10 Años Del Observatorio De Tierras: edición Filbo 2024 parte uno

En este episodio hablamos sobre los dos últimos lanzamientos del equipo del Observatorio de Tierras: el libro "Economía política agraria del conflicto colombiano" y el libro "Cinco ensayos no metodológicos sobre metodología".   Conduce: Lina Zárate junto a Rocío Peña, Paula Villamil y Luis Castillo

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Conflicts over the land of indigenous communitiesoccur in several regions of the country.
One million hectares of forest have beendeforested in Colombia in the last twenty-
eight years as a result of drugtrafficking, illegal mining and the excessive use
of land for livestock. The secondjudge of the restitution of alien lands threatened
to send a victim to the prosecutionfor claiming his rights before his office.

(00:25):
How about this is tired of hearingthis for years. You knew that in
Colombia one percent of the population occupieseighty- one percent of the land,
while ninety- nine percent of theland is blamed by the other nineteen percent
of the population. I knew thatonly twenty- six percent of the productive

(00:48):
units are headed by women. ARosario Radio and the Observatorio de Tierras present
with their feet on Earth a spaceto expand the dialogue on Colombian property and
countryside. Welcome to our program withFeet in the Earth carried out by the

(01:11):
Observatory of Lands in Alliance and withthe digital waves of the Institutional Issue of
the University of Rosario or Rosario Radio. Today, at the working table we
are accompanied by Professor Rocío del Pilar, Peña Huertas, coordinator of the Observatory
of Lands and editor of the Journalof Socio- Legal Studies of the Faculty
of Jurisprudence. We are also accompaniedby Juan Felipe Córdoba, who is editor

(01:33):
of the Earth and Society Collection ofthe Editorial of the University of Rosario Paula
Bellamir Castellanos, researcher at the Observatoryof Lands and student of the Master of
Political Studies at the Institute of PoliticalStudies and International Relations of the National University.
And Luis Castillo, who is alsoa researcher at Riepre' s Observatory
of Lands and magister in Political Studies. And who' s talking to them.

(01:53):
Lina María Sara in the Master's degree control accompanies us with Nelson
Duarte, the N o n NEA, Mario Castro and in the production of
the Carolina Cross program. Remember thatyou can listen to us on our website,
Www, or radio co rosary oron the streaming platform of your preference,
where you can access and download allour episodes. Don' t forget

(02:15):
to follow us on our social networks, on x before Twitter. They don
' t find themselves as they plowlands observe and on Facebook we' re
like Facebook with Barrenkinada, welcome obserlands and welcome you' re listening with

(02:42):
your feet on the ground. Wewelcome you to today' s episode again
from the Book Fair in Bogotá,taking advantage of this great event in corferias
where all the university publishing houses ofincluded the editorial of the University of Rosario,
and taking advantage of the Observatory's birthday. His first leaves.

(03:07):
This episode wants to delve into thelast two works published by the members of
the Observatory' s research team.In this sense, taking advantage of the
fact that we have with us atthe working table, the editor of Tierra
y Sociedad, we wanted to askhim a little to tell us about this
collection and the potential that this collectionhas for research spaces like these good afternoons.

(03:29):
Thank you very much for the invitation. Okay. I' m going
to make a small note that's important, it' s being I
do part of what the University hasas the editing center, which is the
Editor of the University of Rosario.I am currently the editor of the University.
Then the collection is within the productionof what is the public university to

(03:52):
see. I think it' sgood to understand why an editorial is betting
on a subject as sensitive as land, and more in a country like Colombia.
I insist that the texts are theauthors and authors who manage and develop
them, and the library, earthand society collection, society is an idea

(04:24):
of the professor peña. That's it and the particularity of dew is
that I say it quietly. Shecan even pinch me here at this table.
She dries a papay, she's already able to get suspicious things

(04:44):
from the editor, which isn't that soft either. The editor also
has his but I understand as anacademic here I do move to other shoes
as a historian and understand perfectly thatit is necessary to develop research and,

(05:05):
above all, publication of texts thataddress the subject from different angles and perspectives,
because it is important, because itis difficult for us to understand Colombians,
in particular the Earth, as theaxis of the problems that we currently
live. I think it' sa problem that goes back even beyond the

(05:30):
19th century. I think it's a lot tighter in the colonial period.
I mean, I think there aresome things I would think could be
investigated by tomorrow to give you othercontexts to understand the problem. There is
one thing that I always remember,when and the Black Rivers, the Marinillos,

(05:58):
the Union in the 19th century andmuch earlier, ran the fence of
their farms against the people who borderedthem. He will not quote the names
of the promen of that moment,but everyone knows them and also in the
cauca, and that obeys something mucholder than the nineteenth century. I think

(06:24):
these are research that we have tobet on, but above all show I
think that texts, if they arenot in the hands of readers, are
not texts. I mean, that' s one thing. I believe that
the good course of the contents isthe ones that should be beneficial. That
' s what the publishing house isfor. Then it didn' t take

(06:46):
me long to understand the importance ofthe collection. I think it is necessary
for Colombia to move it in differentsupports. It' s not only on
paper, it' s also ondigital so we can reach out to the
public that we can' t reach. You can also make an impression under
demands. If someone wants the printedversion and is out of the country,

