Whose Diversity Counts? The Politics and Paradoxes of Modern Diversity

• Main Authors: Lauren Baker, Michael Dove, Dana Graef, Alder Keleman, David Kneas, Sarah Osterhoudt, Jeffrey Stoike
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2013-06-01
• Series: Sustainability
• Subjects: diversity; modernity; purity; hybridity; mapping; scientific authority; climate change; indigenous languages; political ecology
• Online Access: http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/6/2495

Is “diversity” a modern concept, like indigeneity or biodiversity, which is conceived precisely at the time that it seems to be threatened and on the verge of disappearing? In the face of perceived threats to diversity, projects and policies have been crafted to protect, promote, or conserve diversity, but in doing so they have often demonstrated a paradoxical propensity toward purity and authority in representations of diversity. Perceptions of “pure” natural diversity might represent native forests comprised solely of native species; “pure” cultural diversity might represent indigenous peoples who still speak indigenous languages and wear native dress. If purity is emblematic of diversity, what, then, is the place of hybrid landscapes and peoples? In our study, we draw on a range of examples—of agrobiodiversity conservation in Bolivia, satellite mapping initiatives in Madagascar and Ecuador, scientific authority about anthropogenic climate change, indigenous language and identity in Peru, and a comparison of the Amazon and Atlantic Forest in Brazil—to demonstrate gaps between representations of diversity, and the heterogeneous local realities they obscure. We suggest that hybridity is a form of diversity unto itself—albeit a form of diversity that is more complex, and thus harder to codify and categorize.