
































Microsoft Word - Wong_Indigeniety_numbered.docx


CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 125 

 

                                                                                  

 
 

                                                       

Indigenous Erasure and Resistance in the Caribbean 
 
Elizabeth Wong 

Centre for Caribbean Studies 

Faculty of Arts & Science, University of Toronto 

 
Elizabeth is an undergraduate student at the University of Toronto majoring in Diaspora and Transnational Studies and Ethics, Society, and Law. She 

was previously an undergraduate fellow at Victoria College's Northrop Frye Centre. Her work is interdisciplinary, often drawing on philosophy, an-

thropology, and cultural studies to think through the intersections of race, culture, and colonialism in Toronto and abroad. 

                                                                                  
 
KEYWORDS: 

Indigeneity 

Resistance 

Colonialism 

Dispossession 

Belize 

Diaspora 

Entanglement 

Caribbean 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
ABSTRACT 

                                                                                        
Indigeneity has, for the most part, been absent in literature on the Caribbean, even in decolonial writing. Writing on the 

Caribbean has often portrayed Indigenous people as extinct and thus irrelevant to contemporary life in the Caribbean. 

However, Indigenous peoples have played and continue to play a central role in Caribbean politics. This essay discusses 

how and why Indigenous people have been erased from discourse on the contemporary Caribbean. I argue that 

Indigenous erasure is a longstanding colonial tactic still used to justify the dispossession of Indigenous peoples. Drawing 

on the case of the Maya peoples’ struggle for land in Belize, I describe how Indigenous people resist colonial and 

capitalist violence. Having identified and historicized the myth of Indigenous erasure in the Caribbean, I sketch 

possibilities for shifting the discourse on the Caribbean to highlight rather than ignore the historic and ongoing 

contributions of Indigenous communities to the Caribbean. I suggest that diaspora and entanglement are two concepts 

that may help clarify the Caribbean’s complex colonial histories in a way that underscores the importance of Indigenous 

peoples to the Caribbean. 

 

 

I. Introduction 

Indigeneity has largely been ignored in Caribbean litera-
ture, political discourse, and law. If Indigenous people fig-
ure in discussions on the Caribbean, they are usually only 
considered victims of Europe's imperial conquest. Portray-
ing Indigenous peoples as relics from a pre-colonial past 
obscures the fact that many Indigenous communities have 

survived colonial genocide and continue to resist ongoing 
oppression. In this essay, I aim to answer the following 
questions: How and why have Indigenous peoples been 
erased from discourse on the contemporary Caribbean? 
How can we invalidate the myth that Indigenous people no 
longer exist in the Caribbean and highlight their continued 
resistance to colonial and capitalist violence? I will argue 
that Indigenous erasure is a longstanding tactic of colonial 

Caribbean Quilt 
Journal Homepage: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cquilt/index 
 
 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 126 

domination entrenched in scholarship about the Caribbean, 
even in decolonial writing. I will highlight ongoing Indig-
enous resistance projects that remain central to Caribbean 
politics to undermine the imperial myth of Indigenous 
erasure. In addition, I will suggest that diaspora and entan-
glement are two concepts that can shift the discourse on 
the Caribbean to understand complex colonial histories 
better and foreground Indigenous peoples’ continued pres-
ence in the Caribbean. 
 
This essay proceeds in four parts. In part II, I historicize 
the myth of Indigenous erasure within Europe’s colonial 
invasion of the Caribbean and explain how it remains sali-
ent in recent literature. I detail how anti-colonial scholar-
ship often ignores or marginalizes Indigenous communi-
ties. In part III, I challenge the idea that Indigenous com-
munities are non-existent or irrelevant to the modern-day 
Caribbean by describing how Indigenous communities 
work together to contest dispossession and harmful capi-
talist extraction. In part IV, I draw on Stuart Hall and Édou-
ard Glissant to sketch how the concepts of diaspora and 
entanglement might reframe discourse on the Caribbean in 
a way that does not erase Indigenous peoples. Finally, in 
part V, I offer concluding remarks on dismantling the myth 
of Indigenous erasure. 

