¹ Brian Harley, The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography (Baltimore, 2001), p. 163.

² Alba Moya, ETHNOS: Atlas etnográfico del Ecuador (Quito, 1998), back cover.

³ Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (2nd edition, London, 1991).

⁴ Harley, The New Nature of Maps.

⁵ ‘Multicultural’ here refers to reforms introduced by nation-states in efforts to recognise indigenous and black populations, often at the same time as neoliberal restructuring.

⁶ ‘Pluricultural’ refers to the characteristic of societies which contain numerous diverse cultural, ethnic and racial populations.

⁷ Quote from Roger Plant, ‘Indigenous Rights and Latin American Multiculturalism: Lessons from the Guatemalan Peace Process’, in Willem Assies, Gemma van der Haar and Andre Hoekema (eds.), The Challenge of Diversity: Indigenous Peoples and Reform of the State in Latin America (Amsterdam, 2001), p26; also Willem Assies, ‘Indigenous People and Reform of the State in Latin America’, in Assies et al. (eds.), The Challenge of Diversity, pp. 1–22; Rachel Sieder (ed.), Multiculturalism in Latin America: Indigenous Rights, Diversity and Democracy (London, 2002); Rodolfo Stavenhagen, ‘Indigenous Peoples and the State in Latin America: An Ongoing Debate’ in Sieder (ed.), Multiculturalism in Latin America, pp. 24–44; Nancy Grey Postero, Now We Are Citizens: Indigenous Politics in Postmulticultural Bolivia (Stanford, 2007).

⁸ Hale, Charles, ‘Does Multiculturalism Menace? Governance, Cultural Rights and the Politics of Identity in Guatemala’, Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 34 (2002), pp. 485–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hale, Charles, ‘Neoliberal Multiculturalism: The Remaking of Cultural Rights and Racial Dominance in Central America’, PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, vol. 28, no. 1 (2005), pp. 10–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sarah Radcliffe, Nina Laurie and Robert Andolina, ‘Development-with-Identity: Social Capital and Andean Culture’, in Robert Andolina, Nina Laurie and Sarah Radcliffe, Indigenous Development in the Andes: Culture, Power and Transnationalism (Durham NC, 2009).

⁹ Radcliffe, Sarah and Laurie, Nina, ‘Culture and Development: Taking Culture Seriously in Development for Andean Indigenous People’, Environment and Planning D, vol. 24 (2006), pp. 231–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰ ‘Plurinationalism’ refers here to the political argument for a recognition of the national status of indigenous populations, that is, their distinctiveness on the basis of territory, culture and history.

¹¹ Grey Postero, Now We Are Citizens; Shannon Speed, Rights in Rebellion: Indigenous Struggle and Human Rights in Chiapas (Stanford, 2008); Catherine Walsh, Interculturalidad, estado, sociedad: luchas (de)coloniales de nuestra época (Quito, 2009).

¹² Philip Corrigan and Derek Sayer, The Great Arch: English State Formation as Cultural Revolution (Oxford, 1985); Gilbert Joseph and Daniel Nugent (eds.), Everyday Forms of State Formation (London, 1994); de Sousa-Santos, Boaventura, ‘Una cartografía simbólica de las representaciones sociales: prolegómenos a una concepción posmoderna del derecho’, Nueva Sociedad, no. 116 (1991), pp. 18–38Google Scholar.

¹³ Offen, Karl, ‘The Territorial Turn: Making Black Territories in Pacific Colombia’, Journal of Latin American Geography, vol. 2, no. 1 (2003), pp. 43–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar, deals with mapping in development projects.

¹⁴ In Latin America the context for, and content of, multiculturalism's introduction into state formations varies by regime, the nature and scope of indigenous politics, and the international situation. See Deborah Yashar, Contesting Citizenship in Latin America: The Rise of Indigenous Movements and the Postliberal Challenge (Cambridge, 2005).

¹⁵ On the broader context for Ecuadorean maps, see Radcliffe, Sarah A., ‘National Maps, Digitalisation and Neoliberal Cartographies: Transforming Nation-State Practices and Symbols in Postcolonial Ecuador’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 34, no. 4 (2009), pp. 426–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ Michael Billig, Banal Nationalism (London, 1994).

