Whereas the scholarship on rural contention mostly focuses on austerity and busts, we study protests by agricultural export producers in times of high agricultural prices. Aware of price volatility, farmers seek to take advantage of cycles’ upswings to maximize their income and resist sharing the rents generated by higher prices. When farmers lack the formal political influence to avert redistribution, they are more likely to protest as their tax burden increases although they benefit from higher prices. Their strongest protest tool is lockouts, which halt commercialization activities and have significant economic consequences, but require coordination by farmer associations. Membership homogeneity and lower exposure to state retaliation by these organizations heightens contention. We test this argument using a local-level data set on rural lockouts across Argentine departments between 2003 and 2013, a time of high prices for Argentina’s key export commodity: soybeans. We complement our empirical strategy with in-depth, semi-structured elite interviews.
AlbertusM. (2019). The effect of commodity price shocks on public lands distribution: Evidence from Colombia. World Development, 113, 294–308.
2.
AlbertusM.BramborT.CenevivaR. (2016). Land inequality and rural unrest: Theory and evidence from Brazil. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 62(3), 557–596.
AndersonK. (2009). Distortions to agricultural incentives: A global perspective, 1955-2007. The World Bank.
5.
AnllóG.BisangR.CampiM. (2013). ¿Schumpeter de visita en las pampas argentinas? [Schumpeter visits the Argentine Pampas?] In AnllóG.BisangR.CampiM. (Eds.), Claves para repensar el agro argentino [Clues for Rethinking Argentine Agriculture] (pp. 11–30). Eudeba.
6.
ArceM.MangonnetJ. (2013). Competitiveness, partisanship, and subnational protest in Argentina. Comparative Political Studies, 46(8), 895–919.
7.
AshenfelterO.JohnsonG. (1969). Bargaining theory, trade unions, and industrial strike activity. American Economic Review, 95(4), 35–49.
8.
Barrera-GómezJ.BasagañaX. (2015). Models with transformed variables: Interpretation and software. Epidemiology, 26(2), 16–17.
9.
BatesR. H. (1981). Markets and states in tropical Africa: The political basis of agricultural policies. University of California Press.
10.
BisangR.CampiM. (2013). El desarrollo agrario argentino en las últimas décadas: fases en el establecimiento de un nuevo paradigma productivo [Argentine agrarian development in the last decades: stages in the establishment of a new productive paradigm]. In AnllóG.BisangR.CampiM. (Eds.), Claves para repensar el agro argentino [Clues for Rethinking Argentine Agriculture] (pp. 31–94). Eudeba.
BushS.SimiP. (2001). European farmers and their protests. In ImigD.TarrowS. (Eds.), Contentious Europeans. Protest and politics in an emerging polity (pp. 97–124). Rowan & Littlefield.
13.
CameronA. C.TrivediP. K. (2013). Regression analysis of count data. Cambridge University Press.
14.
CampiM. (2013). Tecnología y desarrollo agrario [Technology and Agrarian Development]. In AnllóG.BisangR.CampiM. (Eds.), Claves para repensar el agro argentino [Clues for Rethinking Argentine Agriculture] (pp. 95–150). Eudeba.
15.
Della PortaD. (2015). Social movements in times of austerity. Polity.
16.
EcksteinS.Wickham-CrowleyT. (2015). There back again: Latin American social movements reasserting the power of structural theories. In AlmeidaP.Cordero UlateA. (Eds.), Handbook of social movements across Latin America (pp. 25–42). Springer.
FairfieldT. (2011). Business power and protest: Argentina’s agricultural producers protest in comparative context. Studies in Comparative International Development, 46(4), 424–453.
19.
FairfieldT. (2015). Private wealth and public revenue in Latin America: Business power and tax politics. Cambridge University Press.
20.
Fernández MilmandaB. (2018). Harvesting influence: Agricultural producers and congress in Brazil [Doctoral dissertation]. Department of Government, Harvard University.
21.
FreytesC. (2015). The Cerrado is not the Pampas: Explaining tax and regulatory policies on agricultural exports in Argentina and Brazil (2003-2013) [Doctoral dissertation]. Department of Political Science, Northwestern University.
22.
FreytesC.O’FarrellJ. (2017). Conflictos distributivos en la economía de exportación en la Argentina reciente [Distributive conflicts in the contemporary Argentine export economy]. Desarrollo Económico [Economic Development], 57(221), 181–196.
23.
GrasC.HernándezV. (2009). El fenómeno sojero en perspectiva: Dimensiones productivas, sociales y simbólicas de la globalización agrorural en la Argentina [A perspective into the soybean phenomenon: productive, social and social dimension in the agricultural globalization of Argentina]. In GrasC.HernándezV. (Eds.), La Argentina rural: de la agricultura familiar a los agronegocios [Rural Argentina: from family agriculture to agribusiness] (pp. 15–38). Biblos.
24.
HainmuellerJ.MummoloJ.XuY. (2018). How much should we trust estimates from multiplicative interaction models? Simple tools to improve empirical practice. Political Analysis, 27(2), 163–192.
25.
HallD. (2011). Land grabs, land control, and Southeast Asian crop booms. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 92(3), 505–523.
26.