II. Indigenous Erasure as Continuing Colonial   

Violence 

The myth of Indigenous erasure began with Europe’s col-
onization of the Caribbean. To take control of Indigenous 
lands, colonizers invoked the principle of terra nullius, 
meaning empty land or land belonging to nobody.1 Colo-
nizers declared they could claim ownership of Caribbean 
islands because these lands were unoccupied. Indigenous 
dispossession and erasure have always been central to Eu-
rope's imperial projects. 2  Colonizers dehumanized 

 
1 Filiberto Penados, Levi Gahman, and Shelda-Jane Smith, 
“Land, race, and (slow) violence: Indigenous resistance to 
racial capitalism and the coloniality of development in the 
Caribbean,” Geoforum (2022): 8. 
2 Gabrielle Hosein, “Indigenous Geographies and Carib-
bean Feminisms,” Stabroek News, 2017, https://www.sta-
broeknews.com/2017/04/10/features/indigenous-

Indigenous peoples, describing them as soulless, subhu-
man beasts to justify stealing, enslaving, and killing their 
lands.3 This colonial logic of doubting the humanity of In-
digenous peoples to justify their dispossession, subjuga-
tion, and decimation constitutes “misanthropic skepti-
cism.”4 Dispossessing and dehumanizing Indigenous peo-
ples erase their histories and deny them their rights to life 
and land. 
 
European colonizers committed genocide against Indige-
nous peoples and thus attempted to erase Indigenous 
knowledge and cultures; nevertheless, Indigenous people 
fought back, and some survived. Indigenous communities 
remain in the Caribbean, yet settler colonial governments 
deny their existence and disregard their rights claims. In 
the anglophone Caribbean, for instance, only Belize, Guy-
ana, and Dominica recognize the rights of Indigenous com-
munities in their national law.5 The myth that Indigenous 
people are extinct is closely bound to the colonial idea that 
Indigenous people, their histories, and their land rights are 
insignificant. This myth has persisted––it bleeds into a 
contemporary discourse on the Caribbean, even anti-colo-
nial discourse. 
 
Caribbean thinkers, politicians, and activists have often ig-
nored Indigenous peoples or reduced Indigenous history to 
colonial genocide, portraying Indigenous peoples as ex-
tinct. Melanie Newton observes that if Caribbean authors 
mention Indigenous peoples, it is often only to note that 
“Europeans murdered them all.”6 While recognizing In-
digenous genocide is imperative, it is equally important to 
acknowledge the resilience of Indigenous peoples and their 
ongoing struggles against neocolonial capitalist extraction. 
Newton argues that the idea that Indigenous people no 
longer exist is a form of colonial knowledge and power that 
has infiltrated Caribbean scholars’ anti-colonial projects.7 

geographies-caribbean-feminisms/ 
3 Penados, Gahman, Smith, “Land, race, and (slow) violence,” 
8. 
4 Ibid., 2. 
5 Melanie J. Newton, “Returns to a Native Land: Indige-
neity and Decolonization in the Anglophone Caribbean,” 
Small Axe 41 (2013): 108. 
6 Ibid., 118. 
7 Ibid., 109. 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 127 

Hence, those writing in and about the Caribbean misstep 
when they fail to challenge the assumption that Indigenous 
violence is a thing of the past. 
 
In The Pleasures of Exile, a series of essays on colonization 
and decolonization in the Caribbean, George Lamming re-
fers to Indigenous people only once, describing them as 
part of a tragic, lost past: “indigenous Carib and Arawak 
Indians, living by their own lights long before the Euro-
pean adventure, gradually disappear in a blind, wild forest 
of blood.”8 Other prominent scholars of Caribbean history, 
including Sidney Mintz, C.L.R. James, and Eric Williams, 
offer valuable yet limited critiques of colonization because 
they ignore Indigenous peoples' role in the decolonial 
struggle.9 My aim here is not to discredit the writers I have 
cited; they have generated profound insights into the work-
ings of colonialism. Instead, I aim to reveal that the myth 
of Indigenous erasure is deeply entrenched in perceptions 
of the Caribbean––even in critical and revolutionary 
thought. Caribbean history has thus been marked by "abo-
riginal absence." As a result, Caribbean scholarship has 
implicitly forwarded the colonial, imperial, and capitalist 
aim of annihilating Indigenous peoples.10 
 
