The Production of Empty Space and Deserts in the South-Central Andean Highlands

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting contribution on Chilean imaginaries, especially within the field of geography. The article explores a sort of geographic imaginary that, starting from the so called ‘unpopulated area of Atacama’, has expanded through periodical press, secondary sources and contemporary digital media. Its remarkable hypothesis argues that representation has led to an actual process of population loss. It is deep and relevant in its field, with broad potential to become a reference for Chilean scholars.

The manuscript is clear, relevant for the field and presented in a well-structured manner. It sounds scientific and is designed to develop the hypothesis correctly. The method is correct, starting from a broad exploration of both imageries and empty space, and studying the sources afterwards. There are plenty of references, yet most of them are local. It could be accepted in its current state with minor revisions of style, structure, and use of English.

Furthermore, some additional comments for improving the article would be:

- Reinforcing the bibliography related to imaginaries, especially including Giuliana Bruno's works.
- Images could be better treated: quality, aesthetics, and resolution.
- Clarifying the structure, which is well prepared, but sometimes mixes capital letters and sections.
- With a better reading of English language, which now is poor.

It must be improved. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The Article „The Production of Empty Space and The Desert in The South-Central Andean Highlands” by adopting a geohistorical perspective within the field of geographical imaginaries and making use of the periodical press, secondary sources and contemporary digital media that describe, narrate and explain the geography of the highlands of northern Chile. The Authors draw attention to the representations that have discouraged the occupation of the mountains.

The article is very interesting. I read it with interest, but I have serious doubts about publishing it.

In terms of structure, the article contains most of the required elements, I certainly lack a discussion of the results. However, this is not a purely technical problem, because basically the whole article is something like a discussion of the proposed issue. And according to me, this is the main problem I wanted to point out here.

I happened to publish in the Land Magazine and have reviewed articles in it many times. The journal is, in my opinion, more technical in nature. The article presented to me for review lacks this "technical aspect".

What exactly was the purpose of the research? I miss specifying what the authors wanted to achieve and for what purpose. On a related note, the article doesn't really have a research methodology. Chapter 2 MATERIALS & METHODS is an analysis of the state of knowledge on the topic under study. There is no description of the research methods used, which is certainly due to the previously indicated lack of definition of the purpose of the research. A continuation of this problem is the fact that in Chapter 3 RESULTS it is difficult to talk about the presentation of the results of the research, when there is no description beforehand of what was actually studied and for what purpose.

In my opinion, the article is not suitable for publication in the Land journal. It is certainly an interesting and valuable study, but I would suggest the authors to choose a less technical journal.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript presents the results of a desk research on the representations of the desert in the South-Central Andean Highlands in Chile as inhospitable and empty, and its effects in the collective imaginary. The topic is highly relevant, as the territory seems to remain unexplored and obliterated.

The topic is interesting, well developed and highly valuable. However, I suggest some structural changes. For instance, there is not enough evidence to support some -powerful and interesting- statements. The methods section needs further development, and I find that 2 articles from the 20th century insufficient to prove the central point of the research. Moreover, there is no mention of the land tenure systems in Chile's highlands (prone to land grabbing, according to the authors), demographic information/statistics (to claim that it is -not- unpopulated), a counter position to the Colonial point of view of the territory (perhaps an Indigenous perspective), among others.

I suggest to also include a reflection on how such imaginaries (of emptiness) are translated into policies that may demean the territory.

I suggest the authors to proofread the paper, make a correct use of quotation marks and get familiar with the Guidelines for Authors.

Please find below and attached by line by line comments:

15. Please explain "representations". Visual, cartographic, literary, oral...?

22-23. This affirmation, although powerful, is not (yet) supported by the statements above. Please develop further based on the results of your research.

27-40. Please cluster sentences that develop the same idea in either deductive or inductive paragraphs. For instance, lines 27-39 could be a single paragraph.
The consecutive paragraph could start with "However, the area has been slowly and progressively depopulating..."
Please, proof read the paper with this suggestion in mind.

28. Note that MPDI does not favour footnotes. I suggest to include it in the text (i.e. between brackets). Please refer to the Guidelines for Authors.

56. Legal documents use nominal numbers rather than ordinal. That is, the correct form is Article 3, not Article 3rd.

67. Please see my comment on footnotes.

80. In congruence with the abstract, please explain "representations".

105-279. This section reads like a Conceptual Framework rather than Methods and Materials. I miss a clarification on the methodology used for data acquisition and analysis. 

112-116. Full stop (no new paragraph) after colon. Please include quotation marks.

166-170. Full stop (no new paragraph) after colon. Please use quotation marks where pertinent.

183-189. Excellent contribution!

196. This brings us to the question on whether such 'deserts' should be conquered by and for civilisation. Perhaps the oblivion by the capitalist system has been positive for the ecological preservation of such habitats.

204. Indigenous should be written with uppercase as any other demonym. Not doing so could be interpreted as demeaning.

207-210. Interesting statement, although rather contradictory. Is the 'desert' connotation protecting (from conquer, from civilisation, from exploitation) or endangering (in terms of oblivion, human rights, infrastructures, growth/development)?

223. Indigenous (uppercase).

229-232. Full stop (no new paragraph) after colon. Include quotation marks where pertinent.

235-236. What is it actual status in terms of land tenure? Is it communal, customary, statutory, private, 'liberated', lease, de facto occupation? Is expropriation possible in Chile? Please expand the explanation in terms of land tenure, and how the 'representations' exacerbate land grabbing.

239. Please see my comment on footnotes.

252. What does 'conducted administration' mean in this context?

254. Indigenous (uppercase).

257. I suggest the use of italics for the term "chilenisation".

258-274. Full stop (no new paragraph) after colon. Please use quotation marks where pertinent.

285. Please develop this argument in terms of land tenure and land rights.

298. Please see my comment of footnotes and refer to MDPI's Guidelines for Authors.

304-308. Full stop (no new paragraph) after colon. Insert quotation marks where pertinent.

309. I would avoid the term 'race' (because its use would confirm the racial distinctions that we try to obliterate in our fight for equal rights for all). White men, bourgeoisie, European descendants are among the acceptable terms (from my point of view).

309-315. is this a quote? Quotation marks and references are missing.

316-320. Quotation marks?

322. Adaptable or malleable.

330. The word published and its variants repeat 3 times in two lines. I suggest "launched" or "released an article" to avoid this.

337-344. Is this an excerpt of the article? Please clarify and use quotation marks. Also, please limit the use of such excerpts to display only the statements that are relevant for this research purpose.

358. Indigenous (uppercase).

360. Indigenous (uppercase).

387. See comment on footnotes.

387. Is "this author" Gonzalez or the author of the manuscript?

402. See comment on footnotes.

Footnote 5. What does this number stand for?

420. See comment on footnotes.

421-423. An ecosystemic map of the territory would be utterly useful to visualise this statement. Such map should include settlements and population sizes.

433. Include the site in the image caption to avoid footnotes.

442. See comment on footnotes.

447. Although interesting, I am not certain this question is as relevant to the research as to what extent is the (unpopulated) desert area of Atacama is actually unpopulated and a desert.

449. See comment on footnotes.

451. See comment on footnotes.

471-473. This affirmation may be true, but the two showcased articles from 1913 and 1964 are not enough evidence of this. As this is a desk research mainly based on literature review, specific details about the number of texts analysed (and, for instance, the number of times certain words repeat - such as "unpopulated", "desert", "uncivilised", "inhospitable") would support this argument irrevocably.

476. Indigenous (uppercase).

476. To affirm that the Atacama Indigenous peoples have been invisibilised, please provide evidence of their presence. At this point, I am still uncertain that this "invisibility" has worked for their demeaning. Perhaps they have had more sovereignty and liberty for their cultural practices, as they have not been expelled from the territory as in many other places?

480-482. But how has this been portrayed in the representations after 1964? What is the current trend?

482-484. The conclusions are confusing: have the highlands been exploited for their resources through environmental degradation and the evacuation of the Indigenous population, or have they been overlooked because they were not conceived as worthy by the capitalist investors?

486. Act.

495. In the collective imaginary or in the physical space?

502-505. Parinacota Plan should be further explored in the paper, as it seems relevant for the conclusions. There is only a mention of it in a footnote.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This article aimed to present geographical perceptions of the upland areas of northern Chile as a factor in the depopulation of the area and the reluctance of settlers to inhabit the area. The article is related to research in the field of social geography, geography of perception. Unfortunately, the authors were not entirely clear about the methods they used to achieve the research objective (this objective was also not clearly articulated). 

It is therefore advisable to describe the methodological apparatus in more detail (the authors used google databases, but how, how much source material and of what type they reviewed, from what time period, etc.). The authors point out that in the Latin American literature, research into the perception of space appeared in the 1990s. this makes it all the more pertinent to carry out qualitative research into geographical perceptions (even if only with a small sample of residents). What is missing from this article is a research section devoted to the study of contemporary perceptions of the described area by the inhabitants of Chile (e.g. using surveys, mental maps, etc.), which is of great interest to social geographers. If the authors use desk research data, the data should be classified and grouped in some way. I would reccomend to expand this study with the indicated elements.

It seems that one figure (instead of three) is enough to present the examined area. It could be more interesting for foreign reader to present some thematic maps of Chilean highlands showing f ex. the types of landscapes (both natural and cultural), population distribution or density (or the dynamics of the process of depopulation) 

Fotographs of old newspapers are also unnecessary because of low quality. It would be enough to mention how many and which journals were taken into the consideration during the research. 

The conclusions indicated by the authors are not fully understood by the foreign reader. This is related to the fact that the results of the research are not clearly presented (they are descriptions, quotations, characteristics rather than an answer to the question - supported by relevant research on how the studied area is perceived in the past and today)

In conclusion, it is recommended to describe in more detail the research methods used in the work, to make a synthetic grouping of the analyzed sources and the perception information contained in these sources. If possible, carry out qualitative research using tools developed by researchers working on the geography of perception.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I thank the Authors for responding to my comments. I understand their point of view, and if the Scientific Editor accepts just for this special issue an article of a slightly different nature than other typical articles in the Land Journal, then I accept that too.

Anyway, I still have some minor comments:

1. please, in the Materials and Methods section, add some kind of scheme showing the different research steps and the methods used in them. This would greatly improve the readability of the methodology.

2. I still miss the separation of the discussion of the results

3. please correct the numbering of the chapters (3.3 should be 4.3).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper has significantly improved and should be ready to publish.

I would like to encourage the authors follow this research up, and do a deeper exploration into the tenure security, Indigenous Traditional Knowledge and ecosystemic diversity of the South-Central Andean Highlands.

A few punctuation marks need to be corrected (e.g. line 517).

Also, the term "Indigenous" should be capitalized to acknowledge and respect the distinctiveness and importance of Indigenous peoples and their cultures. Capitalizing "Indigenous" is a way of recognizing Indigenous communities as distinct and separate from other groups, emphasizing the significance of their unique histories, languages, and traditions. This practice is in line with principles of cultural sensitivity and respect for the identities of these communities. It is considered a mark of respect for the specific and diverse cultures and histories encompassed by the term "Indigenous."

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you for taking my suggestions on board. The corrections and improvements made to the text have significantly improved the perception of the study. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf