Skip to main content

Indigenous Peoples, Traditional Communities and the Environment: The ‘Territorial Question’ Under the New Developmentalist Agenda in Brazil

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Brazilian Left in the 21st Century

Part of the book series: Marx, Engels, and Marxisms ((MAENMA))

Abstract

Laschefski and Zhouri analyze the consequences of the ‘new era of developmentalism’ introduced by the Brazilian center-left government (2003–2016) on indigenous peoples and traditional communities. They highlight that the reprimarization of the economy, albeit in the context of re-democratization and environmental governance, led to increasing land conflicts and reinforced Brazil’s subordinate role within the global division of labor. Attention is drawn on the Eurocentric views of leftist strategies which perceive traditional communities merely as rural poor to be integrated in urban labor markets. Given the fight of these groups for autonomy and the political responses that threaten their constitutional rights and Brazilian socio-biodiversity, the authors develop a complex ‘territorial question’ between competing urban capitalist and nonurban metabolisms that challenge visions of a united class struggle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74r-g2YtTSo. Accessed May 29, 2018.

  2. 2.

    See https://terrasindigenas.org.br/pt-br/quem-sao, consulted May 28, 2018.

  3. 3.

    For further analysis, see Verdum (2017).

References

  • Acosta, Alberto. 2016. O Bem Viver. Rio de Janeiro: Elefante.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acselrad, Henry. 2004. Justiça ambiental: ação coletiva e estratégias argumentativas. In Justiça ambiental e cidadania, ed. Henri Acselrad, Selene Herculano, and José Augusto Pádua, 23–39. 2.ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alimonda, Hector. 2011. La Naturaleza colonizada: Ecologia Política y Minería em América Latina. Buenos Aires: CLACSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altvater, Elmar. 1999. Restructuring the Space of Democracy. Ambiente e Sociedade, ano II (3 e 4): 5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • ANA – Articulação Nacional de Agroecologia. 2018. Carta convocatória do IV ENA. http://enagroecologia.org.br/files/2018/02/CARTA_CONVOCATORIA_IV_ENA_Final.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2018.

  • Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berno de Almeida, Alfredo Wagner. 2010 Terras de preto, terras de santo, terras de índio: uso comum e conflito. In Nelson Giordano Delgado (org.) Brasil Rural em Debate: coletânea de artigos. Brasília: CONDRAF/MDA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 2001. Das politische Feld: Zur Kritik der politischen Vernunft. Konstanz: UVK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, Neil. 2014. Introduction: Urban Theory Without an Outside. In Implosions/Explosions Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization, ed. Neil Brenner, 14–35. Berlin: Jovi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresser-Pereira, Luis Carlos. 2011. An Account of New Developmentalism and Its Structuralist Macroeconomics. Revista de Economia Política 2 (3(123)): 493–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullard, Robert. 1983. Solid Waste Sites and the Black Houston Community. Sociological Inquiry 53: 273–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carneiro, Eder J. 2005. A oligarquização da,política ambiental’ mineira. In A insustentável leveza da política ambiental: desenvolvimento e conflitos socioambientais, ed. Andréa Zhouri, Klemens Laschefski, and Doralice Perreira, 45–64. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesnai, François, and Claude Serfati. 2003. Ecologia e condições físicas da reprodução social: alguns fios condutores marxistas. Crítica Marxista, São Paulo, 16: 39–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • CONAB – Companhia Nacional de Abastamento. 2018. Brasil – Por Produtos. https://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/serie-historica-das-safras. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • COSIPLAN – Consejo Suramericano de Infraestructura y Planeamient. 2018. Plan de Acción 2012–2022 – ajustada a 2017. http://www.iirsa.org/admin_iirsa_web/Uploads/Documents/PAE_digital.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Cowell, Adrian. 1990. Decade of Destruction: The Crusade to Save the Amazon Rain Forest. New York: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • CPT – Comissão Pastoral da Terra. 2017. Conflitos no Campo Brasil 2017. https://www.cptnacional.org.br/publicacoes-2/destaque/4371-conflitos-no-campo-brasil-2017. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Escobar, Arturo. 1995. Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esteva, Gustavo. 2006. The Revolution of the New Commons. Beyond Development, Beyond Economy, Beyond the Individual Self, Beyond the Nation State. Motion Magazine, April 8. http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/global/gest_int_4.html. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • FIOCRUZ. (n.d.). Mapa de Conflitos e Injustiça Ambiental em Saúde no Brasil. https://www.conflitoambiental.icict.fiocruz.br/. Accessed 8 June 2018.