(07:08):
they can order it and reach theirhands, because the texts are from the
readers. I don' t thinkthey' re one of the authors.
Already when they' ve done thatcircuit and that walk, they' re
coming out of their hands. Andthen I do love the looks and the
multiple looks that produce a content,regardless of who has it. Recently we

(07:33):
were in the presentation of a historytext and the reading that the person who
gave it for the presentation did,I said what absorptive he got to read
from there because he read it witheyes that we hadn' t considered.
It is a text of the middleclasses in Latin America and, moreover,

(07:53):
because the teacher who read it camefrom the public administration. So he went
through some very particular glasses. Look. That is the reading of others of
is the position that never considered.One can fall into disciplining. No,
the texts don' t stay inthe discipline. They make journeys that are
really important and I think the appropriationof texts has to do with that.

(08:16):
I' ve got two in fronthere. There' s one, which
is agrarian reform on the national front, which is a beck Seller. I
can say it quietly. It isa thread that is very much requested by
the Tora population of this country,because, obviously, it has a topic
that addresses that is very Colombian.There is the academic editor Francisco Gutiérrez Sannin,

(08:37):
who is one of the authors withwhom he counts of the collection.
There is the one we presented afew days ago Agrarian political economy of the
Colombian conflict, which is before theeditor that Academic Academy, and Luis David
Castillo and Paula Alejandra Villamil, whoare with us at the table and there

(08:58):
is the one we present on Thursdayin the mográfico text of Professor Francisco Gutiérrez
Sannin. Five non- methodical essayson methodology that this is part of the
collection that has been published by theobservatorgu de Tierras, which I believe comes
as an increasingly important production. Whatwe would tell you to do at some
point is to present the entire collection, because it is another relationship with readers.

(09:26):
When that of the entire library asa whole, special situations occur.
I' ll leave that to youlater, so we can think about the
presentation of the collection. I don' t keep talking because I could speak
the concrete and given work. Thankyou very much for the invitation, thank
you very much for accompanying us andalso giving us that incredible introduction, because
precisely this chapter today is intended totalk about the two most recent books published

(09:52):
by the Observatory. We have thebook“ Political Economy” of the Colombian
conflict, which, as mentioned above, the academic editors, s accompanies and
the book of Professor Gutiérrez Anil Fivenon- methodical essays on methodology? Well,
for starters, I think we canaddress the book of five non-

(10:13):
methodical essays on methodology. As Imentioned, Professor Gutiérrez Anil is the director
of the Observatory of Lands and thisbook has a particularity because it does not
bet on being a manual of methodology. So it is not a book that
will explain how to do the researchproblem, how to do the research methodology,
but it is a collection of reflectionsthat are born from a wide experience

(10:33):
that the professor has in research inacademia, from analysis of public policies and
presents questions of qualitative research, whichare new questions, but also questions that
have always been in force in theresearch exercises and that is why, today
at the working table, he accompaniesus to the professor of dew of the
pillar, Peña Huertas, who,in addition, was the commentator invited in

(10:54):
the release of the book that wascarried out in the framework of the film.
And the first question is whether itcan explain or give an introduction to
what qualitative methodology means. Two pointszero and because it is important to introduce
it in research discussions in social sciencesand socio- legals. Thank you very
much, Line for the invitation.I hope to honor the book with these

(11:20):
comments and hope Professor Gutierrez agrees.First, Prof Gutiérrez tells us that in
the methodology two qualitative zero point refersto a new way of addressing qualitative research
in social sciences that is basically characterizedby a concern that is made explicit about

(11:41):
the quality of inference, that is, about the causality and integration of other
methodological tools. In other words,Prof Gutiérrez is very concerned that the methodological
handbooks do not address these concerns aboutthe quality of inference, and that explicit

(12:05):
concern is the travesty of the qualitativemethodology, two punrosero, which constitutes that
it basically contributes to making the socialsciences more rigorous and more connected with reality.

(12:28):
Is there a phrase that I reallylike about Professor Gutierrez who says reality
also has something to say? Whenwe see, for example, the discussions
between social scientists or about methodological orbetween methodological, he says look a minute,
the reality also has something to say? Let' s put some balls
on that. This methodology, Ibelieve, seeks to make qualitative methods more

(12:52):
rigorous, serious and, above all, credible, and what is fundamental in
a context where the production of socialknowledge basically faces crises, challenges and significant
transformations. A very interesting researcher fromLichan named Juan Ballestas asked a very interesting

(13:20):
question at the launch of the bookthat told us that and where the truth
was. So, let' ssay that what the teacher says is that
one has to be between positivism andnew ones, let' s say,
new discussions, because anyway, realitydoes give me a version of the truth

(13:41):
and not all versions of the truthare plausible. So we have to look
for plausibility and in that sense,I think this book points to that and
that methodology he presents basically points tothat. This seems to me, in
addition to being a current and necessarydiscussion in the face of qualitative research,

(14:05):
which is always in constant transformation.But it also seems that your questions are
always the same. So, thisnew approach and these new clues tell us
how to also renew ourselves as researchersand researchers researchers, researchers to try to
understand social phenomena, also recognize thehistoriosity that there is in these social phenomena
and make reflections, like making peacefrom our work, from research. And

