Participatory countermapping

By Moné Vasquez Ladron de Guevara and Pablo Mansilla Quiñones.

How can Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant and peasant communities, as well as others, co-create maps that capture their memories, practices, and territorial knowledge, especially in contexts marked by territorial or environmental conflict, and in histories and geographies shaped by coloniality? How can territorial representations and the spatial organization imposed by extractivist processes that dispossess people of their land be challenged? How can the scientific-technical rationality underlying conventional mapmaking―rationality that often erases multiple, subaltern forms of territoriality and knowledge embedded in these territories―be questioned?

Countermapping can also be considered to be a participatory action research process that supports territorial struggles through the production of maps grounded in local knowledge.

There is no universal methodological formula for this tool. Rather, a situated methodology is required that can be adapted to each context and the ways in which people live and connect to their territories. We propose a five-stage process and then discuss ethical considerations, as well as strengths and challenges.

A five-stage process

1. Gathering of the community

The process begins with a self-organized gathering of the community members living in the territory and the recognition of the problems present in that territory. A key principle is that the community must be the ones who request support and work together with the research team. Without this motivation, a methodology such as countermapping is unlikely to succeed. This requirement establishes a working relationship and commitment among those participating in the countermapping process.

At this stage, participants identify problems, needs and/or conflicts affecting their territories and livelihoods. They also reflect on how these problems impact the interconnections between their lives and the other beings with whom they cohabit.

2. Co-developing the research design

Co-developing the research design involves identifying and formulating questions and objectives that address the community’s problems and needs.

Specific questions such as: Where were the culturally and socially relevant places for the community in the past? Where are they now? What happened in location X? The aim of these questions is to prompt participants to provide spatial answers that can be plotted on a map. We recommend that questions addressing the cause of the problem, the impacts generated, and the community’s vision for the future of the place are included.

At this stage, the community also draws the symbols or representations to be used on the map.

3. Conducting the workshop phase

For the workshop phase, participants can bring photos or elements of the territory to stimulate memory and knowledge. In this phase, activities usually take place in focus groups of five to seven people to ensure that everyone can actively participate.

Where it is culturally appropriate, we recommend that each focus group is gender diverse and includes a mix of elders or territory wisdom holders with younger people, to foster inclusive and intergenerational dialogue.

It is important to maintain structure and timings to avoid demotivation, and to respect everyone’s time and capacities. The structure and timings will depend on the local context and the rapport built before the workshop. For example, for a two-hour workshop, we recommend:

• 30 minutes for presenting the work methodology, responsibilities and guiding questions.
• one hour for mapping and answering the three most important guiding questions.
• 30 minutes for sharing results.

4. Guiding the plenary session and final agreement processes

During the plenary session, each focus group presents their results, lessons learned, and agreements made. Rather than repeating point by point what was placed on the map, it can be more fruitful to ask guiding questions that encourage reflection and address the set objectives.

The aim is for participants to reach agreement on the information presented on the map. Different perspectives on memory, experiences and geography may emerge. If so, preventing internal conflicts among participants and protecting the social and territorial cohesion are crucial.

This stage also addresses the ethical considerations outlined below.

5. Co-formulating strategies with the community

The final stage involves formulating a political strategy for the map with the community. Here, participants answer two questions:

• Where and how will we introduce this map into other spaces within our community?
• Which social actors will we engage with to advance our territorial demands?

Based on these answers, collective political actions in advocating for the right to land, territory, and territoriality are determined.

Ethical considerations

Three key ethical considerations are that:

• Not all aspects of the community’s livelihoods should be mapped. Some information must remain within the community and be transmitted intergenerationally through other means.
• Clear protocols for safeguarding map information must be established in collaboration with the community because maps are scientific instruments used to delineate and demarcate territory; they can unintentionally cause boundary conflicts. If there are conflicts among participants, it is best to postpone or abandon the mapping process to avoid tensions, to maintain respect, trust and the community’s social cohesion.
• Agreement needs to be reached on ownership of the resulting maps: Who will keep the resulting maps? And how will the maps be stored, shared and protected?

Strengths

Countermapping creates a space and time for community gathering. It brings people together to share their memories and fosters intergenerational dialogue. The map becomes a motivating tool for the community, with participants becoming fully engaged in the process. In addition, these new maps are rich in knowledge, offering complex and important ways of seeing, inhabiting and living with the land. This helps to build critical, more resilient and sustainable territories.

Challenges

Four major challenges are that:

• Overcoming the unidimensional portrayal of geographic space in the Cartesian visual language can be complicated. Indigenous spatial representations often understand the world as multidimensional.
• Building rapport beforehand requires time, social skill development and community support.
• For researchers, engaging reflexively with their positionality, practicing humility, and being willing to “lose power” are essential to placing their knowledge at the service of the community.
• From a community perspective, key challenges are 1) involving, often disaffected, young people in map production and 2) ensuring the autonomous use of tools and knowledge by the community.

Concluding questions

Do you have relevant experience to share? Are there other processes or considerations to take into account?

To find out more:

Vasquez-Ladron de Guevara, M. and Mansilla-Quiñones, P. (2025). Participatory countermapping in defense of life and territory. Participatory research methods for sustainability. Toolkit# 15, GAIA, 34, 4: 271-273. (Online) (DOI): https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.34.4.6
Much of this i2Insights contribution is taken verbatim from this article, which also provides references.

To see all blog posts from the partnership with the journal GAIA: https://i2insights.org/tag/partner-gaia-journal/. Thanks to GAIA for making this paper free to access until 15 October 2026.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Statement: Artificial intelligence was not used in the development of this i2Insights contribution or the work on which the contribution is based. (For i2Insights policy on artificial intelligence please see https://i2insights.org/contributing-to-i2insights/guidelines-for-authors/#artificial-intelligence.)

Biography: Moné Vasquez Ladron de Guevara MA is a PhD candidate at the School of Business and Economics and the Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands. His main interests are political ecology, decolonial thought and environmental justice.
Photo credit: the headshot used here was modified from a photo by Catalina Reyes.

Biography: Pablo Mansilla Quiñones PhD is an associate professor at the Geography Institute, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso in Chile. His main interests are critical geography, decolonial thought and spatial justice.