¹⁷ Cartographic production related to the post-2008 Constitution is limited, hence this paper's focus on the 1998–2007 period.

¹⁸ Nacionalidades refer to ethno-cultural-linguistic populations (e.g. Shuar; Awa). Pueblos refer to culturally distinct sub-groups (e.g. Salasaka pueblo in Kichwa nacionalidad).

¹⁹ Yashar, Contesting Citizenship, defines the concept of citizenship regime.

²⁰ Jean-Paul Deler, Génese de l'espace equatorien: Essai sur le territoire et la formation de l'état national (Paris, 1981); Padrón, Ricardo, ‘Cumandá and the Cartographers: Nationalism and Form in Juan Leon Mera’, Annals of Scholarship, vol. 12, nos. 3 & 4 (1998), pp. 217–34Google Scholar; Sarah A. Radcliffe, ‘Imagining the State as a Space: Territoriality and the Formation of the State in Ecuador’, in Tomas Blom Hansen and Finn Stepputat (eds.), States of Imagination (London, 2001), pp. 123–45.

²¹ For example, Jaime Barberis Romero, Nociones generales de geopolítica (Quito, 1979); Julio Tobar Donoso, Derecho territorial ecuatoriano (Quito, 1979); Jaime Miranda Rebutti, Elementos de la cartografía básica (Quito, 1995); Luis Moreno Guerrero, Derecho territorial (Quito, 2004). For critical accounts, see Radcliffe, ‘Imagining the State as a Space’; Raymond Craib, Cartographic Mexico: A History of State Fixations and Fugitive Landscapes (London, 2004). David Hoosen (ed.), Geography and National Identity (Oxford, 1994) claims that Europe had the most intense coincidence of geography and nation-building in the nineteenth century, a view that displaces the co-constitutive role of Latin American geography. While the German state became a user of geography from 1870s, the Argentine Geographical Institute was established in 1879 (see Marcelo Escolar, S. Quintero and Carlos Rebarotti, ‘Geographical Identity and Patriotic Representation in Argentina’, in Hoosen (ed.), Geography and national identity, pp. 346–66), and Ecuador established the post of state geologist with considerable responsibility in cartography and spatial projects in 1870 (see Radcliffe, ‘Imagining the State as a Space’).

²² An Ecuadorean ‘national’ atlas is Nelson Gomez, Atlas del Ecuador: geografía y economía (Quito, 1990); compare Kent, Robert, ‘Homenaje a la patria: Latin American National Atlases’, Latin American Research Review, vol. 30, no. 1 (1995), pp. 256–65Google Scholar.

²³ State military geographers, for instance, provided maps for Ecuador's first census enumerators in 1950. See Clark, Kim, ‘Race, ‘Culture’ and Mestizaje: The Statistical Construction of the Ecuadorian Nation, 1930–1950’, Journal of Historical Sociology, vol. 11, no. 2 (1998), p. 195CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁴ J. Griesse, Ramón Ginestet, Julia Paffenholz and Bierte Thomsen, Entre panas y patas: la imagen de las relaciones peruano-ecuatorianas en los jóvenes (Quito, 2002); Carlos Malpica Faustor, Aspectos de la política educativa ecuatoriana contrarios a la cultura de la paz (Lima, 1997); Radcliffe, Sarah A., ‘Frontiers and Popular Nationhood: The 1995 Ecuador–Peru Border Dispute’, Political Geography, vol. 17, no. 3 (1998), pp. 273–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar. When the border conflict was resolved, national identity shifted away from the ‘wound’ of frontier disputes.

²⁵ Ronald Stutzman, ‘El mestizaje: An All-Inclusive Ideology of Exclusion’, in Norman Whitten (ed.), Cultural Transformations and Ethnicity in Modern Ecuador (Urbana, 1981), pp. 45–94; Erika Silva, Los mitos de la ecuatorianidad (2nd edition, Quito, 1995).

²⁶ For example, Paulo de Carvalho Neto, Geografía del folklore ecuatoriano (Quito, 1967). Critical accounts are Crain, Mary, ‘The Social Construction of National Identity in Highland Ecuador’, Anthropological Quarterly, vol. 63, no. 1 (1990), pp. 43–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Radcliffe, Sarah A., ‘Imaginative Geographies, Post-colonialism and National Identities: Contemporary Discourses of the Nation in Ecuador’, Ecumene, vol. 3, no. 1 (1996), pp. 21–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁷ Anderson, Imagined Communities; Sarah A. Radcliffe and Sallie Westwood, Remaking the Nation: Place, Politics and Identity in Latin America (London, 1996).

