Environmental Costs of Government-Sponsored Agrarian Settlements in Brazilian Amazonia

Brazil has presided over the most comprehensive agrarian reform frontier colonization program on Earth, in which ~1.2 million settlers have been translocated by successive governments since the 1970's, mostly into forested hinterlands of Brazilian Amazonia. These settlements encompass 5.3% of this ~5 million km2 region, but have contributed with 13.5% of all land conversion into agropastoral land uses. The Brazilian Federal Agrarian Agency (INCRA) has repeatedly claimed that deforestation in these areas largely predates the sanctioned arrival of new settlers. Here, we quantify rates of natural vegetation conversion across 1911 agrarian settlements allocated to 568 Amazonian counties and compare fire incidence and deforestation rates before and after the official occupation of settlements by migrant farmers. The timing and spatial distribution of deforestation and fires in our analysis provides irrefutable chronological and spatially explicit evidence of agropastoral conversion both inside and immediately outside agrarian settlements over the last decade. Deforestation rates are strongly related to local human population density and road access to regional markets. Agrarian settlements consistently accelerated rates of deforestation and fires, compared to neighboring areas outside settlements, but within the same counties. Relocated smallholders allocated to forest areas undoubtedly operate as pivotal agents of deforestation, and most of the forest clearance occurs in the aftermath of government-induced migration

Credit Allocation and Farm Structures in the Czech Republic, 1993–1997

In an analysis of primary survey data collected by the author, de novo family farms in the Czech Republic are shown to have had more limited receipt of credit during 1993–1997 than successor organisations to communist-era farms, which are corporate farms. Criteria for credit allocation are investigated for both farm types. It appears that there is a link between farm profitability and obtaining credit for corporate farms, but not for family farms. An explanation for this finding is suggested, taking into account the inadequacy of conventional credit rating instruments in the transition setting and the informational advantage of corporate farms vis-à-vis family farms. Survey findings are in line with some of the implications of this account. Comparative Economic Studies (2003) 45, 25–43. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100000