Indigeneity and extractivism in Bolivia

Abstract

This thesis explores the main challenges associated with the inclusion of indigenous peoples in processes of natural resource extraction. With a predominant focus on the indigenous population on the one hand, and state formation and natural resource governance on the other, I argue that the Bolivian society is structured to include some peoples and exclude others. My findings suggest that the Morales administration struggles to overcome enduring structures of inequality that were created by colonialism – even under the current indigenous discourse in which ‘ethnic politics’ has become “mainstream”. Therefore, unresolved tensions persist – over what it means to be indigenous as well as over how to effectively include the indigenous population in processes of natural resource extraction. Whilst the Bolivian state has expanded the country’s extractive industries on the basis of economic necessity, indigenous peoples in the country argue that their expansion conflicts with respect for Mother Earth and the environment. As I discover through my field research, many indigenous representatives and their supporters consider further capitalization of the economy and ‘ethnic politics’ as incompatible. The state lacks institutional control in its hydrocarbon sector. This has stimulated large-scale corruption that strengthens inequality amongst and between indigenous peoples and the state, and fuels unequal power relations. Indeed, as I argue drawing upon Karl (2007), the absence of a ‘fiscal social contract’ further weakens the state’s legitimacy vis-à-vis its indigenous population. Whilst the role of indigenous peoples in natural resource governance is formally strengthened through further constitutional support for rights to prior consultation, the legal regulatory framework in which these right are exercised, give rise to a set of unintended consequences. Poor procedural activity and lack of due processes hampers indigenous peoples capacity to effectively participate in natural resource governance. I therefore conclude that, despite formal advances in cultural recognition and political representation, indigenous peoples’ participatory power and role in natural resource governance is still severely limited.