Abstract
The border represents the transitional zone of demarcation where places and nations begin and end. Prominence of the eternal truth coexists with the fuzziness of cultures and nature. Border studies have not taken into account the ecological content of the border that enables the fuzziness to give its content. This chapter attempts to reframe the idea of border by bringing in the ecological dimension and critiques both the Westphalian Border perspective and Empire Logic of Border. The border formation is a complex process that does not always involve sovereign. People themselves construct boundaries around them and within selves. In this connection, border is conceptualised as “ecologic” border (bhitamati in vernacular language) as a lived, rather than a constructed place dominated by power relations, that involves a complex interaction of social and environmental milieu of material and cultural life. Examining the lived experiences of the Munda tribe of Kalinganagar, the chapter further argues that border is not always a political artifice constructed to segregate, classify and control people, rather it is a social fact of life embedded within selves and collective memory of a community. The “memorate knowledge” – an assortment of social and symbolic goods – associated with the ecologic border embeds affective memories to place and the environment surrounding it. Increasing industrialisation after the initialisation of the process of globalisation has structurally ruptured the organic link of self with environment by displacing the community from its everyday borderlands. The tribes got deterritorialised from the embedded place, at times through voluntary movement and other times by forceful eviction, into a new “culturescape” where the erstwhile labouring population became part of the footloose labour and of the “lower class sector” of the new political economy evolving here.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Though there is a conceptual difference between border and boundary, I am using border and boundary synonymously here.
- 2.
TT stands for thing and thing, TH stands for thing and human and HT is human and thing dependent relationship.
- 3.
Interview at Chandia on 22 June 2008.
- 4.
The tribes do not have a concept of a king. They call their ruler as Budha Raja meaning a king who is old, is wise and has knowledge about the nature.
- 5.
Interview at Hatimunda on 16 June 2008.
- 6.
Interview at Chandia on 12 June 2008.
Bibliography
Agnew, J. (1994, Spring). The territorial trap: The geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53–80.
Agnew, J. (1987). Place and politics: the geographical mediatioin of state and society. Boston: Allen and Unwin.
Agnew, J. (2008). Borders on the mind: Re-framing border thinking. Ethics & Global Politics, 1(4), 175–191.
Appadurai, A. (2003). Sovereignty without territoriality: Notes for a postnational geography. In S. M. Low & D. Lawrence-zuniga (Eds.), The anthropology of space and place: Locating culture (pp. 337–349). Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.
Bachelard, G. (1994). The poetics of space. Boston: Beacon Press.
Barth, F. (2000). Boundaries and connections. In A. P. Cohen (Ed.), Signifying identities. London/New York: Routledge.
Basso, K. H. (Ed.). (1996). Wisdom sits in places: Landscape and language among the Western Apache. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Brighenti, A. (2007). On territory as relationship and law as territory. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 21(2) pp. 65–86.
Brighenti, A. (2010). Lines, barred lines: Movement, territory and the law. International Journal of Law in Context, 6(3), 217–227.
Byrne, J. A., (2010). Biophilia, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229090791. Accessed on 13-5-2018, 4.30 p.m.
Chakravarti, A., & Dhar, A. (2009). Dislocation and resettlement in development: From third world to the world of the third. New York: Routledge.
Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publications.
Cronon, W. (2003). Changes in the land: Indians, colonists, and the ecology of New England. New York: Hill and Wang.
Cunningham, H. (2012). Permeabilities, ecology and geopolitical boundaries. In T. M. Wilson & H. Donan (Eds.), A companion to border studies (pp. 371–386). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Elden, S. (2010). Land, territory and terrain. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 799–817.
Elden, S. (2013). The significance of territory. Geographica Helvetica, 68, 65–68.
Fall, J. J. (2011). Natural resources and transnational governance. In D. Wastl-Walter (Ed.), The Ashgate research companion to border studies (pp. 628–641). Farham/Burlington: Ashgate.
Ferreira, S. L. A. (2011). One decade of transfrontier conservation areas in southern Africa. In D. Wastl-Walter (Ed.), The Ashgate research companion to border studies (pp. 643–663). Farham and Burlington: Ashgate.
Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to the visual perception. Madison: Psychology Press.
Gottmann, J. (1973). The significance of territory. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
Gray, J. (2003). Open spaces and dwelling places: Being at home on hill farms in the Scottish borders. In S. M. Low & D. Lawrence-zuniga (Eds.), The anthropology of space and place: Locating culture (pp. 224–244). Malden/Oxford: Blackwell.
Green, S. (2012). A sense of border. In T. M. Wilson & H. Donnan (Eds.), A companion to border studies (pp. 573–592). Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Gunderson, R. (2014). Erich Fromm’s ecological messianism: The first biophilia hypothesis as humanistic social theory. Humanity & Society, 38(2), 182–204.
Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1997). Culture, power, place: Exploration in critical anthropology. Durham/London: Duke University Press.
Heidegger, M. (1993). Building, dwelling, thinking. http://designtheory.fiu.edu/readings/heidegger_bdt.pdf.
Hodder, I. (2012). Entanglement: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London/New York: Routledge.
Jackson, J. B. (1987). The word itself. Discovering the Vernacular Landscape, 13 https://sfaiph304.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/jbjackson_vernacular.pdf. Accessed on 21.11.2017.
Jones, R., & Johnson, K. (2014). Placing border in everyday life. New York/London: Routledge.
Kirwan, P. (1999). The emergent land: Nature and ecology in native American expressive forms, 83–92 http://www.ucd.ie/pages/99/articles/kirwan.pdf and http://research.gold.ac.uk/13144/
Lucas, C. P. (1914). Man as a geographical agency. The Geographical Journal, 44(5), 477–492.
McIntosh, A. (2010) Roots, belonging and place. www.christian-ecology.org.uk. Accessed on 7.3.2018.
Milton, K. (2002). Loving nature: Towards an ecology of emotion. London/New York: Routledge.
Mohanty, B. (2016). Recounting double exception in Kalinganagar. International Journal for Migration and Border Studies, 2(2), 149–161.
Newman, D. (2003). On borders and power: A theoretical framework. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 18(1), 13–25.
Newman, D. (2003a). Boundary. In J. A. K. Mitchell & G. Toal (Eds.), A companion to political geography. Hoboken: Blackwell Publishers.
Norberg-Schulz, C. (1971). Existence, space and architecture. New York/Washington, DC: Praeger.
Paasi, A. (1998). Boundaries as social processes: Territoriality in the world of flows. Geopolitics, 3(1), 69–88.
Perkins, C., Cooper, A., & Rumford, P. C. (2014). The vernacularization of borders. In R. Jones & C. Johnson (Eds.), Placing the border in everyday life (pp. 15–32). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
Relhp, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion Publication.
Ruby, T. (2006). Who am I and where do I belong? Sites of struggle in crafting and negotiating female Muslim identities in Canada. In W. Schissel (Ed.), Geographies of self, place and space: home/bodies. Canada: University of Calgary Press.
Sack, R. D. (1986). Territoriality: Theory and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sahlins, P. (1989). Boundaries: The making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Sassen, S. (2013). When territory deborders territoriality. Territory, Politics and Governance, 1(1), 21–25.
Sauer, C. J. (1960). On past and present American culture. In W. M. Denevan & K. Mathewson (Eds.), Carl Saurer on culture and landscape: Reading and commentaries, (2009) (pp. 390–391). Louisiana: Louisiana State University Press.
Schofield, C. (2011). The delimitation of maritime boundaries: An incomplete mosaic. In D. Wastl-Walter (Ed.), The Ashgate research companion to border studies (pp. 665–681). Farham/Burlington: Ashgate.
Silko, L. M. (1986 Autumn). Landscape, history, and the Pueblo imagination. Antaeus, 57, 882–894.
Sohn, C. (2015). On Borders’ multiplicity: A perspective from assemblage theory. Working paper, EUBORDERSCAPES, European Commission.
Sun-young, R. (2003). Boundary and sense of place in traditional Korean dwelling. Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies, 3(2), 62–79.
Tagliacozzo, E. (2015). Jagged landscapes: Conceptualising borders and boundaries in the history of human societies. Journal of Borderland Studies, 31(1), 1–21.
Tilley, C., & Cameron-Daum, K. (2017). The anthropology of landscape: Materiality, embodiment, contestation and emotion. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1mtz542.7
Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Space and place: Perspective on experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
van Houtum, H. (2011). The mask of the border. In D. Wastl-Walter (Ed.), The Ashgate research companion to border studies (pp. 49–61). Farham: Ashgate.
Wilson, E. O. (1993). Biophilia and the conservation ethic. In S. R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 31–41). Washington, DC: Island Press.
Wilson, P. J. (1988). The domestication of human species. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
Wise, J. M. (2000). Home: Territory and identity. Cultural Studies, 14(2), 295–310.
Wylie, J. (2007). Landscape. New York/London: Routledge.
Zhurzhenko, T. (2011). Border and memory. In D. WAstl-Walter (Ed.), Companion to border studies (pp. 63–83). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mohanty, B. (2019). “Ecologic” Border and Deterritorialisation. In: Uddin, N., Chowdhory, N. (eds) Deterritorialised Identity and Transborder Movement in South Asia. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2778-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2778-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-2777-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-2778-0
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)