‘Land grabbing’ e ‘Green grabbing’: Uma leitura da ‘corrida na produção acadêmica’ sobre a apropriação global de terras

A partir de 2008, houve uma extensa produção e publicação de artigos acadêmicos, basicamente em inglês, sobre um fenômeno denominado corrida mundial por terras ou land grabbing (apropriação de terras). Depois de cinco ou seis anos, essa produção se mantém, mas com construções teórico-empíricas mais elaboradas – inclusive com a reformulação de conceitos e criação de outros como green grabbing (apropriação verde) e water grabbing (apropriação da água) –, especialmente porque as primeiras reflexões eram excessivamente centradas em dados quantitativos e escala (quantidade de hectares transacionados), em grandes investimentos estrangeiros em terras agrícolas e voltados para estudos de casos sobre a compra de terras no Continente Africano. O objetivo deste artigo é retomar os termos do debate, relendo argumentos e discutindo formulações teóricas (inclusive o próprio conceito de land grabbing), procurando construir diálogos teóricos e agendas de pesquisas acadêmicas no Brasil, pois o mesmo – além ser um país com históricos problemas agrários como a concentração da terra – é marcado por investimentos externos, mas também incentiva a apropriação privada de terras em outros lugares e países, o que resulta na expansão das fronteiras agrícolas e gera conflitos e disputas territoriais. After 2008, there has been an extensive production and publication of academic articles in English, dealing with a phenomenon called global land rush or land grabbing. After five or six years, such academic production continuous but more elaborated theoretically and with larger empirical evidences, including some conceptual reformulations and creation other concepts like green grabbing and water grabbing. This happened especially because the first studies were overly focused on quantitative data and scale (land deals in hectares), considering large foreign investment in agricultural land and focused on case studies on the purchase of land on the African continent. This article aims to resume the terms of the debate, discussing some arguments and theoretical formulations – including the concept of land grabbing –, looking for reflexions, theoretical dialogue and academic research agenda in Brazil. Besides being a country with historical agrarian problems, like the concentration of landownership, Brazil is has foreign investments, but it also encourages private investments and land deals, resulting in the expansion of the agricultural frontier, generating conflicts and territorial disputes in other countries

Acaparamiento de tierras y acumulación capitalista: aspectos clave en América Latina

__Abstract__ We introduce this special issue by explaining seven characteristics of land grabbing in Latin America. These features are not unique to the region. By highlighting them – arguing, for instance, that a key aspect in Latin America is intra-regional land grabbing driven by (trans)Latina companies – we hope to inspire new cross-regional comparisons to understand the dynamics of “global” land grabbing. Our focus on Latin America challenges some problematic generalisations in the literature, for instance, that land grabs occur mainly in fragile states. We interrogate the relationship between land grabbing and the “foreignisation” narrative, and the need to revisit the broader question of land concentration. Thus we build upon the literature locating land grabs and the land question within the political economy of global capitalism

Accaparement de terres et droits de l'homme: rôle des sociétés et des entités financières européennes dans l'accaparement de terres en dehors de l'Union européenne

Dans les travaux de recherche antérieurs sur l'accaparement de terres, les auteurs se sont initialement intéressés aux sociétés étrangères investissant dans d'autres pays et ont mis notamment l'accent sur les sociétés implantées dans des pays tels que la Chine, les États du Golfe, la Corée du Sud et l'Inde. Ces dernières années, il est devenu évident que la palette des pays d'origine des investisseurs fonciers est bien plus large et comprend des acteurs implantés en Atlantique Nord et dans l'Union européenne. Dans la présente étude, nous fournissons des données qualitatives et quantitatives pour illustrer le rôle des entités financières et des sociétés établies dans l'Union européenne dans les transactions foncières opérées en dehors de l'Union. Cette étude analyse également le phénomène international de "ruée vers la terre" avec les droits de l'homme en arrière-plan, en examinant les répercussions de certaines transactions foncières auxquelles des investisseurs basés dans l'Union européenne participent, ainsi que leurs effets sur les populations qui vivent dans les secteurs visés par les investissements. Ces recherches s'appuient en partie sur l'étude réalisée en 2014 par Cotula sur les facteurs favorisant l'accaparement de terres et les répercussions de ce phénomène sur les droits de l'homme, mais s'en écartent également par la façon dont l'accent est mis expressément sur certains cas d'abus et de violations, potentielles ou effectives des droits de l'homme dans le cadre d'activités dans lesquelles des sociétés et des entités financières européennes sont impliquées. Dans nos conclusions, nous proposons une série de recommandations sur la façon dont l'Union européenne peut s'attaquer de façon efficace à ces problèmes