(14:31):
an invitation is made to the needto rethink the standards of truth that precisely
the teacher is commenting on before achanging context that disowns that, as we
see, there are always some instrumentsof collection that remain. And in those
collection instruments that always remain we haveinterviews in depth and so, one of

(14:52):
the questions that I want to dois what changes this method of gathering information
goes through, that is, interviewsin press one day In light of the
new debates of qualitative methodology. Twogood wax point in that Gutierrez chapter.
What it seeks is to analyze theimportance of qualitative interviews in social research,

(15:15):
thus highlighting that these interviews are complexand that there are challenges in the realization
and interpretation. And one thing hedoes is to emphasize that researchers have to
critically reflect on the quality of transferand representativeness of the narratives that derive from

(15:37):
those interviews to ensure that credibility.I' m not a social scientist.
I am a lawyer and, fromthe point of view of lawyers, the
interview is one of the best toolsthat litigants have to understand what are the

(15:58):
problems they face in the daily litigation. And in that sense, to understand
that the interviewee is not objective,that the interviewee has a burden than the
interviewee. Let' s say Ican' t be directed by the interviewee,
but I can' t address theinterviewee either. And everything that Prof

(16:21):
Gutiérrez presents in this chapter seems tome to be supremely important, obviously for
the social sciences, where the interviewand the interaction of the interview with other
information collection tools are so important forwhat he seeks, that it is the

(16:44):
credibility of social science research. Then, moreover, he says that the method
of collection has to be guided bya logic of those cannot be guided by
the logic of marginal benefits. Inthe presentation of the book, in the

(17:06):
reference that one does not know where? As Mexicans would say you fall twenty,
that is, wherever you find yourself, how you round up what you
are looking for and the inferences youneed to be and the facts that may

(17:29):
have some correlations that may have donemany interviews and have never been able to
find that one. Let' ssay the keys to that puzzle. So
he says look at the interview,unlike other tools, he doesn' t
have, he can' t havethe logic of the margin benefits of decreasing,

(17:52):
because this could lead to a lossof crucial information about a social phenomenon
he' s studying. Moreover,it is extremely clear to us that interviews
continue to be a fundamental tool inthe construction of social sciences and not only
within the framework of research itself,as Professor Rocío del Pilar says, we
also see this in law, butwe must also think, for example,

(18:14):
that we are always mediated by theconstruction of narratives when it comes to projects,
for example, when we want torebuild historical memory, when we want
to know about what happened in aterritory and how that also goes through the
subjects who are there and me,as a person who is forming in social
research. I have a fundamental doubt, and it is about the categories of

(18:37):
analysis. I believe that the categoriesof analysis go through all the research projects
and that is why, with thisbook I ask myself the question is what
elements we must take into account togenerate functional analysis categories, not being how
some reductionists shoots mention it in thebook and what types of tools can help
us to prove that these categories inour research topics are functional and are to

(19:00):
the place. I believe that ProfessorGutierrez, when he talks about gross reductionisms,
I believe that what he does tous is a call that before finding
which categories I am going to usein the investigation, because he has a

(19:21):
saying that it is necessary to takesopita of letters. Yes, I mean,
there are a number of tools,for example, you have to look
at theories, that is, howthematic analyses are done, what tools I
have to do those analyses before buildingthe categories that to analyze a social phenomenon

(19:48):
that I want to know, thatis, to be very open to all
positions, without losing focus on whatone wants to study. And so what
happens let' s say gross reductionism. I think it makes a lot of
reference to sometimes we stop at theorieslike I' m positivist and then what

(20:12):
I do is a kind of questionx or it' s not that I
' m from another current and thepositive doesn' t interest me. So
I think it' s the callGutierrez makes or at least that' s
what I understand. It is thatthe complexity and interaction of the phenomena being

(20:37):
studied must be given considerable importance,and when such categories of analysis are designed,
excessive simplifications must be avoided. Obviously, you have to conceptualize and simplify,
but not lead to a simplification thatdoes not account for the complexity and

(21:00):
interaction of these social phenomena. Thatis what I understood from the book Perfecto
and something that seems to me tobe particular in the book that, moreover,
is a book that also parts ofthe experience that the professor has and
also makes me think about the experienceof the Observatory of Lands that, as

(21:21):
you know, we go for thefirst decade. It' s just,
as researchers, we never stop atdatabase feeding and we' re no more.
The Observatory of Lands in ten yearshas faced different projects and there are
databases that intertwine issues of judgments,interviews, jurisprudence. And the last chapter
of the book seems very interesting tome because it says how instead of reading,

(21:45):
let' s buy shoes. Andwhat he' s trying to do
all of a sudden is to askthat question of how to read a lot
of files collected by the researcher's work. So how is that better
way to systematize different types of sourcesfor a perseus file of the person who
investigates and who is functional, saythis chapter that is said he does not

(22:08):
build databases rather with preshoes. Itrefers to two and researchers, in addition
to the 19th century, twenty ortwo thousand twenty- one century, who
are super important to the teacher Gutierzthey are and who, besides I think

(22:30):
we know in the Observatory and infact, we know all those who speak
Spanish and it is Maria Molinés,who, as everyone knows, built the
best dictionary of use of the Spanishlanguage that is called di stage, María
Molinet, and that she told thatshe liked shoes very much. Then she
would put the tabs of the wordsshe was going to say for her dictionary