²⁸ Escolar et al., ‘Geographical Identity and Patriotic Representation in Argentina’, p. 352, argue that, in nineteenth-century Argentina, geography was perceived as a humanistic discipline that could ‘relate the political community with the cultural nation through the collective internalisation of a territorial identity’. See also Radcliffe and Westwood, Remaking the Nation; Radcliffe, ‘Imaginative Geographies.’

²⁹ Anderson, Imagined communities.

³⁰ Radcliffe, ‘National Maps, Digitalisation and Neoliberal Cartographies’.

³¹ Interviews, 2007.

³² Alberto Chirif P. García and R. Chase Smith, El indígena y su territorio (Lima, 1991).

³³ Walter Mignolo, The Idea of Latin America (Oxford, 2005), p. 157.

³⁴ Author's interview with Kurikamak Yupanki, lawyer, director of Fundación Tinku, Quito, July 2007.

³⁵ Craib, Cartographic Mexico, p. 23.

³⁶ Interview, Yupanki, 2007.

³⁷ Durán Ballen's government (1992–96) established a national indigenous affairs secretariat; the short-lived Abdula Bucarám presidency (1996–97) appointed CONAIE's leader to a new indigenous ministry. After Bucarám's departure, the indigenous movement's legitimacy carried CONAIE's demand for the creation of the indigenous development council. Afro-Ecuadoreans have an equivalent development council, the Corporación de Desarrollo Afroecuatoriano (CODAE) and statistical service, the Sistema de Indicadores Sociales del Pueblo Afroecuatoriano (System of Social Indicators for the Afro-Ecuadorean People, SISPAE).

³⁸ On institutional and professional changes, see Robert Andolina, Nina Laurie and Sarah A. Radcliffe, Indigenous Development in the Andes: Culture, Power and Transnationalism (Durham NC, 2009). On transnational notions of multiculturalism behind indigenous professionalisation, see Laurie, Nina, Andolina, Robert and Radcliffe, Sarah, ‘Indigenous Professionalization: Transnational Social Reproduction in the Andes’, Antipode, vol. 35, no. 3 (2003), pp. 463–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ Literally, the Development Council of the Nationalities and Peoples of Ecuador, but as it does not include Afro-Ecuadoreans it is usually referred to in English as the Indigenous Development Council.

⁴⁰ Research interview with Isidoro Quindé, CODENPE, Quito, April 2000. Also see www.codenpe.gov.ec/sidenpe.htm.

⁴¹ Research interview with Guillermo Churuchumbi of CODENPE, Quito, March 2000.

⁴² This project, the Proyecto de Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas y Negros del Ecuador (Development Project of the Indigenous and Black Peoples of Ecuador, PRODEPINE), became a model for similar projects elsewhere; see Offen, ‘The Territorial Turn.’

⁴³ Sarah A. Radcliffe and Nina Laurie, ‘Culture and Development: Taking Indigenous Culture Seriously in the Andes’; on PRODEPINE, see Robert Andolina et al., Indigenous Development in the Andes.

⁴⁴ Andolina et al, Indigenous Development in the Andes. Compare Hale, ‘Does Multiculturalism Menace?’, Grey Postero, Now We Are Citizens.

⁴⁵ The parish is Ecuador's smallest politico-administrative unit. Social capital was measured by the proxy of numbers of local civil society organisations, as used in World Bank social development programmes.

⁴⁶ Pilar Larreamendy, ‘Indigenous Networks: Politics and Development Interconnectivity among the Shuar in Ecuador’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge, 2003, p. 127; interview, Yupanki 2007.

