Abstract
The history of the Pisque watershed in the Ecuadorian Andes is one of local livelihoods and resources being disrupted by external actors: Incas in Pre-Columbian times, Spaniards during the era of Conquest and Colonisation, and, during the Republic, white-mestizo elites followed by international businesses. Local communities have suffered from, rebelled against, and adapted to adverse, ever-changing socioeconomic, environmental, and political conditions. We trace this history from a political–ecological standpoint, applying the Echelons of Rights Analysis framework and the hydrosocial territory concept to examine conflicts over resources, norms, authorities, and discourses related to irrigation water. The centuries-old saga of battles over water in Pisque helps us understand the latest chapter in the story: the onset of rose agribusinesses, inheritors of the privileges of colonial haciendas. The recent arrival (ca. ten years ago) of small locally managed greenhouses adds complexity to the “food vs. flowers” dichotomy. It also makes it difficult to predict the effects on local attitudes to food security, water justice, and sovereignty.
Highlights
If one asks around the world, “What flower is Ecuador famous for?” most would answer: “Its amazing roses”
Its rather convoluted history is akin to that of many Ecuadorian irrigation systems, i.e., first, landlords owned the system as a private asset; the state took over control of infrastructure and water, and a partial and gradual transferral of management duties took place, from the State to communities (Hoogesteger 2012)
In this paper we have examined the Pisque basins changing configuration of the hydrosocial territory focussing on water flows, rights, and governance forms as constituted by historically shaped power relationships
Summary
Some local floriculturalists have been able to establish very risky yet successful businesses within the flower market chain The problems they have had to face include conflicts with their own neighbours and communities related to a supposed overuse of irrigation water by the new small rose greenhouses compared to their previous use for cattle and/or traditional crops (Mena-Vásconez et al 2017). The recent boom of small, locally run farms some ten years ago adds a new complication to an already discordant situation: an export commodity that many communities first rejected and have started to produce themselves It shares many features with the previous chapters in a continuing history of contested, ever-changing configurations of the hydrosocial territory, driven by struggles over resources, rules, authorities, and discourses
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
