The technosphere, our agency, our planet. What can we do, what should we do?

Mapping is a foundational technology in the evolution of the technosphere, linking the expansion of its material infrastructure with economic activities. It is a key theme in postcolonial studies. During the colonial expansion of Western powers, mapping was instrumental in dispossessing Indigenous peoples. This process began with the establishment of sovereignty by colonial powers and continued with the fixation of property claims in the interests of landholders and tax authorities. This was a gradual process that unfolded over centuries, similar to developments occurring in the colonial motherlands (Greer’s insightful book on colonial dispossession provides a detailed and nuanced account). Indigenous peoples were often perceived as merely living on the land without cultivating it, which led maps to depict it as *terra nullius*, an unoccupied territory available for colonial expansion. However, even at that time, many observers noted that Indigenous peoples had clear notions of territoriality. For example, in North America, they identified specific hunting grounds belonging to kinship groups, clans, and tribes. These concepts of territory differed from colonial notions as they were closely tied to the relationships between Indigenous peoples and the other species with which they cohabited.

Henri Lefebvre has classically explored the idea that modern mapping creates a space subject to capitalist expansion. In my view, this expansion is driven by the growth of the technosphere influenced by economic mechanisms. It is important to note that mapping is also crucial in centrally planned economies, such as those in socialist systems, so it is not exclusive to capitalism. The key point is that the organization of space is shaped by specific technological imperatives that combine with economic interests. For example, precise mapping is essential for determining where roads will intersect or where bridges should be built. Accurate maps are vital for all types of logistics planning.

There are various methods of mapping, one of which is feng shui mapping, primarily used in East Asia and originating in China, with practices also found in Korea, for example, until today. While Western mapping tends to create an objective and neutral representation of space, feng shui mapping reveals natural patterns that influence the flow of cosmic energies, known as qi. This leads to a fundamental difference in how maps are utilized: Western maps are often employed to alter the landscape according to human desires, whereas feng shui maps guide landscape designers on how to make interventions that harmonize with these energy flows and avoid disruptions. Interestingly, one can interpret Western maps similarly by replacing the concept of qi with the flows of finance, investments, and goods and services. In this perspective, maps represent the infrastructure of cities, roads, and ports as reflections of these economic flows over time. This comparison suggests that mapping the technosphere bears a resemblance to feng shui. In fact, many business professionals in China actively practice feng shui, believing that the flows of qi ultimately influence the flows of wealth. However, it is essential to recognize the fundamental distinction between what can be termed subordinating mapping—expressing dominium as understood in Roman law—and accommodating mapping, which seeks to align human practices with nature. In this context, “nature” is not viewed as separate from the human domain as the artificial or culture, aka the technosphere, but rather as part of the cosmos of which humanity is a component.

Until today, mapping continues to support the violent dispossession of Indigenous peoples. This has inspired projects of countermapping, with Sophie Chao recounting a remarkable example. These projects highlight the relationship between people and their land, viewing the land as a place of multi-species cohabitation. In contrast, Western mapping tends to silence “places” in favour of abstract spaces. Places are defined by memories and distinct aesthetic experiences, which are multisensory, involving elements such as smells and sounds. This concept extends to human artifacts as well, as cities have their own unique atmospheres. Consequently, mapping hyper-complex cities like Tokyo is a daunting, if not impossible, task.

I propose the concept of “nature-based countermapping,” which generalizes the practices of Indigenous countermapping. While reflecting on the experiences from the COEVOLVERS project where I am one of the PIs, on implementing Nature-Based Solutions, I observed that our Living Labs are consistently using specific mapping techniques to understand the intricate nature of various locations, as well as the “Umwelts” of the diverse non-human species inhabiting those areas. The term “Umwelt,” as defined by von Uexküll, refers to the unique world each species experiences, shaped by its sensorimotor capacities and behaviors. These distinct “worlds” cannot be represented on a single map because each species would require a different map that accounts for its specific sensory features and activities. For instance, a bird’s map would not simply mirror a flat, two-dimensional image captured by a human drone; instead, it would incorporate perceptions of spatial depth, as birds can easily navigate up and down, which is vital for their survival. Additionally, a bird’s map would include distinctive auditory patterns, such as those found in birdsong.

One insight from the COEVOLVERS mapping is its similarity to Indigenous countermapping, particularly in its emphasis on soundscapes for humans. Traditional mapping is heavily biased toward the visual sensory mode, whereas countermapping highlights the importance of sounds and smells. Indigenous countermapping introduces crucial dimensions, particularly process-based elements, which I mentioned briefly when discussing hunting grounds. Standard mapping tends to freeze spaces in time, while countermapping illustrates flows and processes; this approach is akin to the principles of feng shui. As Elisabeth Povinelli demonstrated in a project on Indigenous countermapping in Australia—both Chao’s and Povinelli’s projects were notably politically suppressed—modern digital technologies enable complex multisensory, event- and process-based mapping. The COEVOLVERS researchers are advancing in this direction, representing a subversive use of components from the technosphere: Nature-based countermapping. Nature-based solutions are often seen as “green” elements of technosphere infrastructure. With nature-based countermapping a shift of perspectives takes place, making the experience of the relationality of people and nature possible and recording it. Colonial mapping was a critical means of governance: Nature-based countermapping is a form of nature-based governance that maps the various Umwelts of a multi-species community and fosters multi-sensory embodied relationality.

Photo by NASA on Unsplash