Lula and the Meaning of Agrarian Reform

Welch, Cliff

doi:10.1080/10714839.2011.11725534

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2006, Lula also signed a law for family farmers, defining them more broadly, including other social groups like the indigenous peoples and maroon communities (quilombolas), who thereby gained access to governmental programs like PRONAF. 14 He added more families and hectares by 'regularizing' land occupied but not titled by both peasants and large-scale land grabbers, especially in the Amazon region, where the actions meant little in terms of the redistribution of land (FNRA 2008;Oliveira 2010;Welch 2011).…”

Section: Rural Unions and Land Struggle Under Constitutional Law (198mentioning

confidence: 98%

Rural unions and the struggle for land in Brazil

Welch¹,

Sauer²

2015

The Journal of Peasant Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of Brazil's agricultural labor movement have generally neglected its relationship to the struggle for land, but this is neither fair nor accurate. Analyzing the rural labor movement's historical contributions to the land struggle in Brazil, this contribution has been organized into three main periods, emphasizing social relations, institutional activism and policy changes. It argues that despite the peculiarities of different historical contexts, rural labor consistently provoked protest against policies that privileged large landholders, whose concentration of power over land and labor resources continually worsened Brazil's ranking as one of the most unequal of nations. For more than half a century, the most constant opponent of this situation among the peasantry has been the National Confederation of Workers in Agriculture (CONTAG), a corporatist organization of rural labor unions founded in 1963.

show abstract

Section: Rural Unions and Land Struggle Under Constitutional Law (198mentioning

confidence: 98%

Rural unions and the struggle for land in Brazil

Welch¹,

Sauer²

2015

The Journal of Peasant Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…He also tried to split and marginalise the land reform movement by extending rural credits and technical assistance programmes to settled peasants and subsistence farmers while ignoring demands for a comprehensive land reform that would ensure a decent quantity of arable land for all farmers. Brazil's prominent landless rural workers movement, MST (Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais sem Terra), has been increasingly experiencing difficulties in maintaining its power since many poor peasants are reluctant to join the movement for fear of losing their benefits (Welch 2011;Reyes 2012). Second, thanks to the clientelist state, which enables the president to appoint thousands of civil servants at all levels of administration, Lula and Rousseff brought hundreds of trades union and social movement cadres into the state, leading to what was described as the 'capture' of Brazil's social movements (see de Oliveira 2006;Saad-Filho and Morais 2014).…”

Section: Deradicalising Labourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Everywhere Taksim: Sowing the Seeds for a New Turkey at Gezi

Saatçioğlu¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The third set of actors-largely social movement activists and movement-or civil-society-oriented scholars-argues that successful land reform requires getting the politics right. They emphasize the importance of political will, particularly the political will of the executive office, in allocating scarce resources to the landless against the interests of powerful landed elites and international agribusiness (Moyo and Yeros, 2005;Rosset, Patel, and Courville, 2006;Welch, 2011). They argue that in many countries land reform is difficult or impossible because the state is captured by elite interests, particularly those of agribusiness and the large plantation-style coroneis (colonels [see Pereira, 2003;Stedile, 2007]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

State-Society Dynamics in Contemporary Brazilian Land Reform

Wolford¹

2016

Latin American Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 15 years, land reform has returned from the “dustbin of history” to serve again as a viable policy option. Much has been written about its resurgence, with the research tending to focus narrowly on the role of prices, policies, and politics in shaping the design and outcome of distribution. While these are necessary elements to understand, their reification neglects the critical element of process. Land reform programs are implemented by an array of government actors and negotiated on the ground by beneficiaries, social movement activists, large farmers, and the general public. A messy assemblage of actors and interests shapes both the design and the outcome of distribution. Qualitative analysis of the federal agency in charge of land reform in Brazil, the Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária (National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform—INCRA), reveals that, in the context of increased citizen participation and reduced funding, the agency must work together with social movement activists to perform its task. The analysis suggests that the study of state-society relations today requires a new vocabulary that highlights substance and process rather than form. Nos últimos 15 anos, a reforma agrária foi resgatada do arquivo histórico para servir como opção políticamente viável. Muito se tem escrito sobre essa restauração. Pesquisas têm concentrado atenção no papel de preços, legislação e política no desenho e resultado da distribuição. Ainda que seja necessário entender esses elementos, sua ratificação ignora os elementos críticos do processo. Programas de reforma agrária são implementados por uma variedade de atores governamentais e negociados por beneficiários, ativistas de movimentos sociais, grandes agricultores e pelo público em geral. Um mosaico desengonçado de atores e interesses dão forma tanto ao desenho quanto ao resultado da distribuição. Análise qualitativa da agência federal responsável pela reforma agrária no Brasil, o Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária (INCRA), revela que, no contexto de maior participação de cidadãos e de recursos reduzidos, é importante que a agência atue coordenadamente com ativistas de movimentos sociais para desempenhar seu papel. A análise sugere que o estudo das relações entre sociedade e Estado hoje exige um novo vocabulário que acentue mais a importância de substância e processo do que da forma.

show abstract

Lula and the Meaning of Agrarian Reform

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Rural unions and the struggle for land in Brazil

Rural unions and the struggle for land in Brazil

Everywhere Taksim: Sowing the Seeds for a New Turkey at Gezi

State-Society Dynamics in Contemporary Brazilian Land Reform

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About