⁴⁷ The PRODEPINE project contained two other mapping procedures, outside this paper's scope due to their local – rather than national – goals. First, land titling for indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorean groups required accurate topographic maps. This project component demonstrated strong continuities with earlier indigenous land-claim activities, although the scale of claims rose considerably. Some indigenous federations had cartographers, due to historical land claims, trained in global positioning systems (GPS) by the NGO FEPP or the German development agency GTZ. Claimants were asked to clear land boundaries of vegetation and put markers down between communities or along rivers. Project staff then confirmed and mapped the boundaries, using GPS to make detailed topographic diagrams. Through local knowledge, claimants were often accurate in estimating the number of hectares involved. A total of 253,000 hectares were identified and mapped for indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorean beneficiaries, mostly in the Andes. Additional information such as land yet to be titled and a time-series showing rates of land titling was collated centrally. PRODEPINE also generated maps using participatory methodologies to collate baseline data for local development plans. The indigenous development council welcomed participatory mapping as a forerunner of so-called ‘Andean community planning’ (interview with Galo Ramón, PRODEPINE Technical Director, Quito, April 2000).

⁴⁸ Herlihy, Peter and Knapp, Gregory, ‘Maps of, by and for the Peoples of Latin America’, Human Organization, vol. 62, no. 4 (2003), pp. 303–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Offen, ‘The Territorial Turn.’

⁴⁹ Lucy Santacruz, ‘La cartografía social como herramienta de investigación colectiva’. Presentation at workshop ‘El uso de la geografía en el Ecuador: logros, perspectivas y retos’ (Quito, April 2008).

⁵⁰ Larreamendy, ‘Indigenous Networks’, p. 127.

⁵¹ Anderson, Imagined Communities, p. 174.

⁵² On ethnic mapping before multiculturalism, see Gregory Knapp, ‘Ethnic mapping’, in Karl Offen and Jordana Dym (eds.), Mapping Latin America: Space and Society 1492–2000 (Chicago, forthcoming), and Gregory Knapp, Geografía quichua de la Sierra ecuatoriana (Quito, 1987).

⁵³ UNESCO, Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues: Sixth session. Information received from the United Nations System and Other Inter-governmental Organisations (Geneva, 2007); United Nations, System of Indicators for Nationalities and Pueblos of Ecuador, workshop on data collection and disaggregation for indigenous peoples (New York, January 2004).

⁵⁴ Guzmán, Mauricio Leon, ‘Etnicidad y exclusión en Ecuador: una mirada a partir del censo de población de 2001’, Iconos, no. 17 (2003), pp. 116–32Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ CODENPE's critiques are expressed in ‘Criterios para la definición de indicadores’, www.codenpe.gov.ec/sidenpe.htm, accessed 27 March 2008.

⁵⁶ On Ecuador's racialised geographies, see Mary Weismantel, Cholas and Pishtacos: Stories of Race and Sex in the Andes (Chicago, 2001), Radcliffe and Westwood, Remaking the Nation.

⁵⁷ United Nations, System of Indicators.

⁵⁸ The Ecuadorean debate is characterised by an engagement with interculturalism (see Catherine Walsh, Interculturalidad, estado, sociedad (Quito, 2009)), which in certain respects speaks to Bolivia's articulation of postmulticultural citizenship (Grey Postero, Now We Are Citizens). However, the relation between these two approaches, and their relationship with the demographic and political characteristics of each country, lie beyond the scope of this paper.

⁵⁹ Neil Smith and Cindi Katz, ‘Grounding Metaphor: Towards a Spatialised Politics’, in Michael Keith and Steven Pile (eds.), Place and the Politics of Identity (London, 1993), p. 78.

⁶⁰ Ecuador's state statistical service can be found at www.siise.gov.ec.

⁶¹ United Nations, System of Indicators, p. 3.

⁶² Interview with Jorge Condor, SIDENPE staff member, Quito, 2007.

⁶³ UNESCO, Permanent Forum, p. 12.

⁶⁴ United Nations, System of Indicators, p. 2.

⁶⁵ Interviews with Reinaldo Cervantes, SIISE Director, Quito, July 2007; and Condor, 2007.

⁶⁶ On the IGM, see Radcliffe and Westwood, Remaking the Nation, pp. 62–7; Radcliffe, ‘Imaginative Geographies’.

⁶⁷ On de-centring of military geographical knowledge-as-power, see Radcliffe, ‘National Maps, Digitalisation and Neoliberal Cartographies’.

