous epistemologies of time. The demarcation of lines within cartographic conventions was understood to divide and conquer the land, enabling capitalist control and the ownership and transmission of property. In contrast, indigenous perspectives of territory need to make space for overlap, for fading, shades of grey. Rather than black lines on white dividing territories, what type of map can do away with lines, showing how territories may merge or flow together. For example, in the Mapuche conceptualization and language, the word border does not represent separation, but rather signifies a place of meeting and articulation -- a place where the territories join, where transit is permitted, where livestock roam, where relations with families take place.
“Settler notions of time tell us something happened long ago and it’s over, but we know this is not true because legacies remain, and these are not trapped in time because descendents still live this every day.”
A second representational challenge highlighted was how to represent time. This includes the challenge of representing and reconciling the compressed accelerated time of capitalist extraction and investment and the slow continuous histories and relationships of indigenous peoples with their lands. And yet we discussed how the cyclical nature of time represented by the seasons, conveyed by the charrette exercise “Five Years Gone” is echoed by the understanding that extractive incursions are also cyclical, and thus there is urgency but also the understanding of having withstood territorial threats since Colombian times in many cases. This highlights the need to continue doing the important (cultural) work, even if it’s slow you make gains.
Maps as restorative and mappers as caretakers of stories
“These maps are not about creating comprehensive history that speaks for everyone, impossible, but instead a way for us to connect with our own stories and histories.”
Maps have diverse audiences which may include 1. for indigenous groups themselves 2. For storytelling to people outside 3. As a tool to help outside organisations, NGOs etc and 4. For courts and legal official purposes. Each map will be geared and fit for its purpose. What emerged from MappingBack was the importance of maps as a means for indigenous peoples to connect with their own stories and histories and how this process of reconnection can serve as a restorative and healing process. We asked questions such as “How can ceremonies be revitalized through maps? How can fears of persecution be dispelled and pride be restored and trust regained?” Participants spoke of healing occurring particularly though reconnecting youth with elders as a way to hear their own histories through protagonists and as such to reclaim their own identity and rebuild nationhood and belonging.
Data management practices informed by indigenous epistemologies, mean not every story is available for everyone to tell or keep. That is a responsibility. So stories are shared with you for a specific purpose and you have responsibility to take care of that story. Keeping that teaching in mind when looking at how we care for our data that basic concept applies. Being a caretaker of information implies attention to the risks inherent in sharing data, who is governing the data, what are policies and procedures to access this, and what levels of data are shared. Further counter to common cartographic expressions which demand a map to be legible in minutes, not all layers or elements of a map may be legible to all audiences. Some symbols may only be recognizable to members of one community.Thus the maps can be layered and the understanding depends on map reader, and part of the decision in this process is what kind of reader you are going to privilege in how easy it is to read? Implicit decision I made is this expectation that maps should be easy to read, connected to colonial process and how maps have been used, and part of larger straight white male entitlement in academia that things should be all easy to understand all the time and come easily to them…so this interrupts this power dynamic to say no, this is legible to you but not made for you, you will have to put energy into understanding this.
During the Indigenous Mapping Workshop 2018 in Montreal, Quebec, the MappingBack collective hosted a total of eight training sessions: six during the first three days dedicated to producing collaborative maps, and two on the fourth and final day organized as an exhibit of the maps produced earlier in the week.
During the production sessions, participants were invited to think about how they see their territory and to work with pencils, paper, painting, fabric, clay, scissors, computers, and any other material to create maps that reflect their visions. The creation of these maps was facilitated by Indigenous and non-indigenous mapmakers with experience in alternative forms of cartography. The overall goal of these sessions was to expose participants to the endless possibilities of representing territories, stories, and epistemologies differently, and to promote the development of spatial representations that emerge from members of Indigenous communities.
Overall, seven maps were produced
The Petal Map. Produced by: Brent Denniston, Mary Denniston, Laura Shillington, Sejal Lal, Serrena Francis, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi, Sebastien Caquard, Tom McGurk.
Unraveling the Colonial Fabric. Produced by: Marina Huzenga, Sophie Sliwa, Jean-Luc Fournier, Anna Sanchez, Lisa M. Arsenault, Catriona Popoff, Genevieve Sioui, Sebastien Caquard, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi.
The Paradox of Roads
Produced by: Paige Isaac, Kaitlin Young, Elaine Stone, Neomi Jayatne, Ambe Chenemu, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi
The process for this map arose out of discussions surrounding roadways. Roads present a unique challenge for many rural communities, including First Nations. Roads allow for the movement of people and are often the lifeline of remote communities. Paradoxically, while allowing services to be extended into these communities, they offer access to unwelcome visitors. The map emerged out of all of our stories surrounding experiences with rural and remote roads- each of us explaining different interactions, experiences, and worldviews based on our positionality. These varying subject-positions allow us to see through different lenses offered on the map. Look through the glasses or monocle to see the landscape transformed by the colonial gaze.
Water refuses to hold your secrets
Produced by: Kim-Ly Thompson, Leena Minifie, Nicholas Cuba, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi, and others.
This is an interactive map, encouraging the map reader to peer through a sparkle-infused pond to break through colonial constructs and allow Water to reveal the secrets that she carries. This map emerged from a discussion around how crimes are often attempted to be hidden in waterways. Violence to Indigenous bodies is buried in Water. But Water refuses to hold these secrets and stories were shared as to how Water has acted as an accomplice in the search for justice. In this case, the base layer of the map shows an underwater world with the word Water written in twelve Indigenous languages, revealing Water to be an active being with agency and in relationship with us.
