flograttarola.bsky.social
Uruguayan in Czech Republic | Postdoc in #Macroecology | #CommunityScience | #BiodiversityInformatics | #OpenScience | Leading biodiversidata.org 🇺🇾🧉 and naturalista.uy 💚
🔗 flograttarola.com
I mix Español and English :)
70 posts
1,884 followers
520 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
¿Vas al #LivingData2025? Enviá un resumen a nuestra sesión 💪🏼 Nos interesan experiencias de proyectos comunitarios que abarquen cualquiera de las distintas etapas de la movilización de datos, desde la recopilación y gestión de datos hasta su publicación y uso www.livingdata2025.com/sessions.htm...
comment in response to
post
youtu.be/4GX6a2WEA1Q?...
comment in response to
post
Uffff, ta difícil
comment in response to
post
Hola Gabriel! I couldn't agree with you more :) I should add, words have meanings, and we need to discuss them and resignify them. In the same way we shouldn't call a study "Global" if it only covers the Global North. Thanks for engaging <3
comment in response to
post
Thanks for bringing your perspective, Thilina! I'm not sure developed/developing is more consistent among people. How many think Chile/Uruguay are "more developed" than Turkey/Montenegro? In any case, I would still add the definition, for instance, "according to the UN's Human Development Index".
comment in response to
post
Yes! Torres García <3
Thank Fabricio. One more for Global South 💪🏼
comment in response to
post
🫶🏼
comment in response to
post
I'm also on your team Reynaldo, but I'm starting to think this is a South American preference. Interesting point about literature in Spanish using more the term "desarrollo", thanks!
comment in response to
post
Good point, Cemal. I think this is precisely what I mean by the term being confusing/problematic. As far as I know, "Global South" does not refer explicitly to the geography but it's implicit in the words North/South 🤪
comment in response to
post
We agree, Flor! "Developed" is such a loaded word to me. But I was telling Jiuliano, that perhaps the best solution is not to assume everyone knows (and agrees with) what we mean by "Global South" or "Developing countries", but to clearly define it or even better, avoid it! Haha
comment in response to
post
Thanks for engaging, Juliano! I also love them :) I think we agree that, if you are using any of these terms, you need to define them. Else, just mention/list which countries you refer to insted of assuming. Consifering "development" this is not *too* awful actually hdr.undp.org/data-center/...
comment in response to
post
I agree with you. I struggle with developing/developed. But I think "Global South" might be something only people from South America feel comfortable with :/
comment in response to
post
I think it's good that it's political! The issue with "Global South" is that although it relates to geography, the definition actually emphasises historical aspects. Also, many people have appropriated the term "South" as something to be proud of. But yes, most don't read "Global South" in this way
comment in response to
post
That said, I totally agree it's problematic. But it's problematic because it is confusing. Maybe the best way is to pick a term but then have a side note detailing exactly what we mean by it 🤔
comment in response to
post
Thanks, Juliano! I feel a bit the opposite way, that the term "developing" is precisely Eurocentric, while the term "South" represents more than just geography, a historical perspective. The social sciences have define "South" like that (e.g., Epistemologías del Sur, Boaventura de Sousa Santos)
comment in response to
post
I feel the first is Eurocentric and I like the last because it reflects better historical inequalities, but it often confuses people or they think it's "too political" (?)