  • Foster, Bellamy. 2013. Marx and the Rift in the Universal Metabolism of Nature. Monthly Review 65 (07), December. https://monthlyreview.org/2013/12/01/marx-rift-universal-metabolism-nature/. Accessed 10 June 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 2008. Segurança, Território, População. São Paulo: Martins Fontes (Coleção Tópicos).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gellert, Paul K., R. Scott Frey, and Harry F. Dahms. 2017. Introduction to Ecologically Unequal Exchange in Comparative Perspective. Journal of World-Systems Research, [S.l.], 23(2): 226–235. http://jwsr.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/jwsr/article/view/733. Accessed 10 June 2018. https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2017.733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GESTA – Grupo de Estudos em Temáticas Ambientais. (n.d.). Mapa dos conflitos ambientais em Minas Gerais. http://conflitosambientaismg.lcc.ufmg.br/observatorio-de-conflitos-ambientais/mapa-dos-conflitos-ambientais/. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Global Witness. 2017. Defenders of the Earth, Global Killings of Land and Environment Defenders in 2016. London. Available at: https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/environmental-activists/defenders-earth/. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Gudynas, Eduardo. 2011. Tensiones, contradicciones y oportunidades de la dimension ambiental del Buen Vivir. In Vivir bien: ¿Paradigma no capitalista? ed. Yvonne Farah and H. Luciano, 231–246. Vasapollio, La Paz: CIDES – UMSA y Plural.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, David. 2004. The ‘New’ Imperialism: Accumulation by Dispossession. Socialist Register 40: 63–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • INCRA – Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária. 2017. Área Incorporada ao Programa de Reforma Agrária – histórico até 2016. http://www.incra.gov.br/tree/info/file/11933. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • ISA – Instituto Socioambiental. 2016. ISA e sociedade civil repudiam proposta do governo Temer que inviabiliza demarcações. December 15. https://www.socioambiental.org/pt-br/noticias-socioambientais/isa-e-sociedade-civil-repudiam-proposta-do-governo-temer-que-inviabiliza-demarcacoes. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • ———. 2018. Com pior desempenho em demarcações desde 1985, Temer tem quatro Terras Indígenas para homologar. https://www.socioambiental.org/pt-br/noticias-socioambientais/com-pior-desempenho-em-demarcacoes-desde-1985-temer-tem-quatro-terras-indigenas-para-homologar. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Laschefski, Klemens. 2014. Governança, Neodesenvolvimento e Autoritarismo difuso. In Zhouri, Andréa, Valencio, Norma. (Org.). Formas de matar, de morrer e Resistir, ed. Andréa Zhouri and Norma Valência, 243–276. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Conflicting Urban and Rural Territorial Livelihood Metabolisms: The “Explosion” of the “Sustainable” Urban-Industrial Pulp Complex in Bahia – Brazil. Sustainable Cities and Society 45: 159–171, accepted manuscript, available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.11.030. Accessed 25 Nov 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, Henri. 2003. The Urban Revolution. Trans. Robert Bononno. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original French Version, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, Paul. 2002. Territórios Sociais e Povos Tradicionais no Brasil: por uma antropologia da territorialidade. Série Antropologia n° 322. Brasília: UNB. http://www.direito.mppr.mp.br/arquivos/File/PaulLittle__1.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Martinez-Allier, Joan. 2002. The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar Publisher.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Monte-Mór, Roberto L. de M. 2014. Extended Urbanization and Settlement Patterns in Brazil: An Environmental Approach. In Implosions/Explosions Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization, ed. Neil Brenner, 109–120. Berlin: Jovi.

