Amid the climate crisis, environmental conflicts have intensified in various parts of the country, especially in areas affected by water scarcity and pressure on natural resources. In these contexts, environmental advocacy responds to the need to safeguard ways of life and ties to the land that are increasingly under threat.
At the same time, the use of digital technologies has become key to raising awareness of these conflicts, building support networks, and coordinating collective action, making it possible to amplify complaints and sustain organizational processes that previously took place mainly through fieldwork. However, this growing use occurs within a landscape marked by what is known as social datafication, where much of everyday interaction is translated into data that circulates, is stored, and is used in digital systems.
This intersection of environmental crisis, territorial conflict, and intensive use of technology raises new questions about the effects of digital technologies on forms of social organization. In particular, it highlights tensions that are not always visible, such as dependence on technological infrastructure that requires the very same natural resources that are in dispute in these territories.
In this context, Dr. David Jofré, a faculty member at the Usach School of Journalism, is leading a Fondecyt Initiation project that analyzes how environmental defenders use these tools in their collective action and how they address the dilemmas this entails.
“Unlike activists who are typically affiliated with more structured organizations, environmental defenders often lack formal support networks or access to specialized technical resources, since their actions are directly linked to defending their livelihoods. This means that the use of digital tools takes on specific characteristics, shaped by inequalities in access, knowledge, and opportunities for protection,” explained the researcher.
Digital Technology as Both a Tool and a Challenge
One of the key aspects of the research is understanding how the use of these technologies can lead to levels of exposure that did not previously exist, since “the digital footprint defenders leave when using these tools makes them more visible, but also more vulnerable, because that information can be used to track them down, threaten them, or even attack them,” added Jofré.
Based on this, the project aims to analyze how these individuals navigate, in their daily lives, the risks and opportunities associated with the use of digital platforms. “This involves observing which tools they use, how they make decisions regarding their use, what information they share, what safeguards they adopt, and what tensions they face when exposing themselves in digital environments,” explained the USACH scholar.
Based on this, the initiative aims to provide concrete tools for those involved in these processes; in particular, it envisions developing feedback mechanisms with the communities themselves, with the goal of translating the findings into practical guidelines that contribute to a safer and more mindful use of digital technologies.
The project will be carried out over a three-year period and involves identifying case studies in areas affected by water stress, conducting fieldwork with environmental advocates through interviews and participatory methodologies, analyzing their digital practices, and, finally, systematizing the results for feedback to the communities.
In addition, the research has collaboration agreements with the NGO Derechos Digitales and the Fundación Datos Protegidos, both of which are dedicated to promoting the protection of personal data and privacy, as well as direct work with environmental advocates in different regions of the country and the support of an interdisciplinary team throughout its various stages.
Finally, the scholar suggests that these findings can contribute to a broader discussion on the role of the state. “Today in Chile, there is a tendency to place the responsibility on the individual, but this problem also requires a broader public discussion and, eventually, the development of policies that better regulate these digital environments,” he concluded.