On Newton’s account, the descendants of enslaved people 
and indentured labourers transported to the Caribbean 
from Africa or Asia are often described as 'Indigenous' to 
the Caribbean. This misuse of Indigeneity occurs both in 
literature and in everyday discourse. Sylvia Wynter, for ex-
ample, claims that Afro-Caribbean culture had "become in-
digenous” because pre-colonial Indigenous cultures were 
lost when the “Arawak Indians died out.”11 Here, Wynter 
wrongly reduces Indigenous peoples and cultures to histor-
ical relics, denying their continued presence in the Carib-
bean. According to Michelle Hosein, Caribbean people 
have claimed Indigeneity to assert their belonging to the 
region after years of being devalued under colonialism.12 
This misuse of Indigeneity, however, obscures Indigenous 

 
8 George Lamming, The Pleasures of Exile (Ann Arbor: 
University of Michigan Press, 1992), 13. 
9 Newton, “Returns to a Native Land,” 110. 
10 Ibid., 109. 
11 Ibid., 117. 
12 Hosein, “Indigenous Geographies and Caribbean Femi-
nisms.” 

peoples’ histories and their ongoing resistance to oppres-
sion. 
 
The imperial myth of Indigenous erasure also underlies 
creolization theory. Caribbean scholars developed the no-
tion of creolization to refute the colonial idea that Caribbe-
ans are primitive and instead recast Caribbeans as modern 
people. This theory held that the mixture of African, Euro-
pean, and Asian cultures in the post-colonial Caribbean 
generated creole identities that afforded Caribbeans a mod-
ern, globalized subjectivity. Though creolization was a rec-
lamation of power for descendants of enslaved people and 
indentured labourers, it implicitly excluded Indigenous 
peoples from modernity. Indigeneity is, in many respects, 
the antithesis of creolization. Following this theory, Indig-
enous people are not modern or relevant to the globalized 
world because they are not creolized.13 Creolization thus 
further obscures Indigenous presence in the contemporary 
Caribbean. 

III. Indigenous Communities’ Ongoing Resistance 

Indigenous peoples in the Caribbean have remained resili-
ent despite neo-colonial violence. As Hosein writes, "In-
digenous people didn't become extinct. They don't belong 
to a time past.”14 Indigenous communities resist colonial 
oppression, which takes shape today as the state-sponsored 
expropriation, privatization, and destruction of Indigenous 
lands for capitalist profit.15 The land has always been and 
continues to be at the center of colonial violence.16 The 
dispossession of Indigenous communities is a form of 
“structural violence” because it endangers Indigenous lives 
through neutral-seeming institutions, such as private prop-
erty law.17 These institutions normalize Indigenous precar-
ity. Even though colonial violence is deeply entrenched in 
contemporary institutions and cultures, Indigenous peoples 
tirelessly struggle against dispossession. 

A striking example of Indigenous resistance is the 
Maya Land Struggle in what is now known as Belize. Since 

13 Newton, “Returns to a Native Land,” 111. 
14 Hosein, “Indigenous Geographies and Caribbean Femi-
nisms.” 
15 Ibid. 
16 Penados, Gahman, Smith, “Land, race, and (slow) violence,” 
1. 
17 Ibid., 3. 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 128 

contact with colonial powers, the Q’echi and Mopan Maya 
peoples have fought to regain their lands and protect their 
livelihoods.18 In the mid-1990s, the Belizean state granted 
corporations access to Maya lands for timber extraction.19 
Like in the colonial era, the state denied that the Maya peo-
ple were Indigenous to Belize, thereby denying them their 
land rights. Misanthropic skepticism and the myth of In-
digenous erasure were again at work for (neo-)colonial 
capitalist profit. In 2007, after many years of an arduous 
legal battle with the Belizean state, the Supreme Court of 
Belize recognized the Maya people as Indigenous and thus 
as bearing land rights. The court mandated that the state 
obtain the Maya community's informed consent before al-
lowing corporations to develop on their land. The state, 
however, violated the court order to respect Maya land 
rights for 37 out of the 39 Maya communities.20  After 
launching and winning another court case and subsequent 
appeals, the remaining 37 Maya communities won legal 
recognition of their right to ancestral lands. This case un-
derscores that Indigenous communities continue to strug-
gle against neo-colonial exploitation, and their relentless 
efforts yield essential gains. Moreover, this case demon-
strates the strength of Indigenous governance systems and 
Indigenous nations' power when they stand in solidarity. 
 