Land Grabbing and Human Rights: the Involvement of European Corporate and Financial Entities in Land Grabbing outside the European Union

In early research on land grabbing, the initial focus was on foreign companies investing abroad, with a particular focus on those based in countries such as China, Gulf States, South Korea, and India. In recent years, it has become evident that the range of countries land investors originate in is far broader, and includes both North Atlantic - and EU-based actors. In this study, we offer both quantitative and qualitative data illustrating the involvement of EU-based corporate and financial entities in land deals occurring outside of the EU. This study also analyses the global land rush within a human rights framework, examining the implications of particular land deals involving EU-based investors and their impact on communities living in areas where the investments are taking place. The research presented here builds partly on Cotula’s 2014 study on the drivers and human rights implications of land grabbing, but differs in that it focuses explicitly on particular cases of possible, actual or potential human rights abuses and violations, in the context of activities involving European corporate and financial entities. In our conclusions, we offer a series of recommendations on how the EU can more effectively address these issues

Transnational land investment web

Despite international media’s waning attention, research and political debates on global land grabbing have not subsided. We argue the importance of understanding the ‘transnational land investment web’ of corporate and state actors and institutions, which are not always immediately visible. Focusing on transnational corporations (TNCs) based in the European Union (EU), we examine five sets of actors and institutional spheres through which these actors are able to grab lands beyond Europe. It is crucial to understand these not as individual sets of actors or institutions, but as interconnected sets, comprising a web. These are EU-based: (1) Private companies using regular institutional platforms; (2) Finance capital companies; (3) Public–private partnerships; (4) Development Finance Institutions; and (5) Companies using EU policies to gain control of land through the supply chain. One implication of this complex web is that democratic governance in the context of land grabs becomes an even more daunting challenge

The new enclosures: critical perspectives on corporate land deals

The contributions to this collection use the tools of agrarian political economy to explore the rapid growth and complex dynamics of large-scale land deals in recent years, with a special focus on the implications of big land deals for property and labour regimes, labour processes and structures of accumulation. The first part of this introductory essay examines the implications of this agrarian political economy perspective. First we explore the continuities and contrasts between historical and contemporary land grabs, before examining the core underlying debate around large- versus small-scale farming futures. Next, we unpack the diverse contexts and causes of land grabbing today, highlighting six overlapping mechanisms. The following section turns to assessing the crisis narratives that frame the justifications for land deals, and the flaws in the argument around there being excess, empty or idle land available. Next the paper turns to an examination of the impacts of land deals, and the processes of inclusion and exclusion at play, before looking at patterns of resistance and constructions of alternatives. The final section introduces the papers in the collection.ESR

Effectiveness of a stepped primary care smoking cessation intervention (ISTAPS study): design of a cluster randomised trial

Background: There is a considerable body of evidence on the effectiveness of specific interventions in individuals who wish to quit smoking. However, there are no large-scale studies testing the whole range of interventions currently recommended for helping people to give up smoking; specifically those interventions that include motivational interviews for individuals who are not interested in quitting smoking in the immediate to short term. Furthermore, many of the published studies were undertaken in specialized units or by a small group of motivated primary care centres. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a stepped smoking cessation intervention based on a trans-theoretical model of change, applied to an extensive group of Primary Care Centres (PCC). ethods/Design: Cluster randomised clinical trial. Unit of randomization: basic unit of care consisting of a family physician and a nurse, both of whom care for the same population (aprox. 2000 people). Intention to treat analysis. Study population: Smokers (n = 3024) aged 14 to 75 years consulting for any reason to PCC and who provided written informed consent to participate in the trial. Intervention: 6-month implementation of recommendations of a Clinical Practice Guideline which includes brief motivational interviews for smokers at the precontemplation - contemplation stage, brief intervention for smokers in preparation-action who do not want help, intensive intervention with pharmacotherapy for smokers in preparation-action who want help, and reinforcing intervention in the maintenance stage. Control group: usual care. Outcome measures: Self-reported abstinence confirmed by exhaled air carbon monoxide concentration of ≤ 10 parts per million. Points of assessment: end of intervention period and 1 and 2 years post-intervention; continuous abstinence rate for 1 year; change in smoking cessation stage; health status measured by SF-36. Discussion: The application of a stepped intervention based on the stages of a change model is possible under real and diverse clinical practice conditions, and improves the smoking cessation success rate in smokers, besides of their intention or not to give up smoking at baseline