⁶⁸ CODENPE [Consejo de Desarrollo de las Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador], SIDENPE – Sistema información del CODENPE. Accessed on www.codenpe.gov.ec/sidenpe.htm on 27 March 2008 (Quito, 2004), p. 5.

⁶⁹ CODENPE, SIDENPE, pp. 6–7.

⁷⁰ Interview, Condor, 2007.

⁷¹ Manuela Tomei, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: An Ethnic Audit of Selected Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (Geneva, 2005), p. 44.

⁷² Interview, Condor 2007.

⁷³ UNESCO, Permanent Forum, p. 12.

⁷⁴ Ibid., p. 27.

⁷⁵ CODENPE's department of communications has begun to work with census officials to prepare the 2011 census by devising a participatory process (interview, Andrés Andrango, Kitu Kara representative on CODENPE governing council, 2007). Afro-Ecuadoreans were also involved in this process via CODAE.

⁷⁶ For this reason, Latin American indigenous movements pursue new census maps, such as in Guatemala. In Bolivia, detailed information on populations defined in ethnic and linguistic terms was gathered in a geographical information system. See Xavier Albó and Ramiro Molina, Gama étnica y linguística de la población boliviana (La Paz, 2006).

⁷⁷ Neoliberal multiculturalism is also produced in university education and in professional training programmes. See Laurie et al., ‘Indigenous Professionalization’; Andolina et al., Indigenous Development in the Andes.

⁷⁸ On maps produced under mestizaje, see Crain, ‘The Social Construction of National Identity’; Radcliffe, ‘Imaginative Geographies’.

⁷⁹ From 1988, Ecuador's indigenous movement had autonomous responsibility for the intercultural bilingual education system. In 2009, Correa's government moved to recentralise the national educational system.

⁸⁰ This point and other substantive information (unless indicated otherwise) about Ecuarunari's map comes from the author's interview with Mario Bustos, editorial coordinator of the map, Quito, September 2007.

⁸¹ I acknowledge production of this map by the Departamento de Comunicación Intercultural of CODENPE, with coordination of Ana Lucía Tasiguano, design Wayra Coro, photos Departamento de Comunicación CODENPE, Ayañawi Films, 2008.

⁸² Compare Andrea Pequeño, Imágenes en disputa: representaciones de mujeres indígenas ecuatorianas (Quito, 2006), p. 56.

⁸³ ECUARUNARI, CONAIE, DINEIB, Plan, UNICEF, and the Spanish bilateral cooperation agency co-produced this map, under Mario Bustos' editorial coordination. CONAIE provided 16 images for the map.

⁸⁴ Mapmaking in this context represents an ongoing process of using different communication strategies to provide information, raise awareness and publicise ethnic marginalisation.

⁸⁵ Some people at the national workshop made additional drawings, but these were not included.

⁸⁶ See Gregory, Geographical Imaginations, p. 101–5, on spatialisation.

⁸⁷ Interview, Bustos, 2007.

⁸⁸ Ibid.

⁸⁹ Pequeño, Imágenes en disputa, p. 54.

⁹⁰ Hale, ‘Neoliberal Multiculturalism’.

⁹¹ Harley, The New Nature of Maps.

⁹² It also frames the (different reasons for) black erasure from multicultural maps, as these populations have less political leverage to shift dominant power relations.

⁹³ Harley, The New Nature of Maps, p. 158.

⁹⁴ Pequeño, Imágenes en disputa, p. 39.

⁹⁵ Ibid., p. 41.

⁹⁶ Interview, Bustos, 2007.

⁹⁷ Li, Tanya Murray, ‘Articulating Indigenous Identity in Indonesia: Resource Politics and the Tribal Slot’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 42, no. 1 (2000), pp. 151–3Google Scholar.

⁹⁸ Watts, Michael, ‘Development and Governmentality’, Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, vol. 24, no. 1 (2003), pp. 6–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar, speaks of governable spaces in terms of Nigeria's authoritarian government and petro-capitalism. In Ecuador, governable spaces are produced at the intersection of specific racialisations and neoliberal multiculturalism.

⁹⁹ For instance, a different CODENPE map of 2003 shows no physiological features; instead, faces are circles in orange, purple, black or pink. Although this hints at a plurinational imaginary, the power of whiteness/mestizaje remains unmarked.

¹⁰⁰ Interview, Bustos, 2007, 3.