Indigenous peoples often band together to plan and carry 
out resistance projects because the oppressive states and 
corporations they oppose have abundant economic re-
sources and political power. Hosein describes a conference 
titled "Indigenous geographies and Caribbean feminisms: 
Common struggles against global capitalism," which 
brought together women leaders from many Indigenous 
nations in the Caribbean, including Akawaio, Garifuna, 
Kalinago, Lokono Arawak, Macushi, Maho, Mopan Maya, 
Q’eqchi Maya, Wapichan, and Warrau First Peoples.21 At 
the conference, these leaders discussed the possibilities for 

 
18 Ibid., 4. 
19 Ibid., 5. 
20 Ibid. 
21 Hosein, “Indigenous Geographies and Caribbean Femi-
nisms.” 
22 Ibid. 
23 Beatriz Felipe Pérez and Alexandra Tomaselli, “Indige-
nous Peoples and climate-induced relocation in Latin 
America and the Caribbean: managed retreat as a tool or a 

joining their local efforts to disrupt the capitalist, neo-co-
lonial extraction that threatens their communities. In de-
tailing this conference, Hosein highlights that Indigenous 
peoples are at the forefront of struggles against state pro-
jects to generate profit by privatizing water and clearing 
forests to make space for other development.22  
 
Indigenous peoples are spearheading these battles against 
unsustainable capitalist extraction in part because they are 
disproportionately affected by climate change. 23  Rising 
sea levels, water shortages, and extreme weather events in 
the Caribbean have displaced many Indigenous peoples.24 
The economic subordination and political marginalization 
that Indigenous people have suffered since contact with 
colonizers has left Indigenous nations in the Caribbean 
with little land and few resources. This deficiency, in turn, 
made Indigenous people more vulnerable to the effects of 
climate change.25 Indigenous sovereignty is, therefore, in-
extricably tied to climate change, among other justice is-
sues. 
 
The examples of Indigenous resistance I have sketched re-
veal that the myth of Indigenous erasure allows capitalist 
states and corporations to steal Indigenous lands, deplete 
their resources, and ultimately endanger Indigenous lives. 
These examples elucidate the pressing need to debunk the 
erroneous belief that Indigenous people no longer exist in 
the Caribbean and that colonial violence has ended. Indi-
geneity must be central in discussions on global capitalism, 
climate change, and the possibilities for creating a sustain-
able and just future. Anyone who lives on stolen lands and 
benefits from the destruction of Indigenous lives is respon-
sible for working towards the end of colonial violence. A 
critical step in reducing the harm done to the Indigenous 
communities of the Caribbean is to disrupt the myth of In-
digenous erasure. We must instead shift the discourse to 

threat?” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 11, 
no. 3 (2021): 353. 
24 Ibid. 
25 Rose-Ann J. Smith and Kevin Rhiney, “Climate (in)jus-
tice, vulnerability and livelihoods in the Caribbean: The 
case of the indigenous Caribs in northeastern St. Vincent,” 
Geoforum 73 (2016): 22. 
 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 129 

highlight the centrality of Indigenous justice projects to 
contemporary Caribbean politics. This can be done, I argue, 
by reframing the Caribbean––its history and current state–
–using the concepts of diaspora and entanglement. 

IV. Diaspora and Entanglement for Reframing the 

Caribbean 

To close her essay on Indigenous absence in Caribbean 
anti-colonial writing, Newton identifies that diaspora has 
the potential to be a “liberating concept,” and she sees a 
similar value in the idea of entanglement.26 She does not, 
however, expand on how we might use these concepts go-
ing forward. Here, I will elaborate on the concepts of dias-
pora and entanglement and clarify their usefulness for dis-
pelling the myth of Indigenous erasure. 
 
