This paper provides the first econometric results which show that during the period 1976–2013, the conglomerate farming of soybeans aggravated poverty in Brazil. It was found that the impact of soy on poverty in the north of the country, where land consolidation is active, is precisely opposite that in the south, where family farming dominates. The result directly contradicts mainstream views that smallholder farmers’ losses would be offset by gains from the trickle-down effect. Based on the findings of this study, a necessity is raised that family farming be supported to help alleviate poverty.
ArimaEYRichardsPWalkerR. (2011) Statistical confirmation of indirect land use change in the Brazilian Amazon. Environmental Research Letters6(2): 024010.
2.
BalettiB (2012) Ordenamento territorial: neo-developmentalism and the struggle for territory in the lower Brazilian Amazon. The Journal of Peasant Studies39(2): 573–598.
BaumgartnerPvon BraunJAbebawD, et al. (2015) Impacts of large-scale land investments on income, prices and employment: empirical analyses in Ethiopia. World Development72(0), 175–190. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.02.017.
5.
BorrasJRFrancoJC (2012) Global land grabbing and trajectories of agrarian change: a preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change12(1): 34–59.
6.
BourguignonF (2003) The growth elasticity of poverty reduction: explaining heterogeneity across countries and time-periods. In EichlerTTurnovskyS (eds) Inequality and Growth: Theory and Policy Implications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BuesA (2011) Agricultural foreign direct investment and water rights: an institutional analysis from Ethiopia. In TadesseMAlemuBBekeleG. (eds) Atlas of the Rural Ethiopian Economy 2006. Addis Ababa: IFPRI/CSA/ERDI.
8.
DattGRavallionM (1992) Growth and redistribution components of changes in poverty measures: a decomposition with applications to Brazil and India in the 1980s. Journal of Development Economics38(2): 275–295.
9.
DeiningerKByerleeDLindsayJ. (2010) Rising Global Interest in Farmland – Can it Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits?Washington, DC: World Bank.
10.
De SchutterO (2011) How not to think of land-grabbing: three critiques of large-scale investments in farmland. The Journal of Peasant Studies38(2): 249–279.
11.
DjiréM (2007) Land registration in Mali – no land ownership for farmers? Issue paper 144, London: Drylands Programme, IIED.
12.
EversSBurnodPRatsialonanaRA. (2011) Foreign land acquisitions in Madagascar: competing jurisdictions of access claims. In: African Engagements: Africa Negotiating an Emerging Multipolar World. Leyde: Brill, pp.110–132.
13.
FerreiraJPardiniRMetzgerJP. (2012) Towards environmentally sustainable agriculture in Brazil: challenges and opportunities for applied ecological research. Journal of Applied Ecology49: 535–541.
14.
GarrettRDRauschLL (2015) Green for gold: social and ecological tradeoffs influencing the sustainability of the Brazilian soy industry [Published online ahead of print May 22, 2015]. The Journal of Peasant Studies. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2015.1010077.
15.
GrewalBGrunfeldHSheehanP (2012) The contribution of agricultural growth to poverty reduction. ACIAR Impact Assessment Series Report No. 76. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: Canberra.
16.
GudynasE (2008) The new bonfire of vanities: soybean cultivation and globalization in South America. Development51(4): 512–518.
17.
HechtSBMannC (2008) How Brazil outfarmed the American farmer. Fortune157: 92–105.
18.
HerediaBPalmeiraMPereira LeiteS (2010) Sociedade e economia do “agronegócio” no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais25(74): 159–176.
19.
HLPE (2011) Land tenure and international investments in agriculture. A report by the high level panel of experts (HLPE) on food security and nutrition. Rome: Committee on World Food Security.
JainLRTendulkarSD (1990) Role of growth and distribution in the observed change in headcount ratio measure of poverty: a decomposition exercise for India. Indian Economic Review25(2): 165–205.
24.
KakwaniN (1993) Poverty and economic growth with application to cote d’ivoire. Review of Income and Wealth39(2): 121–139.
25.
LimaMSkutschMde Medeiros CostaG (2011) Deforestation and the social impacts of soy for biodiesel: perspectives of farmers in the South Brazilian Amazon. Ecology and Society16(4): 4.
26.
MartinelliLANaylorRVitousekPM. (2010) Agriculture in Brazil: impacts, costs, and opportunities for a sustainable future. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability2(5): 431–438.
27.
MortonDCDeFriesRSShimabukuroYE, et al. (2006) Cropland expansion changes deforestation dynamics in the southern Brazilian Amazon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences103(39): 14637–14641.
28.
MyersN (1980) The present status and future prospects of tropicalmoist forest. Environmental Conservation7: 101–114.
29.
NoronhaSOrtizLSchlesingerS (2006) Agronegócio e Biocombustíveis: Uma Mistura Explosiva-Impactos da Expansão das Monoculturas para a Produção de Bioenergia. Rio de Janeiro: Núcleo Amigos da Terra.
RavallionMHuppiM (1991) Measuring changes in poverty: a methodological case study of Indonesia during an adjustment period. The World Bank Economic Review5(1): 57–82.
33.
RibeiroMCMetzgerJPMartensenAC. (2009) The Brazilian Atlantic forest: how much is left, and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation142(6): 1141–1153.
34.
SauerSPereira LeiteS (2012) Agrarian structure, foreign investment in land, and land prices in Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies39(3–4): 873–898.
35.
SmallerCMannH (2009) A Thirst for Distant Lands: Foreign Investment in Agricultural Land and Water. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).
36.
StewardC (2007) From colonization to “environmental soy”: a case study of environmental and socio-economic valuation in the Amazon soy frontier. Agriculture and Human Values24: 107–122.
37.
StockJHWatsonMW (2003) Introduction to Econometrics. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
38.
Vander VennetBSchneiderSDesseinJ (2015) Different farming styles behind the homogenous soy production in southern Brazil [Published online ahead of print June 26, 2015]. The Journal of Peasant Studies. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2014.993319.
39.
WeinholdDKillickEReisEJ (2013) Soybeans, poverty and inequality in the Brazilian Amazon. World Development25: 132–143.
40.
WeszVJJr (2008) Características e dinâmicas das agroindústrias esmagadoras de soja no Brasil: uma leitura preliminar. Rio de Janeiro: CPDA/UFRRJ, PPGAS/MN/UFRJ, PPGSA/IFCS/UFRJ (Pesquisa Sociedade e Economia do Agronegócio, mimeo).
41.
WooldridgeJM (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data.
42.
ZoomersA (2010) Globalisation and the foreignisation of space: seven processes driving the current global land grab. The Journal of Peasant Studies37(2): 429–447.
