Engenho and Assentamento

]

Engenho and Assentamento: An Impasse in the Transformation of Sugar Cane Plantations in Northeast Brazil?

Carla Inguaggiato

PhD in Local Development and Global Dynamics, University of Trento

Researcher at Training Centre for International Cooperation, Trento, Italy

1Rural Sociological Society August, 1 2014

Objectives of the paper

Present the possible risks of impasses of Brazilian agrarian reform

Focus on villages’ social networks to understand if there are the conditions for social transformation

Present a comparative analysis of three agrarian reform settlements’ case studies

2

Brazilian agrarian reform: risks of an impasse

Introduction on Brazilian agrarian reform: when and how?

- Several waves since Sixties, focus on 1990’s and early 2000’s: strong role of social movements

Possible causes of the risks of reproduction of previous dependency patterns:

• Land is still property of the state

• Most settlers are in debt with the state

• Quality of housing is one crucial benefit for settlers

Risk is substitution of land lords’ patronage bonds with state patronage bonds

3

Why focus on social networks to study change

Northeast Brazil: area of sugar cane plantations since 1600s

Before agrarian reform villages were factory towns of sugar cane plantations (“engenhos”):very hierarchical organization of labor

After agrarian settlements (“assentamentos”): possibility of transformation of labor organization in a more polycentric one

4

Why focus on networks to study change (2)

Agrarian reform and creation of a coop aimed at supportingfamily farming

BUT

Very low level of state investment and training

Very few households had previous experience in familyfarming

THEREFORE

Main opportunity of agrarian reform enable interactionbetween households with different backgrounds

If only similar households are in contact no change

5

The main idea

6

S. Segregation P. Partial overlap O. Complete overlap

Different scenarios of overlap between multiple socialnetworks define adaptiveness to change of communities

Scenario S and O is the least adaptive

Scenario P is the most adaptive because it allows for theinteraction between different people

Adapted from S. Parkinson (2013, p. 59)

Main research question & Hypothesis

7

Main question: which “assentamento” is more similar to scenario P?

Hypothesis:Villages’ formation history

Villages’ social networks

Villages selection criteria: • Created by different organizations (a

private ass., MST, CPT)• High percentage of households’

members of coop

Data

Primary data

3 whole undirected networks: kinship, family farming employment, frequent meetings

177 households (102, 38, 37)

Households’ attributes

One point in time observation

1.1 Frequent contact networks

9

Village A

Village B

Village C

!! Village!A! Village!B! Village!C!

Density! 0.034! 0.114! 0.101!

Isolates!! 2%! 5%! 0%!

Average!degree! 3.39! 4.21! 3.6!

!

1.2 Kinship networks

10

Village A

Village B

Village C

VillageA VillageB VillageC

Density 0.047 0.024 0.045

Isolates 12% 50% 19%

Averagedegree 4.71 1.36 1.62

1.3 Employment in family farming networks

11

Village A

Village B

Village C

VillageA VillageB VillageC

Isolates 33% 50% 54%

Density 0.014 0.024 0.021

Averagedegree 1.41 0.89 0.76

Network overlap of kinship & family farming

12

Village A Village C

Village B

Comparative analysis of three agrarian reform settlements’ case studies

• Family farming favors cross-cutting ties in the 3 villages: it connects households that would be connected

• Villages differ in social networks’ structural configurations

• Village A most similar to scenario P as more social configurations are needed to explain network formation

• Vulnerability of villages because of important role of municipal politics to support family farming

13

Thank you for your attention!

carla_inguaggiato@live.com

14

Village A contact network colored by party

15

Village B contact network colored by party

16