(22:56):
in a few shoe boxes under herbed and very nicely, Catheri was grandeda
of the last century, of theeighties that comes from Canada to work what
Juan Felipe told us about how theearth was stripped of in the nineteenth and
early twentieth century She, in herdoctoral thesis, which is a book that

(23:19):
is, all those who work landwhere we have, she did exactly the
same thing. Then he bought alot of shoes and in the shoe boxes
he was putting his work chips.Obviously, that' s one. It

(23:41):
' s not a, say,it' s not a rejection of technology.
Obviously, we can have virtual shoeboxes, but what we have to
build is from those databases. It' s like having our own worksheet repository,
where we know we' re goingto find something. Many times,

(24:04):
when you' re going to investigatesome topic, you say we write something
about that topic for someone you're going to set an example. Last
week they were asking us to interveneat a symposium on land restitution. Then

(24:26):
we found in that shoebox an interventionwe made for the Constitutional Court on the
same subject. So let' ssay you can find it in those shoe
boxes? Many, many, manythings. I don' t know if

(24:49):
with this I have understood how youcan say how you can go about putting
together that repository of your own that, besides, I think that with technology,
you can make links that allow youto quickly go to the database when
you need them, without having tobuild your own database. Not perfect the

(25:12):
same. One of the reflections thatalso leaves the books that, as researchers,
it is very important to incorporate inour technological skills, precisely to be
more successful and probably efficient the searchin our databases and or shoe boxes.
Many thanks to the teacher for joiningus today we were able to realize in

(25:37):
her narrative that it is important toadapt to the new challenges and transformations in
social research, maintaining precisely the rigorand relevance of these topics in the production
of knowledge to our audience. Donot forget that you can get this book
in the Rosario editorial, which islocated in pavilion three on level two.

(26:15):
Well, as promised. It's debt. Today also at the working
table we have live and live theacademic editors of the book" Economía política
agraria del conflicto Colombiana". Thisbook analyzes the relationship between militarism and different
forms of agrarian conflict in Colombia.It deals with different cases. Most of
them are located in the Caribbean Coast, and discussions are taking place that are

(26:40):
crucial to understanding the role of agrarianérites and their complex relationship with the processes
of privatization of violence. In addition, we analyze the dispossession of paramilitary lands
and the various interactions that took placein these territories, where we see the
violence, the legality and also theconcentration of lands. As we have heard,
the Earth Observatory has been studying theseissues for ten years. And that

(27:00):
' s why the first question isfor the working table why it' s
important to be the research agent ondispossession in this book. A lot of
the book Good, Good in Lino. Thank you very much for the invitation.

(27:22):
First of all, I think thefirst thing to say is that dispossession
has been a phenomenon, let's say, significantly studied in Colombia and
let' s say it' sbeen through different times. Then it has
been studied which actors were involved inthe dispossession. Many of the networks and

(27:45):
alliances linked to dispossession have been studied. In fact, the Observatory has been
one of the pioneers in accounting forthese networks and those alliances that a little
express that dispossession does not happen inisolation, given that it happens in relation
not to specific actors, but asin an integration of different networks, of

(28:07):
actors that have different possibilities as interventionin the political world, either because they
are directly related, as with thenational scale or, let' s say,
because of their different margins of actionand many of the mechanisms around dispossession
have also been studied. Some ofthe temporalities have also been studied. And

(28:30):
you' re like one of thethings that comes up as the national landscape
changes, and it' s howthey transform, let' s say,
as the dynamics of dispossession in relationto armed conflict. According to the times
that happened, let' s saywar situations. So, like there has

(28:51):
been, the first thing to sayis that there is as a significant legacy
of an important collection around the studieson dispossession in Colombia. However, there
are still many questions to ask,and that' s a bit like saying,
like answering your question, there aremany things that have not yet been
specified. There are many things youcan keep digging about. And a little

(29:14):
that we do in this book,particularly in the chapters associated with dispossession,
which are the chapters that address dispossessionand against agrarian reform, and the final
chapter of Braa Antreana, where someof the notions and common places that exist
about dispossession are questioned and discussed.A little we open the doubts, we

(29:41):
open up like the black box,which is behind common places about dispossession,
to realize that there are many timesconceptual inaccuracies when we refer to this phenomenon
and a little what we do isto realize that when we tell that phenomenon,

(30:02):
what we do is like showing thatthere are different dimensions. If you
want the phenomenon that many times areput as in the same bag, in
the same package, then I thinkthat, because, as insisting on this,
there are still many questions to ask, many ways, say many approaches

(30:25):
from where to take the phenomenon ofdispossession and a little bit in this book
we realize that would close by posingthat it is not only as conceptual problems
that can be like revisiting, butthat there are also new scenarios and say

(30:48):
all the transition from war to peace, and this is something that we can
say one, extending a lot intalking about it from war to peace allows
how to generate new questions to understanddispossession and a little our two chapters in
the book address as those two dimensionsof spoil perfect. In addition, I

(31:10):
feel that it should be emphasized thatthis book is not only a theoretical reflection,
which also tries to refine the categorieswith which the dispossession is being analyzed,
precisely in order to avoid this bazaarof the common place, but that
they do some very judicious collections andstudies, with case studies and chapter three

