Assessment of the Risks of Spatial Disintegration in Colombia

The study assesses the risks of spatial disintegration of Colombia as an example of a Latin American state with relatively weak control of public space by the central government. Spatial disintegration in the study is understood as the process of disruption and destruction of the system-forming connections between regions, as a result of which “gray zones” may arise—territories that are not controlled by the central government. The methodology for calculating the risk of spatial disintegration of a country is based on the equivalence of seven factors: historical, socioeconomic, domestic political, ethnocultural, transport, military-strategic, and foreign policy. At the same time, the importance of each factor is determined by the proportion of the country’s population living in territorial units with high risk of disintegration according to this factor. The study revealed that almost all departments of Colombia have experience of disintegration in the past (mainly as part of numerous civil wars), later due to the activities of radical armed groups and drug cartels. It has been established that historical, socio-economic and ethnocultural factors are leading in the architecture of risks of spatial disintegration of Colombia. The overall risk of spatial disintegration in Colombia exceeds similar indicators in a number of Latin American countries to which this technique has been applied (Venezuela, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, Mexico). At the same time, Colombia is inferior to Bolivia in terms of the risk of spatial disintegration. The number of departments in Colombia that combine high risks for 4 or more spatial disintegration factors is 12 (out of 33 administrative divisions of the 1st order). The greatest risks are noted in the departments of Chocó (a combination of 6 out of 7 possible factors), North Santander (a set of high-risk factors sharply differs from most other heterogeneous regions), as well as in the geographically remote island department of San Andres and Providencia, which is the subject of a territorial dispute with Nicaragua. There is a similarity in the spatial pattern and the structure of the risks of disintegration with the corresponding indicators of neighboring Venezuela previously calculated by the authors.

1. Alesina A., Spolaore E. On the number and size of nations. Q. J. Econ., 1997, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 1027–1056.

2. Cortázar-Gómez D.M., Pineda-Guarin J.F. Red de comercio departamental en Colombia: Enfoque gravitacional y análisis topológico de redes. Documentos de Trabajo sobre Economía Regional y Urbana. No. 285, 2019. 51 p.

3. Dabagyan E.S. Colombia: difficult roads to peace. Novaya Noveish. Istor., 2017, no. 5, pp. 118–125. (In Russ.).

4. Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística. Available at: https://www.dane.gov.co (accessed: 10.08.2025). Dubovik V.O. Transportation systems of the countries of South America. Latin. Am., 2015, no. 4, pp. 48–62. (In Russ.).

5. Flores Th.E. Vertical inequality, land reform, and insurgency in Colombia. Peace Econ. Peace Sci. Public Policy, 2014, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2013-0058

6. González-Cortés L.D., Husain-Talero S. Social entrepreneurship and sustainable tourism in Colombia: A baseline study in post-conflict regions. Int. J. Sustain. Econ. Soc. Cult. Context, 2020, no. 16, pp. 65–85.

7. Guasca M., Vanneste D., van Broeck A.M. Peacebuilding and post-conflict tourism: Addressing structural violence in Colombia. J. Sustain. Tour., 2021, pp. 1–17.

8. Istoriya Kolumbii s drevneishikh vremen do nachala 21 veka [History of Colombia from Ancient Times to the Beginning of the 21st Century]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2022. 720 р.

9. Ivanovskii Z.V. Colombia: Peace process and challenges in the post-conflict period. Mir. Ekon. Mezhdun. Otnosh., 2020, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 110–118. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-1-110-118

10. Ivanovskii Z.V. Colombia: a paradigm change? Challenges and prospects of the “left shift”. Svobodn. mysl’, 2022, no. 4, pp. 69–84. (In Russ.).

11. Lobach D.V., Smirnova E.A. Terrorism and drug traffic during permanent armed conflict in modern Colombia. Aziat.-Tikhookean. Reg.: Ekon., Polit., Pravo, 2016, no. 3, pp. 135–148. (In Russ.).

12. Manukhin A.A. Colombian guerrillas and Latin American left regimes: The sketch of building a “quasi-alliance”. Latin. Am., 2020, no. 7, pp. 49–67. (In Russ.). https://doi: 10.31857/S0044748X0009861-6

13. McFarlane A. Cimarrones y palenques en Colombia: Siglo 18. Histor. Espacio, 1990, no. 14, pp. 53–78. https://doi.org/10.25100/hye.v0i14.6846

14. Montalvo J.G., Reynal-Querol M. Ethnic polarization, potential conflict, and civil wars. Am. Econ. Rev., 2005, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 796–816.

15. Morales Nieto J. ¿Qué es el postconflicto? Colombia después de la guerra: Una breve introducción al reto de cómo enfrentar el proceso de transición hacia la reconciliación y la paz en Colombia. Lecturas sobre paz y Desarrollo, B, Grupo Zeta, 2015. 196 p.

16. Moreno Aristizábal D.A. Analysis of the determinants of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in developing countries. Specific case of Colombia. Master’s Degree in Engineering and Management. Politecnico di Torino, 2022.

17. Popov F.А. Fragmentation of the political space of the world: The main forms and current trends. Reg. Issled., 2015, no. 2, pp. 64–73. (In Russ.).

18. Prieto Curiel R., Quiñones Domínguez M., Lora E., O’Clery N. Mobility between Colombian cities is predominantly repeat and return migration. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 2022, vol. 94, art. 101774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2022.101774

19. Rohas Samper M. Gustavo Petro: The first leader of left government in Colombian history. Latinoam. Istor. Al’manakh, 2023, no. 38, pp. 237–263. (In Russ.).

20. Sebentsov A.B., Kolosov V.A. The phenomenon of uncontrolled territories in the modern world. Polis. Polit. Issled., 2012, no. 2, pp. 31–46. (In Russ.).

21. Skachkov V.S., Zayats D.V. Assessing the risks of spatial disintegration in a state with a multinuclear territorial and political structure (on the example of Bolivia). Vestn. S.-Peterb. Univ. Nauki Zemle, 2022a, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 475–490. (In Russ.).

22. Skachkov V.S., Zayats D.V. Risks of the state territory disintegration (case studies of Mexico, Venezuela and Chile). Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 5: Geogr., 2022b, no. 3, pp. 50–61. (In Russ.).

23. Skachkov V.S., Zayats D.V. Dynamics of the risks of spatial disintegration in Argentina at the beginning of the 21st century. InterCarto. InterGIS, 2023a, vol. 1, no. 29, pp. 34–54. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.35595/2414-9179-2023-1-29-34-54

24. Skachkov V.S., Zayats D.V. Spatial disintegration of the state and evaluation of its risks (a case study of Ecuador). Geogr. Vestn., 2023b, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 36– 48. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17072/2079-7877-2023-2-36-48

25. Suarez A., Árias-Arévalo P.A., Martínez-Mera E. Environmental sustainability in post-conflict countries: insights for rural Colombia. Environ. Dev. Sustain., 2018, vol. 20, pp. 997–1015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9925-9

26. Treivish А.I. Regionalization and reintegration of Russia: The crisis cycle of the last decade. Izv. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2001, no. 4, pp. 73–80. (In Russ.).

27. Turovskii R.F. Politicheskaya regionalistika [Political Regionalistics]. Moscow: GU-VShE Publ., 2006. 780 р.

28. Villar D., Schaeffer D. Disarmament is the new war, gold is the new opium, and ecohealth is the historic victim. Environ. Health Insights, 2019, vol. 13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178630219862241