Agriculture intensification, economic identity, and shared invisibility in Amazonian peasantry: Caboclos and Colonists in comparative perspective.
Agriculture intensification, economic identity, and shared invisibility in Amazonian peasantry: Caboclos and Colonists in comparative perspective.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1525/cag.2004.26.1-2.1
复制
发表时间：
2004-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Brondizio, E. S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Brondizio, E. S.
本文讨论了亚马逊地区Caboclo和殖民主义小规模农村生产者“隐形”(无论是经济、政治、技术还是社会)的共性的存在。在试图评价他们的历史和社会文化特殊性的同时，本文讨论了误解他们的农业制度对构建这些农村亚马逊人的经济和社会身份的影响。结果表明，亚马逊农民的所谓“隐形”部分是对被认为是农业系统的主导观点的结果，因为它与农业、美学、经济、技术和社会效益及特征有关。这一等式的一个核心要素是如何界定农业生产的“集约化过程”，特别是考虑到它的比较性质及其对理解该区域当代历史上的社会和社会经济变化的影响。使用现场数据和巴西Caboclo和殖民主义生产系统的例子表明，与外生性、大规模、高投入和以资本为基础的农业相比，这两种系统在社会经济相关性和有效性方面往往被忽视。
This paper discusses the existence of commonalities underlying the "invisibility" (whether economic, political, technological, or social) of Caboclo and Colonist small-scale rural producers in the Amazonia. While trying to value their historical and sociocultural particularities, the paper discusses the implications of misinterpreting their agricultural systems for the construction of an economic and social identity of these rural Amazonians. It is shown that the so-called "invisibility" of Amazonian peasantry is in part a result of the dominant views of what is considered an agricultural system as it relates to its agronomic, aesthetic, economic, technological, and social efficiency and characteristics. A core element in this equation is how the "process of intensification" of agricultural production is defined, particularly given its comparative nature and its implications for understanding social and socioeconomic changes throughout the contemporary history of the region. Using field data and examples of both Caboclo and Colonist production systems in Brazil, it is shown that both systems tend to be disregarded in terms of their socioeconomic relevance and effectiveness when compared to exogenous, large-scale, high-input, and capital-based agriculture.