(31:30):
specifically have as a case study therelations between big cattle ranchers and because the
banana guilds with the paramilitaries in theMagdalen, and that is why we ask
what kind of differences are found inthe alliances and operating models of these guilds
with the paramilitary groups. In thelight of the case you studied well.
The chapter, in fact, showsthat the two types of elites, cattle

(31:53):
ranchers and banana growers participated directly inthe paramilitary experience, but shows in turn
that they did so in different ways. So, while, on the one
hand, we have the banana elitesinvolved in alliances with the paramilitaries, basically
for three things, alliances to providesecurity and protection to their own lives and

(32:16):
their properties, alliances, second,to repress and confront the union mobilization in
the banana zone and alliances, third, to accumulate land. While this happens
in the case of banana growers,in the case of cattle farmers, we
observe a relationship and a articulation thatone could call much more organic. Picking

(32:37):
up the concept developed by Profe Gutiérrezand Jennifer Vargas a couple of years ago.
So, in the case of cattleranchers, what one finds is that
not only did these alliances make them, but they also find large cattle ranchers
founding paramilitary experiences, that is,committed to all those initial activities that are
required to be able to assemble anarmed group. That you' re a

(33:00):
simple thing for us. So,get the contacts, get the armed men,
get the guns, put the farms, set up the base, the
whole universe of things that involves foundingor creating an armed group. Then,
unlike the banana farmers, the farmersgot into the creation of these groups.
He also does not find one inthe leadership structures i e, putting on

(33:21):
the uniform, the camouflage and participatingas commanders or as or as part of
the leadership structures. And finally,one thing that also changes is that they
participate in the operation of the groups, which is a concept that has not
been given too much attention, butthat is very interesting because in the case
of the cattle ranchers, when exploringthe judicial documentation and the files, one
finds everywhere references to cattle ranchers who, without belonging to the leadership structures,

(33:45):
without being the commanders, still gaveorders to the group, the subordinates and
let' s say the paramilitaries operatingon the ground responded to orders and,
basically, to the orientations given bythe cattle ranchers. In fact, so
was it that in some cases itgenerated tensions within the same armed group.

(34:06):
I' m going to allow myselfto read you a little quote every one
of the book that shows the tensionsit generated is to participate in the operation.
These are words taken from an exulentcourt, said by Alias Raffa,
who was the commander of the FrenteTomás Guillén. He' s complaining that
a big rancher in the area,he' s giving orders, going over
him, and he' s threateningto get out of the group. So

(34:28):
says Alia Raffa Severini, who's a big rancher in the area.
He was the leader of the areaas if he were a commander. That
' s why, in two thousandfour I was going to retire because I
was the commander, but my ordersdidn' t count, because Severini was
there, he was the one whodeclared military objective to the people in that
area. Then one encounters all thiskind of evidence that indicates that the role

(34:51):
of cattle ranchers in the paramilitary experiencewas much, much, much deeper,
organic and diffused than that of bananaelites and because that contributes to a much
better understanding of the relationship between elitesand military and to show that it is
a little more complex than we sometimesthink. Well, precisely that is the
following question and listening to these analysesand also findings found in the chapter for

(35:15):
the case in Magdalena, ask whythese relations, those trajectories of economic unions
with paramilitary groups, should continue tobe studied and complemented. Well lira,
let' s say one could differentiateat least two reasons. A first one
has to do with the demands ofjustice and truth that exist in the country
and so, in the model ofjustice and peace, of the law of

(35:37):
justice and peace, and this hasbeen documented researched, let' s say
that there was a line of researchleft over on economic actors and third parties,
which was left out. The investigatorsof paramilitarism had an orientation to concentrate
only on what the paramilitaries did andas a result, there are in the

(35:58):
thousand computations of copies to the fiscaquality asking to investigate the participation of third
parties and businessmen, because it wasnot one of the orientations to investigate and
attend that. So, that impliesthat in this issue about how businessmen participated
in the Colombian War there is agreat void that has not been covered by
our jurisprudence or the transitional justice processesthat we have had. So it'

(36:20):
s a topic, that' sa reason let' s say there'
s a demand for truth and justicepresent there. The second one could be
said to be a more theoretical reason, a more theoretical justification, and is
that in studies on violence and theuse of violence let' s say that
there is as a great emphasis onviolence being exercised from below, in which
oppressed, marginalized, excluded, etcetera, etcetera. Either be the version of

(36:44):
rebellions in insurgencys or be the organizedcrime version as you like. But in
any case, violence is often attributedto the most popular and excluded sectors of
society. And that implies that wehave a big bump on the outside,
and that the fact that violence isalso exercised by well- off sectors,
economic elites and big businessmen and theyhave done so and in our war they

(37:06):
did a lot. So let's say there' s a whole theoretically
uncovered subject there and there' sa lot of fabric left to cut on.
There is a topic that mentions andgenerated a noise and it also generates
me is the next question that Iam going to do, and it is
of a methodological order, and isclearly explaining to us that there are gaps,

(37:28):
not only conceptual and theoretical, butalso, for example, in the
production of jurisprudence or cases and processesthat are carried against economic guilds as ranchers
or bananets. My question is thenhow was the methodological construction of this capique
worth. In this chapter different typesof evidence are used mainly documentary. Then

(37:51):
justice and peace sentences are used.A large number of court files from one
of the Santa Marta sentencing courts.File documentation recovered is used in inquiries we
have made. The archive of theMinistry of the Interior and other types of
files can be a network and isalso used to support some parts of the

(38:16):
argument. Evidence of the field workwe carried out in one of the projects
of the Luis Observatory. I,hearing what you are telling about what is
the methodology you used for the constructionof that chapter, wonder if we say
the interaction between lawyers and social scientistschanges in some way the perception that you

(38:43):
have about the phenomenon being studied,because I understand that in the project that
is, let' s say,the result of that investigation, because you
had an interaction not only with thelet' s say, with the documents,
with the file, but an interactionwith the lawyers, not only as

(39:06):
subjects within the phenomenon, that is, judges or lawyers, but as part
of the investigation team. Then Iwould like to know what changes the methodology
or how the perception and analysis ofthat information changes. Okay, well,
let' s say the first onethat comes to mind, which was crucial

(39:30):
and which has actually marked maybe twoor three generations already from the Observatory,
is the use of legal tools foraccess to information. So, through the
team of lawyers and what we've learned from that team. We have
been able to access databases, thecourts themselves, documentation that does not have

(39:52):
public access, but that in anycase, we have the right to consult,
review and analyze and or that wewould not have been able to access
otherwise if it had not been forthe legal and legal tools that the team
of lawyers at the Observatory has kindlyshared with us. The second thing that

(40:14):
comes to mind as a contribution ofthat interaction between social analysts and lawyers is
that lawyers also have an expertise inreading this type of document. When,
to speak from my personal experience,the first time I read a restitution sentence
I could not be lost any more. It was not possible and in the

(40:36):
dialogue with lawyers we have learned torescue the elements that are most relevant to
the social analysis of all this typeof judicial documentation. Then I would say
at least that those two things arethe result of that interaction. Yes,
and I' d add a third, and it' s just that it
' s given very much by wayof exchange. No. So, the

(40:59):
swapbit also goes through as a disciplinarycomplementarity where lawyers also have as a wealth
in front of the readings about thephenomena that appear in a sentence, as
a series of facts and let's say that they happen to have as
other conceptions around those phenomena. SoI think that' s where interaction goes,

(41:20):
too. Thank you, and Iwould like to highlight this as a
let' s say as a verylarge asset that the Observatory has, and
that is that we managed to havea double- track reading, not only

(41:42):
from lawyers to social analysts, asLuis mentions, but everything that we lawyers
learn with those tools that we donot know and that additionally that knowledge sometimes
translates a fear as from I donot want to know. So I think
that this asset that the Observatory has, allows research results, such as the

(42:06):
book, that is fantastic indeed veryproud of it. I think it makes
that the analyses that authors and academiceditors manage to show have a very important
richness because of the depth of theanalyses that are made. But not only

(42:29):
that, but how the information wascollected and how it was systematized. I
just wanted to make that note ready. Continuing with how to approach the book.
Chapter four examines the impact of illicitrural economies on our armed conflict,
once again located in Magdalena. Butyou present an important factor of analysis that

(42:52):
I had not seen or identified inother academic works. And it' s
about families. Families as actors thatsustain these chains of economies and conflicts,
and I don' t know ifthey can go a little deeper into that.
Yes, of course, Lina,then, in the chapter on that
subject, I believe that what isworth noting is that families are shown or
shown to be devices where different structuresof power, political power, economic power,

(43:19):
cultural power are reproduced and confluenced,and that these structures influence when certain
individuals or actors jump the border oflegality. And that' s like the
great contribution of the chapter, becausethe chapter shows that it' s because
of the power that these Magdalene saceletefamilies had, both in terms of control

(43:43):
over the earth. They were familiesof landowners and agro- industrialists, but
also the political power they had,because they controlled the political representation of the
department in Congress, but they alsocontrolled the local state. The appointment of
each official was done mathematically according toeach faction of the parties. It is
those power structures that explain that later, when some individuals of these families get

(44:04):
involved in drug trafficking. During thebonanza marinbera. These families, as pointed
out in the chapter, increase theirproclivity, the use of violence. Why,
because they have state protection, becausetheir family member, their cousin or
their uncle, their nephew, maybe negotiating and trading marimba, but they
have a mayor, cousin, congressmanuncle, etcetera, etcetera. Because he

(44:30):
has all his relatives in the economicguilds, in the Port of Santa Marta,
in the farms, in the guilds. So let' s say that
the important point there I think wouldbe the family in the family confluence those
power structures and when they jump theborder of legality, those structures weigh and
mark different outcomes. I think itis an approach that we have not seen

(44:57):
in other studies on these issues,because sometimes they are understood as unitary actors,
as the company acts, the presentstate group acts and is not a
unitary act, it is almost likehybrids, so to speak and the family
seems to me to be an extremelyinteresting actor. And continuing we are,
I would also like to ask youin there is a chapter where you see

(45:22):
the case of studies dedicated to Montesde María and because Montes de Marías has
been a studied region that has beenthe subject of extensive academic study. But
there is something particular, and Iwould like to ask you why it is
the innovative that is shown about therole of the State in the encampment of
land by companies in this particular territoryand that you are clear about the lina,

(45:44):
because well, as you well say, Montes de María has been one
of the subregions, let us sayas widely studied around dispossession and armed conflict
in general. But let' ssay, in particular, with the phenomenon
of companies, which has taken uplarge tracts of land, let' s
say that it has sounded quite alot again. But let' s say

(46:05):
that this chapter has as a particularfocus and I think that this is like
the innovative point and is that itconcentrates on the institutional designs that allowed that
land grabbing to exist, that is, and there it points out as two
ways, on the one hand,to how to complement the role that the
State has played in these land grabbingprocesses, but, on the other hand,

(46:30):
to demonstrate how companies end up linkedto a phenomenon like land grabbing.
Then, and in addition, Ithink it has as two very interesting elements,
and it shows that these institutional designspoint as in two directions at the
same time, on the one hand, to the economic development of areas that

(46:51):
have been affected by the conflict duringthe hard period. Let us say of
the war in Colombia, but letus also say that linked to that economic
development as to a dynamic of securitizationand pacification of these areas, then let
us say that these two dimensions demonstratehow throughout that chapter, they demonstrate how

(47:15):
it was promoted, not only thatresources were invested, let us say,
by the companies in these territories,but also that it was done as a
stimulus to the massive displacement by thepeasants who received the policies of securitization,
of security and, moreover, veryaccompanied by stigmatization, in many cases,

(47:39):
of judicialization, at a time whenthey increased, say, like the confrontations
products of these same policies. Solet' s say that, in general
terms, showing these two faces ofthese institutional designs realizes how we say it.
The role of the state is notonly to give economic incentives to companies
to invest there, but also alittle boost that exists are massive displacements of

(48:02):
the ready peasantry. Here I havea question and because we are going as
parallels in two cases and if youcan find good, first of all,
what are you reading of the state' s action in the face of these
dispossession and legal economies and all thischain of facts, what happens? That
' s the first and the next. If you can see that there are

(48:24):
common factors or ones and drivers,because let' s say when we were
talking about Magdalena, the state isclear, but the state is also crossed
by families, by ties that arenot always so obvious and the mountains of
Mary. We have to make thestate clear from the political secorizations of secritization,
but also economic incentives. So Idon' t know if in those

(48:46):
studies and also the trajectory that youhave as researchers can say yes, look
there are some common lines or factorsthat had those territories or not. According
to each territory, it has alwaysbeen very different. For this good experience.
For my part, I' dsay it' s difficult. In

(49:06):
other words, there are patterns,there are certain patterns in the way the
state influenced land grabbing processes, butthere are definitely very different dynamics. So,
the day of cattle grabbing, forexample, of Magdalena, is a
dispossession that, although there are someuseful cases of cattle ranchers who stripped a

(49:31):
farm to sow timber and taking advantageof this type of incentives that existed,
really the vast majority of livestock dispossessionin Magdalena did not have much to do
with such incentives to certain economies orto some type of productive chains. It
was a dispossession that took place verymuch like in that local world of livestock.

(49:54):
On the other hand, one findsdynamics in other regions, such as
the mountains of Mary, where notonly local actors play a crucial role,
but also the investment opportunities that theState opens up. So, I think
there are patterns that can be recognizedin some cases, for example, one

(50:15):
of them the complicity of lynching officialsthroughout various departments of the Caribbean. That
is a constant in the dispossession ofland in this region. But at the
same time, there are very differentiatedpatterns and dynamics that deserve to be studied
in their particularity and complexity. Yes, I think we should say as the

(50:40):
divergences of how dispossession happens, notonly on the Caribbean coast, but in
general. Let' s say asin the country they realize that they have
certain regional specificities, but even departmentalones, even municipal ones, because as
in different territorial scales, what wesee in the Caribbean Coast if they are

(51:07):
like some common cases linked also asto the dynamics in which they happened in
which the war happened in itself.Let' s say the way paramilitarism was
constituted or the ways in which itoperated, but it' s quite true
that it wasn' t something homogenous. So it is very important, like
seeing in a lot of detail justhow they are constituted, how these alliances

(51:30):
that are seen throughout the book,but also how the same actor can play
different functions in specific cases. Andit is a bit like seeing the complexity
of the state acting as an incentivefor development in one place and at the

(51:51):
same time acting with measures of muchdirect repression towards the peasantry. It is
to see a little how there isa double or even more of those roles
in the same actor around the sameprocess of poverty Many thanks. Now,
to close, there is a keyquestion left in the revision of the book

(52:13):
in general, and it is likewhat contributions the book has for understanding post
- conflict. I ask this understandingin terms of how this book could contribute
to have better measures, for thefinancing of territorial measures in terms of peace
building, gives the particularities, sincethey were what I was saying. Paula
is the same actor who plays indifferent facets, but in these different facets

(52:35):
is also crossed by other factors.Then I don' t know how you
can read the book' s potentiality. Well, Lina, that' s
a tough question. It is adifficult question because let us say that,
linked to this question, several thingsappear. No. The first thing is
yes and here I will not extendmuch, as if necessarily the books that

(52:59):
are going to talk about one orlet' s say the academic developments,
which speak of a phenomenon that happenedin the war, have to be useful.
Let' s say for another,for another situation. And there I
could, because how to stay talkingabout the relevance of the theory itself and
how to say it. Theory cangive as new conceptions around a phenomenon and

(53:19):
so on. But getting out ofthat side, I think that the book
specifically has as contributions in terms ofpublic policy, mainly around understanding the complexity
of a phenomenon. And it's like opening up like the back of
what happens in a phenomenon like theso complex dispossession, so loaded with networks

(53:44):
where so many actors have been involved, but where these actors have also changed,
it allows us, on the onehand, to generate clearer measures like
public policies around that and in thatsense, I think it has utility for
post- conflict and it' slike I understand how the dispossession works.
I can attack as specific points ofthe chain where they allowed the spy to

(54:07):
happen. But it also allows meto have as policies that are not only
as post- dispossession care, butthat are preventive for new situations of dispossession.
No, and it' s kindof like how to understand that these
differentiated interventions of the state could affectlike this chain of dispossession. Then I

(54:30):
do not know how to generate regulatorymeasures that are more attentive to public points
and policies and to institutional designs,because as they were favorable to dispossession,
it is also a way to ensurethat how it can be maintained in the
longer term, these attempts of conflictand peace also silena. I would point

(54:53):
out in that same direction that oneof the contributions that the book can make
to us to understand the problems ofpost- conflict is that it helps us
to complement our vision of the relationshipbetween economy and violence in the country.
A story was sold that comes comingdown a little bit, more and more,

(55:15):
and is that the narco was theengine of the war. And then
all the violence revolves around the narco. And this book contributes in a very
rigorous way to show that much ofthe violence went through the legal elites,
through the legal economies. And thatraises a very big question and it is
as good as smart that the problemof the cultivation of its illicit crops is

(55:37):
solved, but our engines of violencehave had a lot to do with the
legal economies. Then, it isvery important to understand first which legal economies
were the ones most linked to violence. And then, here, the work
of Professor Francisco and this book thatcontinues in that direction of research, makes
us call attention to piles with livestock. Not because they are bad people,

(55:59):
because they are bad, they arenot a moral problem, but a problem
of the political economy of livestock.It is an economy that produces many quarrels,
which is very vulnerable, which isvery subject to attacks to solve problems
using private violence and not state security. So this invites us to think which
economies were most articulated to violence?What art, what economies not so much,

(56:21):
and that from those economies we canrescue to think economies towards peace.
Once solved the issue of drug traffickingand like everything that that hoarded ready perfect.
I have one question left listening tothem, and one of the developments
that the book has is around theelites. How we understand the elites and
how they are crossed, precisely becauseof what he is mentioning of legal economies

(56:45):
that perpetuated these chains of violence.So I take up the previous question of
how or what recommendations could be madeto address identifying these elites and to make
them contribute to better public policies andeven to repair and correct these mechanisms that
I know we have involved in theterritories. Well, we would have said

(57:09):
that we would enter a first methodologicalchallenge and start by documenting the issue ourselves
in the country. I think wehave as a precariousness in studies on economic
elites. There is a whole literatureon business history, that exists, but
it has not been connected to theliterature on social studies, on social processes,

(57:34):
on dynamics of violence. I believethat there is a need for greater
convergence in order to understand the rolethat they play both in the processes of
violence and in the processes of peace- building. Then a first task starts
by documenting the phenomenon well and fromthere, and then let' s say
that then descriptive analysis comes as thepossibility of putting together theories about what is

(57:57):
the role that these actors can playin both the processes of violence and peace
- building, on different scales,on the national scale, and there are
elites that come into play, butalso on the territorial scale, and those
are the least documented. Well,we have realized that these two works that
we present today bring new questions andapproaches suddenly to issues that have always been

(58:21):
in force in the study of socialsciences. To our audience do not forget
that they can get the academic productionof the team the Observatorio de Tierras in
the editorial of Rosario, which islocated in pavilion three on level two in
the framework of the film. Thanksto the teacher she has received the Pilar
Peña, Paula Bellamil and Luis Castillofor accompanying to the work table, Nelson
from master control and a radio rosaryfor making this space possible. We thank

(58:45):
those who tune in to our signal. Remember to visit our Earth Observatory or
RG website. Barrenking Nothing Podcast tolisten to more of our episodes and publications.
They forget to follow us on oursocial networks. In x before iter
they are not found as Earths observesand on Facebook as ugly point with Pierre

(59:05):
Barra inclined Earths observes. Until nexttime, conflicts over the land of indigenous
communities occur in several regions of thecountry. One million hectares of forest have
been deforested in Colombia in the lasttwenty- eight years, as a result
of drug trafficking, illegal mining andthe excessive use of land for livestock.
The second land restitution judge withdrew,threatening to send a victim to the prosecution

(59:30):
for claiming his rights before his office. He' s tired of hearing this
for years. You knew that inColombia one percent of the population occupies eighty
- one percent of the land,while ninety- nine percent of the land
is blamed by the other nineteen percentof the population. I knew that only

(59:54):
twenty- six percent of the productiveunits are headed by women. A radio
rosary and the Earth Observatory presented withtheir feet on the ground a space to
expand the dialogue on Colombian property andcountryside