The design of this scenario made us think of the territory as a game board in which the goal is to manage large chunks of territory to sequester many tons of carbon. Players have to deal with all kinds of issues such as new governmental regulations, natural disasters, Indigenous resistance, social acceptability, and carbon value fluctuation. They have to be strategic in buying and selling forested concessions and carbon offsets. The winner is the one who generates the maximum profits. This is a game that should appeal to the entire family since it conveys positive environmental values and helps develop business skills.
Whose Land is it Anyway?
Produced by: Charlotte Adams, Kaitlin Kok, Melissa Castron, Tom McGurk, Mary Kate Craig, Sebastien Caquard.
The design of this map started with a conversation about the increasing importance of carbon offset and its forthcoming consequences on Indigenous communities. On the one hand, this can be seen as new opportunities for communities by enabling them to be in charge of managing forestry to sequester carbon in a traditional way (and to earn some money for this). But the likelihood of this happening is not very high, since most communities don’t have territorial rights to make this happen. Therefore, it is highly possible that big companies – that are often a large part of the problem when it comes to producing greenhouse gas emissions – might obtain concessions to manage large chunks of forested areas based on their own productivist agendas, while in the process being paid to do this. For instance, large oil companies could invest in large monoculture forestry management, which would enable them to generate new “green” profits by planting trees to sequester the CO2 largely produced by their extractive activities.
This scenario made us think of the territory as a game board in which the goal is to manage large chunks of territory to sequester many tons of carbon. Players have to deal with all kinds of issues such as new governmental regulations, natural disasters, Indigenous resistance, social acceptability, and carbon value fluctuation. They have to be strategic in buying and selling forested concessions and carbon offsets. The winner is the one who generates the maximum profits. This is a game that should appeal to the entire family since it conveys positive environmental values and helps develop business skills.
Renaming the Le Westin
Produced by: John Bishop, Tara Rush, Jen Castro, Annita Lucchesi, Sebastien Caquard, Tom McGurk.
Renaming Le Westin was inspired by the work of Ogimaa Mikana: Reclaiming/Renaming Project out of Toronto, an effort to restore Anishinaabemowin place names to the streets, avenues, roads, paths, and trials of Gichi Kiiwenging (Toronto) in order to transform a landscape that often obscures or makes invisible the presence of Indigenous peoples.
The process of creating this map grew out of discussions about place names. During the brainstorming and discussion portion of the charrette process, the topic of modern places being given Indigenous names came up. The concept of renaming commercial and other locations of popular western culture with Indigenous names was talked about in detail. For example, Wal-Mart being renamed as or “the place where you buy things” in the language.
Produced by: Kim-Ly Thompson, Leena Minifie, Nicholas Cuba, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi, and others.
Building on this premise, the group decided to rename the spaces of the conference host hotel (Le Westin). The group members created new signage for various locations on the 8th floor and without permission pasted over the existing signs then waited to see what would happen.
Would people notice?
Would the signage be removed by the hotel?
Would others make new signs as well?
The new signs were undisturbed and in place the after day the renaming occurred. A presenter from the Mappingback group during the morning lecture session on the following day informed the rest of the conference attendees about the mapping and invited everyone to participate by renaming various elements of Le Westin.
Forms of Displacement
Produced by: Colleen Hele Cardinal, John McLean, Heather Elliott, Annita Lucchesi, Josee-Anne Langlois, Genessa Bates.
With a shared interest in mapping social issues in Indigenous communities, a small group of us gathered to share ideas and receive feedback. In our group discussion, we found that many of us, particularly the Indigenous group members, were interested in mapping similar or shared stories of violence. For example, one group member wished to make a map addressing the stories of child removal during the 60s Scoop. Another was interested in mapping the continued internal displacement of Indigenous peoples due to the 2011 Winnipeg flood. A third theme emerged around how to map the stories of missing and murdered Indigenous women. We felt that these issues were all tied together as part of the same story, so we chose to create a collaborative map addressing the larger issue — displacement of Indigenous people due to past and present colonialism.
In thinking about how to represent all these seemingly disparate forms of land-based violence on the same map, we were drawn to representing this narrative through the use of water imagery. Like water, people can be removed from their environment, but also restored and brought home. We chose to create a series of raindrops cut from old maps, each with a different story of violence written on it. These raindrops flow into a copper bucket, which is used in certain ceremonies to cleanse water and bring healing. Just as the bucket cleanses the water in the raindrops, it offers up the possibility of healing the trauma of the displacements that have occurred in our communities.
In order to engage other community members in dialogue on displacement, we decided to include a cup with blank map raindrops so that they too can write down their own experiences of displacement and loss and offer them up to healing. We hope to encourage our relatives to embark on their own healing journeys.
What does mapping mean for Indigenous communities today? What are the main objectives of Indigenous mapping projects? What are the influences of ancestral spatial knowledge and Western colonization in these spatial expressions? Overall, what roles maps and mapping play in contexts of education (of communities, of outside publics) as well as in social and legal contexts? These are some of the questions that have inspired the Mapping Back collective to create a Web Series showcasing the diverse work of Indigenous communities, activists, artists, and scholars within the CICADA and MappingBack networks involved in Indigenous mapping.
Episode 1
To kick us off, a team from el Resguardo Canamomo Lomaprieta (Colombia) will explain how they are designing and implementing their own geographic information system (GIS) for the protection and recovery of the Canamomo Lomaprieta Indigenous Reserve. Their goal is to guarantee access to cartographic information of the territory by and for Indigenous people for management, administration, follow-up and monitoring decisions.
Episode 2
In this second video, members of the Indigenous community San Andres de Negritos in Cajamarca, Peru explain how they are responding to Yanacocha, South America’s largest gold mine, as it attempts to take their land and threaten their livelihood and jurisdiction.