¹⁰¹ Anderson, Imagined communities talks about maps anticipating nationhood.

¹⁰² CODENPE and SIDENPE created the 2003 map under Dmitri Oña's editorial coordination. Likewise, the 2001 CODENPE map ‘Nationalities and Pueblos of Ecuador’ lists 13 nationalities and 14 pueblos and states that ‘Ecuador is a multilingual and pluricultural country’, echoing the 1998 Constitution's opening foundational statement. Pequeño, Imágenes en disputa, pp. 47–8, discusses this map's gender politics.

¹⁰³ Moreover, SIDENPE's expertise in updating data reinvigorated demands for appropriate census methodologies.

¹⁰⁴ See Craib, Cartographic Mexico.

¹⁰⁵ See, e.g., Pequeño, Imágenes en disputa.

¹⁰⁶ Interview, Bustos, 2007.

¹⁰⁷ For example, the CODENPE map (Figure 3) uses stylised drawings of un-paired male and female figures placed around the map, each with a different type of clothing (thereby breaking gender's association with clothing, and essentialised ethnic identities).

¹⁰⁸ Interview with Luis Maldonado by Daniel Mato, Quito, Ecuador, 30 July 2003, http://gp.cnti.ve/site/red.org.ve/view/entrevistamaldonado.php, accessed 4 July 2008.

¹⁰⁹ The pueblo Kitu Kara, for instance, lives in both rural and urban areas.

¹¹⁰ An ECUARUNARI initiative in the early 2000s attempted to reverse this (interview, Andrango, 2007).

¹¹¹ Harley, The New Nature of Maps, pp. 154–6.

¹¹² This relates also to the international principles, rules and conventions for establishing the grid and coordinates for a map. Even Ecuador's highly politicised cartographic productions for schools and the public rest upon these conventions.

¹¹³ Jorge Phillips, Sistema de inventario y titulación de tierras de INDA (Quito, 1998); Radcliffe, ‘National Maps, Digitalisation and Neoliberal Cartographies’.

¹¹⁴ Interview with Hernán Velásquez, Director of Geographical Information Systems, Ministry of Agriculture, Quito, September 2007.

¹¹⁵ CODENPE, SIDENPE, p. 5.

¹¹⁶ One key influence on these participatory methods comprises the so-called mapas parlantes that originated with Paulo Freire's popular education before being adapted by Fals Borda in Colombia during the 1970s. See Santacruz, ‘La cartografía social’.

¹¹⁷ Peter Herlihy and Gregory Knapp, ‘Maps of, by and for the Peoples of Latin America’.

¹¹⁸ Pratt, Geraldine, ‘Spatial Metaphors and Speaking Positions’, Environment and Planning D, vol. 10, no. 3 (1992), pp. 241–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neil Smith and Cindi Katz, ‘Grounding Metaphor’.

¹¹⁹ Hale, ‘Does Multiculturalism Menace?’, p. 487; Sieder, Multiculturalism, p. 1; Assies, The Challenge of Diversity, p. 19.

¹²⁰ Hale, ‘Does Multiculturalism Menace?’, and ‘Neoliberal Multiculturalism’.

¹²¹ Hale, ‘Neoliberal Multiculturalism’, pp. 11, 20–4.

¹²² Matthew Sparke, In the Space of Theory (London, 2005).

¹²³ Also Andolina, Robert, Radcliffe, Sarah and Laurie, Nina, ‘Development and Culture: Transnational Identity Making in Latin America’, Political Geography, vol. 24, no. 6 (2005), pp. 678–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Joel Wainwright, Decolonizing Development: Colonial Power and the Maya (Oxford, 2008).

¹²⁴ On historic dimensions, see Juan Regalado, ‘Contenidos del dominio geográfico en Ecuador durante el siglo XIX: un ensayo interpretativo’, paper presented at 1st Ecuadorian Anthropology Congress (Quito, October 1996); Margarita Serje, El revés de la nación: territorios salvajes, fronteras y tierras de nadie (Bogotá, 2005).

¹²⁵ See Scott, David, ‘The Aftermaths of Sovereignty: Postcolonial Criticism and the Claims of Political Modernity’, Social Text, vol. 48, no. 3 (1996), pp. 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.