The concepts of colonisation, colonialism, neocolonialism, and coloniality are often used interchangeably, but they each carry distinct meanings and implications for our work. Understanding where they build off each other and where they diverge can help us design the best strategies to meet the right approach.

Colonisation is a process where one nation or group of people physically invades and takes control of another’s land, resources, and people. This process is always violent and often involves establishing settlements and exploiting the colonised territory’s resources to benefit the colonisers.

Colonisation is a time-bound event with a clear beginning and, in some cases, an end, as seen in the formal independence movements of the mid-20th century. There are of course some colonies still in place, such as Polynesia and New Caledonia, both still colonised by France.

However, the context extends beyond the physical occupation of land. Owing to its long history with our species and the recent history of 120 countries that gained independence during the 20th century, colonisation has many deep-rooted aftereffects. These include the broader, systemic domination of a colonised society’s political, economic, and social structures, even after formal independence is achieved.

Colonialism manifests in the lingering power dynamics, economic dependencies, and cultural hegemonies that continue to shape the lives of formerly colonised peoples. In many cases (I would argue this is true in every colonised space), there is no clean break after colonisation ended and people regained their independence. All the way from the ongoing relationships of exploitation and subjugation to cultures and the mixed ethnicities of people who come from both groups of people.

This is neocolonialism, the continued influence and control exerted by either former colonies or current global powers. I believe that our sector is controlled by a US political agenda due to the number of funders, donors, institutions, and government bodies that originate in the US and exert their social and political agenda over our work. From USAID to the UN controlling the type of work that is funded, designed, and implemented, down to the structure of something like an after-action review, which comes from the US military, there’s a lingering legacy of US cultural imperialism across all of our work.  

Coloniality and colonialism are concepts named by scholars like Aníbal Quijano and Walter Mignolo, both from former Spanish colonies in South America (Peru and Argentina, respectively) and refer to the enduring patterns of power, control, and hierarchy established during the colonial period that continue to influence the present.

Coloniality is not tied to the physical presence of colonisers but rather to the ways in which colonial power dynamics have been internalised and normalised. It is the legacy of colonialism in our contemporary world, visible in global economic systems, social hierarchies, and even in the knowledge systems that dominate academia and policymaking.

Understanding these distinctions is vital for any efforts to decolonise. We may not be able to target the colonial systems and structures in places that are still colonies. Still, our work may be able to target colonialism as a concept and manifestation of power. By unpacking structures of power (who controls the funding, where it goes, and the strategies it supports) and practices of power (who designs projects, conducts data collection, who defines knowledge and how it manifests), we can target the deep-rooted ideologies that affect how our sector interacts with each other and the roles we’ve assigned – which should never have been there in the first place.