UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Can direct democracy deliver an alternative to extractivism? An essay on popular consultations

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102715

Auteurs

Nicolás Acosta García

Année déclarée

2022

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.599116+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:05:51.631343+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

University of Gothenburg

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

SE

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Between 2013 and 2018, ten different municipalities in Colombia held popular consultations in which people were asked to decide whether they wanted or not extractive industries in their territory. Promoted and articulated by environmental movements for the defence of water resources and local livelihoods, popular consultations led to surprising alliances of traditionally opposed actors, that found their interests temporarily aligned in opposition to resource extraction. In all of the ten popular consultations people voted massively against allowing the industry to enter. Through the defunding of the popular consultations and through a series of legal challenges, the government rushed to stop an additional 54 votes from happening that threatened to derail its finances and model of development. In this essay, I identify three main boundaries in the literature concerning popular consultations: between what counts as legal and legitimate, between the centre and the periphery as loci of political power, and between people and nature as bearers of rights. By providing an analysis of the absent elements of the political and academic discourse, I argue that popular consultations as spaces of experimental autonomous activity have the potential to engender alternatives to extractivist development. Hence, building on the notion of ‘resource sovereignty’ and contemporary discussions on autonomy as a prefigurative force, I reconfigure the three boundaries into a theoretical framework to guide research and political action for alternative post-extractivist futures.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W4285725500

DOI

10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102715

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Territoire

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102715
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4285725500

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1552262866 · CITES
• openalex:w1567172554 · CITES
• openalex:w1567806376 · CITES
• openalex:w1599865963 · CITES
• openalex:w1601641141 · CITES
• openalex:w1703703970 · CITES
• openalex:w1981605984 · CITES
• openalex:w2009985411 · CITES
• openalex:w2011341528 · CITES
• openalex:w2020757221 · CITES
• openalex:w2029157077 · CITES
• openalex:w2035675634 · CITES
• openalex:w2048025431 · CITES
• openalex:w2055569723 · CITES
• openalex:w2061680095 · CITES
• openalex:w2079541039 · CITES
• openalex:w2126644472 · CITES
• openalex:w2140694930 · CITES
• openalex:w2146449178 · CITES
• openalex:w2158499134 · CITES

1 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.