The concept of food sovereignty has been enshrined in a number of countries' Constitutions around the world without any clear consensus around what state-sponsored 'food sovereignty' initiatives might entail given the complexity and interconnectedness of the global food system. In the vanguard of this movement at the national level has been the so-called 'pink tide' of Latin America -namely Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia. As a constitutional right, food sovereignty presents a significant opening to promote a citizen's revolution of the food system, but is such a proposal possible or desirable as a top-down initiative? The concept itself is inherently peopleled as it implies constructing (or deconstructing) a food system that is defined, led, controlled, and accessed in a culturally appropriate and ecologically sustainable way by local people in a given territory. At the same time, state intervention is a necessary function to confront the global food system, dismantle unequal agrarian structures, and recognize the autonomy of people and communities in defining and controlling their food and agricultural systems. In different geographies and societies of food sovereignty, it is necessary to evaluate how state and social actors interact in the pursuit of a national food sovereignty strategy, with particular attention to the relations of control and access to decision-making and physical resources.To date, pushes for food sovereignty have been led and carried out at the local and transnational levels by social movements -largely circumventing the involvement of state actors. So how does food sovereignty manifest itself through a state-led process constitutionally in the national economy? Is it likely that even the most progressive regimes today will consist of pro-reform state actors with the autonomy and capacity to transform agrarian structures and cede political and economic power to communities on the basis of selfdetermination? Food sovereignty ultimately requires a structural transformation of the economy and society as a whole. It requires a synergetic relationship between state and societal actors able to dismantle power structures through transforming the relations of access and control over resources and decision-making processes. This paper critically analyzes the role of the state in constructing and pursuing a pathway towards food sovereignty using three country case studies. We argue that the most favourable conditions for pursuing a food sovereignty strategy exist when pro-reformist state and societal actors interact in a mutually reinforcing way to restructure relations of control and access over resources and political spaces.

No abstract

No abstract

In the context of rising resource demand, agricultural crops such as sugarcane are being promoted for their multiple uses in different commodity markets and as alternatives to fossil fuel equivalents (i.e. as a source of biofuel, bioelectricity and bioplastic). These commodities are also produced on an increasingly flexible basis, as sugarcane mills respond to price signals and switch between different crop uses. This paper offers a preliminary exploration into the politics of this latest development in the capitalist industrialization of agriculture. It does so by focusing primarily on flexing in Brazil and highlighting the role of the state both in creating markets for non-food products that sugarcane mills can now switch between and managing the tensions that arise from this. These tensions have concerned consumer prices for fuel, control of distribution infrastructure and conditions of land conversion, each prompting political interventions by the state. The paper then suggests how this same process is taking place, albeit shaped by different contexts, in Southern Africa and Cambodia. It concludes with some key questions for further research: is flexing eroding the distinction between crop regimes? How do primary processors decide what their product mix will be? And on what basis do state actors support flexing between agricultural products and investments in so-called bio-refineries?

A significant transition is underway in Bolivia where both domestic and foreign capital are monopolizing commercial agriculture and leading a highly mechanized, capitalintensive production model which has considerably diminished the need for labour. This paper explores mechanisms and processes of 'productive exclusion' in the soyproducing zones of Santa Cruz in relation to the expansion, concentration and mechanization of the 'soy complex'. We provide an analysis of how the agrarian structure has developed since soy was adopted -from 'putting land into production' to 'expanding the agricultural frontier' and 'controlling the agro-industrial chain'. We explore how and the extent to which the penetration of new capital is leading to new processes of agrarian change which exclude the rural majority from accessing the means of production. While a process of 'foreignization' of land began to take shape in the early 1990s, new processes of capital accumulation are eroding the ability of small farmers to engage in productive activity, potentially leading to 'surplus' populations no longer needed for capital accumulation.

This paper analyses the politics of agrarian change in Bolivia in the context of the development and expansion of the soy complex in Santa Cruz. It attempts to contribute to a better understanding of the nature and role of the state in relation to agrarian change through what is referred to here as the state-society-capital nexus. From an "agrarian" to a "productive" revolution in the countryside, this paper situates the rise of the Movement Toward Socialism (Movimiento al Socialismo, MAS) to state power and its ability to maintain control over the state apparatus by balancing both accumulation and legitimation interests through its neo-extractivist development strategy. As extractivist rents fall with the commodities bust and smallholders' exclusion becomes more apparent, the MAS' overextension in facilitating capital accumulation is beginning to show signs of a legitimacy crisis. The politics of agrarian change remain as contested as the dynamics within the state-societycapital nexus.

No abstract

The conjunction of climate, food, and financial crises in the late 2000s triggered renewed interest in farmland and agribusiness investments around the world. This phenomenon became known as the 'global land grab' and sparked debates among social movements, NGOs, academics, government and international development agencies worldwide. In this introduction, we critically analyse the 'state of the literature' so far, and outline four areas that are moving the debate 'beyond land grabs'. These include: (1) the role of contract farming and differentiation among farm workers in the consolidation of farmland; (2) the broader forms of dispossession and mechanisms of control and value grabbing beyond 'classic' land grabs for agricultural production; (3) discourses about, and responses to, Chinese agribusiness investments abroad; and (4) the relationship between financialization and land grabbing. Ultimately, we propose new directions to deepen and even transform the research agenda on land struggles and agroindustrial restructuring around the world.