HilbeJ. M. (2011). Negative binomial regression. Cambridge University Press.
27.
HoraR. (2002). Los terratenientes de la pampa argentina. Una historia social y política [The Landlords of the Argentine Pampas. A Social and Political History], 1860-1945. Siglo XXI.
28.
HoraR. (2010). La crisis del campo del otoño de 2008. Desarrollo Económico [The Agricultural Crisis of the 2008 Fall.], 50(197), 81–111.
29.
Investigación y Consultoría Agropecuaria. (2000). Survey summary report.
30.
KasaraK. (2007). Tax me if you can: Ethnic geography, democracy, and the taxation of agriculture in Africa. American Political Science Review, 101(1), 159–172.
31.
KaufmanR. (2012). The political left, the export boom, and the populist temptation. In LevitskyS.RobertsK. M. (Eds.), The resurgence of the Latin American left (pp. 93–116). John Hopkins University Press.
32.
KerboH. (1982). Movements of “crisis” and movements of “affluence.”Journal of Conflict Resolution, 26(4), 645–663.
33.
KlepperR. (1974). The economic bases for agrarian protest movements in the United States, 1870–1900. The Journal of Economic History, 34(1), 283–285.
34.
KurtzM. (2004). Free market democracy and the Chilean and Mexican countryside. Cambridge University Press.
35.
LattuadaM. J. (2006). Acción colectiva y corporaciones agrarias en la Argentina: Transformaciones institucionales a fines del siglo XX [Collective Action and Rural Associations in Argentina: Institutional Changes at the end of the 20th century]. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes.
36.
LongJ. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Sage.
37.
MangonnetJ.MurilloM. V.RubioJ. M. (2018). Local economic voting and the agricultural boom in Argentina, 2007-2015. Latin American Politics and Society, 60(3), 27–53.
38.
MargaridoM. A.TurollaF. A.BuenoC. R. (2007). The world market for soybeans: Price transmission into Brazil and effects from the timing of crop and trade. Nova Economia, 17(2), 241–270.
39.
MazzucaS. L. (2013). The rise of rentier populism. Journal of Democracy, 24(2), 108–122.
40.
McGuireJ. W. (1996). Strikes in Argentina: Data sources and recent trends. Latin American Research Review, 31(3), 127–150.
41.
MillánF. (2010). Cartografías sociales II: Bigand [Social Cartographies II: Bigand]. In GrasC.BidasecaK. (Eds.), El mundo chacarero en tiempos de cambio. Herencia, territorio e Identidad en los pueblos sojeros [The Farmers’ World at a Time of Change. Legacies, Territory and Identity in Soybean Towns]. CICCUS.
42.
MooneyP. H.MajkaT. J. (1995). Farmers and farm workers’ movements. Social protest in American agriculture. Twayne Publishers.
43.
MoravcsikA. (2014). Transparency: The revolution in qualitative research. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47(1), 48–53.
44.
MoseleyM. (2018). Protest state: The rise of everyday contention in Latin America. Oxford University Press.
45.
National Agricultural Technology Institute. (2014, September10). Silobolsa, de la Argentina al mundo [Silobag, from Argentina to the World].
46.
NorthD. C. (1974). Growth and welfare in the American past. Prentice Hall.
47.
NunJ.LattuadaM. J. (1991). El gobierno de Alfonsín y las corporaciones agrarias [The Presidency of Alfonsin and the Rural Associations]. Manantial.
48.
OfferleM. (1988). Sociologie des groupes d’ interêt [Sociology of Interest groups]. Montchrestien.
49.
Pérez TrentoN. (2015). La acción política de la Federación Agraria Argentina durante el período de convertibilidad [The Political Action of the Argentine Agrarian Federation during the Convertibility Period] (1991-2001). Mundo Agrario, 16(32), 1–24.
RichardsonN. P. (2012). The politics of abundance: Export agriculture and redistributive conflict in South America [Doctoral dissertation]. Department of Political Science, UC Berkeley. http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4cb7t472
53.
RosatiG. (2013). Patrones espaciales de expansión de la frontera agrícola: La soja en la Argentina [Spatial Patterns in the Expansion of the Agricultural Frontier: Soybean in Argentina] (1987-1988 2009-2010). In GrasC.HernándezV. (Eds.), El agro como negocio. Producción, sociedad y territorios en la globalización [Agriculture as Business. Production, Society and Territories during Globalization] (pp. 97–122). Biblos.
54.
SaylorR. (2014). State building in boom times. Oxford University Press.
55.
SchneiderB. R. (2004). Business politics and the state in twentieth-century Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
56.
SchulzN. (2018, June8). The political economy of processing promotion: A comparative analysis of export restrictions in Africa [Paper presentation]. African Politics Conference Group Online Colloquium (Unpublished manuscript).
57.
ScottJ. C. (1976). The moral economy of the peasant: Rebellion and subsistence in Southeast Asia. Yale University Press.
58.
SimmonsE. (2016). Meaningful resistance. Market reforms and the roots of social protest in Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
59.
Sociedad Rural Argentina. (2016). By-laws. Buenos Aires: Sociedad Rural Argentina.
60.
WellsR. A. (1979). The development of the English rural proletariat and social protest, 1700–1850. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 6(2), 115–139.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