The idea of diaspora conveys the dispersal of people from 
a homeland. The term is often associated with exile and 
forced migration, like the movement of slaves and inden-
tured labourers from Africa and Asia to the Caribbean.27 
Writing from his experience as a Black Jamaican who lived 
in the Caribbean and the UK, Stuart Hall describes dias-
pora as a “scattering” that leaves migrants and their de-
scendants unable to “ever [go] home in exactly the same 
way as you left it.”28  For Hall, diaspora produces hybrid 
cultural identities continuously "producing and reproduc-
ing themselves anew" through influences from the home-
land and host land.29 Hence, the diaspora does not essen-
tialize Caribbean identities by claiming that Caribbean 
people retain an inherent African-ness at their core; instead, 
diaspora takes seriously that migration fundamentally al-
ters our identity and worldview.  
 
Reading the contemporary Caribbean through the concept 
of diaspora sheds light on the fact that Caribbeans with lin-
eage to Africa or Asia are not Indigenous to the Caribbean, 
nor are they Indigenous to Africa or Asia. Instead, due to 

 
26 Newton, “Returns to a Native Land,” 119. 
27  Robin Cohen, “Diasporas and the nation-state: from 
victims to challengers,” International Affairs 72, no. 3 
(1996): 507. 
28 Stuart Hall, “Through the Prism of an Intellectual Life,” in 
Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity and Diaspora, ed. David 
Morley (Durham: Duke University Press, 2018), 317. 
29  Stuart Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora,” in 

the Atlantic slave trade, they are diasporic people uniquely 
positioned between their homeland and host land. They 
cannot claim the host land as their own or return to an an-
cestral homeland. Diaspora thus offers a means of under-
standing and communicating the differences between In-
digenous Caribbean people and Caribbeans with African or 
Asian heritage. Moreover, highlighting diaspora clarifies 
that not all those who moved to the Caribbean during the 
colonial era were responsible for Indigenous genocide. 
Distinguishing between Indigenous and diasporic Caribbe-
ans is critical to dispelling the myth of Indigenous erasure. 
Framing the Caribbean population as diasporic opens the 
possibility of discussing the complexity of the histories of 
enslavement, including Indigenous peoples’ historical and 
continued resistance to colonialism. Taking up the lan-
guage of diaspora alongside Indigeneity creates a space for 
discussing the potential for collaboration between Indige-
nous communities and diasporic Caribbeans to decolonize 
the Caribbean and end capitalist exploitation. Furthermore, 
because diaspora challenges the rigidity of national bor-
ders, which often cut through Indigenous lands, diaspora is 
a subversive tool that can call into question the authority 
of the nation-state to control land and define belonging. 
Thinking through diaspora primes us to consider Indige-
nous peoples' rights to land and self-government critically. 
 
Like diaspora, entanglement helps call attention to the Car-
ibbean's colonial foundations and lasting impact on con-
temporary Caribbean society. Édouard Glissant puts for-
ward the idea of entanglement in Caribbean Discourse. 
Recognizing the impossibility of returning to the homeland, 
Glissant argues that Caribbean people must “return to the 
point of entanglement, from which we were forcefully 
turned away.”30 The point of entanglement is, for Glissant, 
the Caribbean itself––its complex cultural and political 
history. Glissant uses entanglement to describe the Carib-
bean as a society formed through a mesh of Indigenous, 

Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory: A Reader, 
ed. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman (Abingdon: 
Routledge, 2013), 401. 
30 Édouard Glissant, Caribbean Discourse: Selected Es-
says, trans. J. Michael Dash. (Charlottesville: University 
Press of Virginia, 1992), 25. 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 130 

African, Asian, and European cultures, thoughts, and lan-
guages. As a lens through which to read the contemporary 
Caribbean, entanglement foregrounds the region’s com-
plex and violent colonial history. At the same time, entan-
glement produces beauty and creative potential, and there-
fore it can act as a guiding principle for imagining a future 
free of exploitation.  
 
Entanglement is a rejection of the misconception that co-
lonialism is a phenomenon of the past that has no bearing 
on contemporary society. Suppose we return to the point of 
entanglement by drawing attention to the Caribbean's com-
plex histories. In that case, we will be better positioned to 
understand that Indigenous peoples continue to be a vital 
part of the Caribbean's entanglement. To say that the Car-
ibbean remains entangled is also to wrestle with the fact 
that Indigenous and diasporic Caribbean people can have 
conflicting needs and interests.31 Taken together, diaspora 
and entanglement offer us a way of reconceptualizing Car-
ibbean histories without erasing Indigenous communities’ 
historical and ongoing resistance to colonialism.  

V. Conclusion 

In this essay, I have described the colonial tactic of claim-
ing that Indigenous peoples are absent or extinct. Indige-
nous absence has persisted over time: scholarship on the 
Caribbean, even at its most revolutionary, has reinforced 
the idea that Indigenous peoples existed only before colo-
nization and are irrelevant to present-day decolonial strug-
gle. States continue invoking the myth of Indigenous eras-
ure, denying Indigenous peoples' status and land rights to 
facilitate capitalist resource extraction. Indigenous peoples, 
however, resist this neo-colonial oppression, often collab-
oratively. Their projects to reclaim land intersects with cli-
mate justice because harmful extractivist practices are 
premised on Indigenous dispossession. Finally, I have sug-
gested dismantling the myth of Indigenous erasure by re-
framing the Caribbean as a locale of diaspora and entan-
glement. 
 
Shifting discourse on Indigeneity is necessary because the 
myth of Indigenous erasure continues to be taken up by 
states to justify dispossession; however, changing 

 
31 Newton, “Returns to a Native Land,” 121. 

discourse only has limited effects on material and legal 
conflict. Even if we eradicate the myth of Indigenous eras-
ure, land reform will remain rife with tensions. Indigenous 
communities must still appeal to the state to respect their 
rights to land, engaging with the state on its terms. If, as 
Hosein suggests, seeking recourse for Indigenous oppres-
sion through global institutions operated by the Global 
North, such as the UN, reinscribes rather than dismantles 
colonial relations, we face the challenge of finding better 
solutions that call state power into question. Though erad-
icating the myth of Indigenous erasure is not a panacea for 
Indigenous violence, it is essential for validating Indige-
nous rights claims. It must be accompanied by localized, 
community-based justice projects that support Indigenous 
sovereignty. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



CARIBBEAN QUILT 
2023 VOL. 7 NO. 1 
 

 131 

BIBILIOGRAPHY 

                                                                      
Cohen, Robin. 1996. “Diasporas and the nation-state: from victims to challengers.” International Affairs 72, no. 3: 507–520. 

https://doi.org/10.2307/2625554. 

 

Glissant, Édouard. 1992. Caribbean Discourse: Selected Essays, translated by J. Michael Dash. Charlottesville: University Press 

of Virginia. 

 

Hall, Stuart. 2013. “Cultural Identity and Diaspora” In Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory: A Reader, edited by Patrick 

Williams and Laura Chrisman. Abingdon: Routledge. 

 

Hall, Stuart. 2018. “Through the Prism of an Intellectual Life.” In Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity and Diaspora, edited by 

David Morley. Durham: Duke University Press. 

 

Hosein, Gabrielle. 2017. “Indigenous Geographies and Caribbean Feminisms.” Stabroek News. https://www.sta-

broeknews.com/2017/04/10/features/indigenous-geographies-caribbean-feminisms/ 

 

Lamming, George. 1992. The Pleasures of Exile. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 

 

Newton, Melanie J. 2013. “Returns to a Native Land: Indigeneity and Decolonization in the Anglophone Caribbean.” Small Axe 

41: 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1215/07990537-2323346. 

 

Penados, Filiberto, Levi Gahman, and Shelda-Jane Smith. 2022. “Land, race, and (slow) violence: Indigenous resistance to racial 

capitalism and the coloniality of development in the Caribbean.” Geoforum: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geofo-

rum.2022.07.004. 

 

Pérez, Beatriz Felipe and Alexandra Tomaselli. 2021. “Indigenous Peoples and climate-induced relocation in Latin America and 

the Caribbean: managed retreat as a tool or a threat?” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 11, no. 3: 352–

364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-021-00693-2. 

 

Smith, Rose-Ann J. and Kevin Rhiney. 2016. “Climate (in)justice, vulnerability and livelihoods in the Caribbean: The case of the 

indigenous Caribs in northeastern St. Vincent.” Geoforum 73: 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.008. 

 