    Google Scholar 

  • MP – Ministério do Planejamento, Desenvolvimento e Gestão. 2015. Qual a diferença entre PAC1 e PAC2? http://www.planejamento.gov.br/servicos/faq/pac-programa-de-aceleracao-do-crescimento/visao-geral/qual-a-diferenca-entre-pac1-e-pac2. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Oliveira, João Pacheco de, ed. 1998. Indigenismo e Territorialização: Poderes, Rotinas e Saberes Coloniais no Brasil Contemporâneo, 310. Rio de Janeiro: Contra Capa Livraria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver-Smith. 2006. Displacement, Resistance and the Critique to Development: From Grassroots to Global Change. In Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies, People, ed. Chris de Wet. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petras, James, and Henry Veltmeyer. 2017. The Class Struggle in Latin America: Making History Today, Routledge Critical Development Studies. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prates, Clarissa. 2017. Efeitos Derrame da mineração, violências cotidianas e resistencias em Conceição do Mato Dentro-MG. Master’s thesis, UFMG-UNIMONTES, Montes Claros.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quijano, Anibal. 2002. Colonialidade, poder, globalização e democracia. Revista Novos Rumos 17 (37): 4–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffestin, Claude. 1993. Por uma geografia do poder. Trans. Maria Cecília França. São Paulo: Ática.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranciére, Jacques. 1996. O Dissenso. In A crise da razão, ed. Adalto Novaes, 367–382. São Paulo: Cia das Letras.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sader, Emir. 2013. Apresentação. In 10 anos de governos pós-neoliberais no Brasil: Lula e Dilma, ed. Emir Sader. São Paulo/Rio de Janeiro: FLACSO Brasil/Boitempo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlins, Marshall. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Chicago: Aldine and Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Said, Edward. 1994. Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salleh, Ariel. 2010. Climate Strategy: Making the Choice Between Ecological Modernisation or Living Well. Journal for Australian Political Economy 66: 124–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, Saskia. 2013. When Territory Deborders Territoriality. Territory. Politics, Governance 1 (1): 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2013.769895. Accessed 20 May 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1988. Can the Subaltern Speak? In Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, ed. Carry Nelson and Larry Grossberg, 271–313. Urbana: Illinois University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Svampa, Maristella. 2012. Consenso de los commodities, giro ecoterritorial y pensamiento crítico en América Latina. Revista del Observatorio Social de América Latina, Año XIII N° 32 – Noviembre de 2012: 15–38. http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/osal/20120927103642/OSAL32.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Turner, Barry. 1978. Man-Made Disasters. London: Wykeham.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCSD – United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. 2012. The Future We Want. http://www.unis.unvienna.org/pdf/2012/Rio20_brochure.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • UNICA – União da Indústria de Cana-de-Açúcar. 2018. Área cultivada com cana-de áçúcar. http://www.unicadata.com.br/historico-de-area-ibge.php?idMn=33&tipoHistorico=5. Accessed 10 June 2018.

  • Verdum, Ricardo. 2007. Integração, Usinas Hidrelétricas e Impactos Socioambientais. Brasília: INESC.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Povos indigenas, meio ambiente e políticas públicas. Uma visão a partir do orçamento indigenista federal, Coleção antropologias 14. Rio de Janeiro: e-papers.

    Google Scholar 

  • WCED – World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhouri, Andréa. 2010. ‘Adverse Forces’ in the Brazilian Amazon: Developmentalism Versus Environmentalism and Indigenous Rights. Journal of Environment and Development 19 (3): 252–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhouri, Andréa, and Klemens Laschefski. 2010. Desenvolvimento e Conflitos Ambientais: Um Novo Campo de Investigação. In Desenvolvimento e Conflitos ambientais, ed. Andréa Zhouri and Klemens Laschefski, 11–33. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zhouri, Andréa, Raquel Oliveira, Marcos Zucarelli, and Max Vasconcelos. 2017. The Rio Doce Mining Disaster in Brazil: Between Policies of Reparation and the Politics of Affectation. Dossier Mining, Violence, Resistance. Vibrant 14 (2): 81–101.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Laschefski, K., Zhouri, A. (2019). Indigenous Peoples, Traditional Communities and the Environment: The ‘Territorial Question’ Under the New Developmentalist Agenda in Brazil. In: Puzone, V., Miguel, L. (eds) The Brazilian Left in the 21st Century. Marx, Engels, and Marxisms. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03288-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics