Urban Ecosystems, 6: 99121, 2002

c 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.



The changing dynamics of land conflict in the

Brazilian Amazon: The rural-urban complex
and its environmental implications
CYNTHIA S. SIMMONS
Department of Geography, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI, USA
STEPHEN PERZ
Department of Sociology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
MARCOS A. PEDLOWSKI
Laboratorio de Estudos do Espaco Antropico, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Campos dos
Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil
LUIZ GUILHERME TEIXEIRA SILVA
EMBRARA/CPATU, Belem, Brazil
Received April 17, 2002; Revised April 16, 2003; Accepted July 3, 2003

Abstract. The Brazilian Amazon is an area of both serious environmental degradation and social instability.
Despite billions of dollars spent on economic development and the rapid pace of urbanization, deforestation is
extreme and violent land conflict is intense. Although episodes of conflict over land are common in Brazilian
history, this paper focuses on agrarian issues that arose with the opening of the Amazon frontier in the 1970s. The
paper argues that the nature of land conflict in the eastern Brazilian Amazon is dynamic, and proposes a two-stage
model to illustrate how the struggle has evolved from an agrarian phenomenon to an organized resistance that is
urban-based. Recognizing the interaction between cities and rural areas in the frontier reaches of the Brazilian
Amazon is key to understanding the land struggle in the face of urbanization. The analytical framework deployed
considers the transformation of the region from an agrarian frontier to an urbanized frontier, assessing the dynamic
nature of the land struggle and examining the implications for land cover change.
Keywords: land conflict, frontier urbanization, environmental justice, political and social movements

1.

Introduction

The Brazilian Amazon is an area of both serious environmental degradation and social
instability. Large tracts of forest have been removed in the wake of economic development,
and current estimates of deforestation range between 10,000 and 20,000 km2 annually
(INPE, 2000). Although much international attention and research have considered the
environmental consequences of development, comparatively less has been written about the
social consequences of development in the region. Nevertheless, available social welfare
indicators reveal that infant mortality rates are rising (Schneider, 1995), malnutrition levels
are higher than the national average (INAN, 1989), and several Amazonian states (e.g.
Para) show social indicators comparable to Sub-Saharan Africa (Cardoso and Helwege,

100

SIMMONS ET AL.

1992). Another troubling outcome of development has been intensified land conflict, which
frequently turns violent. Land conflict, in turn, may have serious consequences for land
cover change dynamics, and in particular deforestation.
Conflict over land resources in the Amazon is somewhat ironic given that vast tracts of
undeveloped land are characteristic of frontier regions. However, it is land made accessible
by development efforts, particularly road construction, that is targeted by new immigrants,
small farmers and large ranchers alike. The Brazilian government frequently intervenes by
purchasing contested land from the owners, and distributing it to the claimants. But, when
government intervention is not forthcoming, ensuing land conflict may evolve into violent
confrontation, involving ranchers, landless farmers, wage laborers, hired gunmen, police,
and numerous political, religious, and social organizations.
Such conflict is not new to Brazil, nor is it confined to the Amazon region. Nevertheless,
this paper focuses on contemporary land struggle that has emerged in the wake of development efforts in the mid 1960s aimed at opening up the Amazon frontier, creating an urban
hierarchy of central places to facilitate modernization, and integrating the region with the
national economy. Although the discussion that follows considers national and regional
scale processes and outcomes, the analysis is limited to data available for the State of Para,
which is appropriate given that this was the site of much of the early development interest,
and is the region of greatest land conflict-related violence (figure 1).
This paper considers the ongoing land conflict that has emerged alongside of development
and urbanization, and links it with processes of land cover change. Its primary objectives are
to: (1) re-conceptualize explanations that describe land conflict in Amazonia as endemic to
the agricultural frontier; (2) dispel the expectation that conflict will dissipate with urbanization; and (3) assess the implications for deforestation concomitant with the transformation
from a rural to an urban-based land struggle. In so doing, the paper considers an emerging
debate in Brazil that questions the importance of traditional agrarian reform measures to
address rural problems in the wake of the mass movement of farmers from the countryside to the city (Graziano and Biachini, 2001; Veiga, 2001). Explicit in this discussion are
complications that arise by imposing policies that accept as given a dichotomous divide
between the urban and the rural (Silva, 2001; Veiga, 2001). In particular, this paper argues
that recognizing the interaction between cities and rural areas in the frontier reaches of the
Brazilian Amazon is key to understanding the dynamic nature of land struggle in the face
of urbanization.
The paper proposes a hypothetical two-stage model of land conflict evolution that
acknowledges rural and urban dynamics. The first stage involves a purely agricultural
frontier with individualized conflicts between small farmers and large-landed interests,
triggered by competition for land resources. In such a setting deforestation occurs as individuals establish their farming systems and cut down trees to demonstrate land claims.
Under conventional urban theory we expect that as the frontier begins to urbanize, rural to urban migration takes place and excess rural labor is absorbed into the urban job
market. An emerging theory, forest transition, suggests that urbanization and industrialization will alleviate pressure on agricultural land, allowing forest recovery to proceed
(Walker, 1993; Rudel, 2002). Unfortunately, urbanization and industrialization are not occurring in unison in the Brazilian Amazon. The immaturity of the industrial base has not

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

Figure 1.

101

Study region: Para State, Brazil.

satisfied the job demands of recent immigrants, and many still have their sights on rural
land.
The second stage of the land conflict is organized resistance emerging as a result of
urbanization. Urbanization under this scenario has facilitated the large-scale political mobilization of different groups on both sides of the land struggle. In this stage, the forest
transition is prolonged, and land conflict is explicitly linked to deforestation as political

102

SIMMONS ET AL.

groups target forested land for occupation. Thus, the argument here is that long-run forest recovery is put at risk. This new form of land conflict can have dramatic impacts on
land cover given that it most often occurs as large-scale land invasions involving 1000s of
families, and in the Amazon region these occupations occur almost exclusively in forested
areas, exacerbating deforestation rates.
The paper is organized as follows. Section two addresses the primary theoretical explanations of land conflict. In this discussion, frontier settlement processes are outlined,
implications for land conflict considered, and impacts on land cover change discussed. In
addition, this section examines the nature of frontier urbanization particular to the Amazon,
with details provided about migration and land occupation patterns. In section three, an
alternative understanding of land conflict is proposed that suggests the evolution of the
struggle from an agricultural frontier to an urban-rural phenomenon. The changing dynamics of land conflict are addressed, and the importance of social capital networks considered.
Finally, in section four the environmental implications of land conflict in light of urbanization are considered. The paper concludes in section five by summarizing the rural-urban
dynamics of land conflict and presenting potential policy implications.
2.

Theories of frontier settlement: Implications for land conflict and deforestation

Land conflict in Brazil began more than 500 years ago with Portuguese settlement in the
new world (Mueller et al., 1994). Numerous accounts of early peasant resistance (i.e., the
Cabanagem Rebellion in the 1830s, Ronco de Abelha rebellion in 1851, Quebra-Quilos
rebellion in 1874; and War of Canudos at the end of the 19th century) have pointed to
the maldistribution of land as the impetus to confrontation. Contemporary land conflicts
include violent settlement in Sao Paulo State beginning in the 19th century (Welch, 1999;
Brannstrom, 2001), western Parana in the 1940s, Matto Grosso in the 1950s (see Velho,
1972; Katzmann, 1977; Foweraker, 1981; Schmink and Wood, 1992; Mueller et al., 1994;
Alston et al., 2000), and Southern Para at the turn of the 20th century. Violent struggle has
existed during every phase of frontier expansion in Amazonia (Foweraker, 1981). In the very
early years, physical coercion was used to force nomadic nut gatherers to extract resources
(Velho, 1972), and during later periods, large-landholders resorted to violent expulsion of
squatters in the process of land appropriation and consolidation (Schmink and Wood, 1992).
Today, land invasions and violent clashes are occurring in many places across the country.
This struggle is most frequently portrayed as a confrontation between landless peasants and
large landed interests, emerging as poor farmers intent on acquiring farmland, or exploiting
valuable timber, invade public and private holdings not put to beneficial use. By Brazilian
law, individuals who occupy and improve public lands for one year and one day, or occupy
private lands not in production for five years and a day, can obtain legal recognition of their
claim.1
A more cynical perspective considers the land struggle to be a moneymaking venture
on part of squatters, or a collusional effort between them and large landowners. There are
two common categories to distinguish squatters, the good-faith farmer who genuinely
intends to farm the land occupied, and the marginal minority who invade land in order to
turn around and sell it to the highest bidder, whether the buyers are other squatters, large

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

103

landholders, or the State (Foweraker, 1980). By this account, the incentive behind invasions
is monetary payoff from government. It is alleged that large landowners hire peasants to
occupy land they do not deem valuable, and then profit from government buyouts. Under
another scenario, land invasions are motivated by the expectation that government will pay
invaders to vacate disputed areas.
Complicating any understanding of land conflict is grilagem, a scheme involving the use
of fraudulent titles to lay claim to land and evict current occupants. Grilagem, in turn, is
facilitated by a historical land law system that enables the registration of illegal land titles,
which then affords the holder of the title legal status, that is unless the land is contested by an
alternative land claim, which might also be fraudulent. Some suggest, in fact, that Brazilian
land law promotes conflict, not resolution (Holston, 1991; Brannstrom, 2001; Fearnside,
2001), and serves as an instrument of calculated disorder by means of which illegal practices are enabled and extralegal solutions are smuggled into the judicial process (Holston,
1991).
2.1.

Theoretical models of frontier settlement

Regardless of cause or motivation, land invasions involving several individuals, or, as has
become common, planned invasions supported by numerous social movements, are occurring in many places throughout Brazil. Much of the literature addressing land conflict in
the Brazilian Amazon considers it endemic to the agricultural frontier. Nevertheless, this
region has experienced rapid urbanization, with urban population exceeding 50% by 1991.
Consequently, some in Brazil have suggested that the traditional agrarian problem is of less
concern today in light of the movement of many small farmers from rural to urban areas,
and the rising problems in the city (Graziano and Biachini, 2001; Veiga, 2001). However,
as this paper will demonstrate, land invasions have accelerated despite the rapid pace of
urbanization.
This paper argues that the nature of land conflict in the eastern Brazilian Amazon is
dynamic, and proposes a two-stage model to illustrate how the struggle has evolved from
an agrarian phenomenon to an organized resistance that is urban-based. Central to this contention are two bodies of literature. One is the agricultural frontier literature, addressing
agrarian explanations of land conflict. The second is the urban frontier literature, which emphasizes the demographic and spatial transformation of the Amazon frontier that proceeded
with the rural exodus of the people from the countryside to the emerging frontier towns. The
analytical framework deployed considers the transformation of the region from an agrarian
frontier to an urbanized frontier, assessing the dynamic nature of the land struggle and
examining the implications for land cover change.
Agrarian frontier
Agrarian explanations of land conflict. Much of the literature addressing land conflict in
the Brazilian Amazon considers it endemic to the agricultural frontier, attributing it to the
conflictive nature of production and exchange relations (Foweraker, 1981; Kotscho, 1981;
Wood, 1983; Branford and Glock, 1985; Schmink and Wood, 1992; Walker and Homma,
1996; Walker et al., 2000) and the failure of tenure institutions in the countryside (Mueller

104

SIMMONS ET AL.

et al., 1994; Alston et al., 1995, 1997, 2000; Fearnside, 2001). The structural approach
suggests that land monopolization, a necessary condition for the capitalist phase of frontier
development, creates a minifundio-latifundio complex that does not provide sufficient land
for subsistence farming, forcing peasants to work part time in order to supplement their
livelihood (Foweraker, 1981; Wood, 1983). Furthermore, large landowners benefiting from
scale economies of production are able to drive down prices of production and force small
farmers unable to compete into bankruptcy, thereby leaving land open for appropriation
(Walker and Homma, 1996). Dispossessed farmers either fight for their land rights, push
further into the forest in search of new land to settle, or move to the city in search of
employment opportunities.
The institutional account suggests that violent land conflict results from the failure of
land tenure institutions to keep pace with frontier expansion (Mueller, 1994; Alston et al.,
1995, 1997, 2000). Through the process of frontier settlement, in-migration augments the
demand for land, stimulating property values and accentuating the need for the definition of
property rights. Land conflict occurs as a result of ill-defined property rights, and the slow
pace of government intervention.
Implications for deforestation. During the agrarian stage of frontier development, deforestation occurs as individuals establish their farming systems. Land conflict emerging as
individuals compete for land resources has also been recognized as an important factor
exacerbating deforestation (Alston et al., 2000; Fearnside, 2001). In particular, inconsistencies between civil and constitutional law regulating private property rights provide incentive
for occupants to deforest. Although legal rights are afforded to private landowners under
Brazilian civil law, the main stipulation for tenure, as stated in the beneficial use clause
in the Brazilian constitution, is that land must be kept in production for the government
to recognize and enforce those rights. Land not put to productive use is vulnerable to
invasion, and expropriation by the government.
In general, the social value of land stipulated in these laws contradicts environmental
policy requiring private land in the Amazon to maintain 80% forest cover (medida provisoria
2.166-67, article 16 part 1 and 2), and, unfortunately, forest is not often recognized as a
productive use. Consequently, large landowners frequently convert forest to pasture in an
attempt to reduce their vulnerability to land invasion by squatters and strengthen their
property rights. Squatters likewise deforest the areas they occupy in order to lay claim to
the land and, in areas with hardwood, to extract trees to sell in order to provide initial capital
for investments in agriculture. Another incentive for both squatters and large landowners to
deforest is to make improvements on the land, which will ensure some compensation in the
event they are evicted. It should also be recognized that a great deal of deforestation in this
phase is productive and results from farming. Thus, a significant component of land cover
change is initially correlated with land conflict indirectly.
Urbanization processes
Urbanization and implications for land conflict. The classical models of frontier expansion propose a development process in which the agricultural frontier evolves into a mature
central-place urban system (i.e., Turner, 1920; Bylund, 1960; Olsson, 1968; Hudson, 1969),
the ultimate goal of early Amazonian development policy.2 According to this view, cities are

105

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

Table 1.

Land conflict-related deaths in the Legal Brazilian Amazon, 19851999

Acre

1985

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

Total

17
17

Amazonas

Amapa

21

12

12

105

32

10

88

117

82

44

36

14

20

16

15

22

13

14

33

11

10

453

20

12

48

Maranhao
Mato Grosso
Para
Rondonia
Roraima
Tocontins
Legal Amazon

35

147

139

106

59

32

45

26

24

40

36

31

47

14

20

11

777

Average annual assassination rate

198589

96.6

199094

34.2

199599

24.6

Source: CPT.

not randomly distributed across the landscape, but rather they emerge as part of an urban
hierarchy. Different formulations of the model emphasize the importance of transportation, markets, administration, and other conditions, such as mineral discovery and policy
incentives, that may distort the hierarchical pattern (see Brown et al., 1994).
Implicit in the process of urbanization are the redistribution of population from rural
areas to cities, and the alleviation of pressure for land in the countryside as the industrial
base of the city expands to absorb excess rural labor. Presumably, then, conflict over land
resources should dissipate with urbanization. Be this as it may, there were 777 land-conflict
related deaths in the Amazon region between 1985 and 1999 (Table 1), during which time
urban population nearly doubled. Nevertheless, over time the number of victims showed a
marked trend from 147 deaths in 1985 to 11 in 1999. This represents a precipitous decline
from a region-wide annual rate of 97 deaths between 1985 and 1990, to 25 deaths annually
between 1995 and 2000. Figure 2 clearly depicts a decline in violent land conflict in the
Amazon region. On first glance, this would be expected given the rapid rate of urbanization
that has occurred. However, despite declines in land conflict-related deaths, land conflict
has intensified in terms of the number of land invasions, and the number of participants
(figure 3). In fact, the number of families participating in land occupations has increased
from almost 100,000 in 1992 to an estimated 180,000 families by 1999. Likewise, the
number of land invasions increased from about 80,000 to more than 120,000 during that
same time period.
Implications for deforestation. The urbanization of this tropical forest environment raises
important questions concerning land conflict, the pace of deforestation, and the potential

106

SIMMONS ET AL.

Figure 2.

Land conflict in the Amazon, Brazil 19851999.

Figure 3.

Number of conflicts and families participating in the land struggle in the Amazon, Brazil.

for forest recovery at some point in the future. An historical assessment of deforestation in
developed countries recognizes that the onset of urbanization and industrialization, along
with labor saving agricultural technology, led to rural out-migration, providing labor to
manufacturing in the cities and alleviating pressure for agricultural land (Walker, 1993).
Walker (1993) outlines a two-stage model of landscape change in developed countries in
which deforestation during early periods gives way to reforestation, and ultimately to forest stability as economic development progresses. Deforestation is a necessary outcome of
development; however, at some point of landscape turnaround the factors causing deforestation dissipate, and forest recovery occurs (Walker, 1993).

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

107

Surprisingly, in an apparent paradox, rates of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

increased rapidly alongside of frontier urbanization (Perz, unpublished manuscript). The
annual rate of urban growth during the 1980s was estimated at 5.3%, while deforestation
ranged from 10,000 to 20,000 km2 per year.3 The following section addresses how frontier
urbanization varied from the patterns outlined in classical urban theory, and attempts to
connect these processes with land conflict and deforestation outcomes.
2.2.

Frontier urbanization in the Brazilian Amazon

The Brazilian Amazon has indeed undergone rapid transformation as development efforts
beginning in the late 1960s attracted waves of in-migration. Population growth rates in
the region have exceeded 15% in many areas, and urbanization increased from 36% in
1970 to 61% by 1996. Rather than being a region of progressive rural land occupation, this
region reveals a pronounced relative shift of population to urban centers. Analysis of the
demographic data in Table 2 provides evidence of a rural-urban exodus, showing that rural
population density from 1970 to 1996 grew little, peaking at 1.5 persons per km2 in 1991
and actually declining to 1.4 persons per km2 by 1996. Meanwhile, total population density,
reflecting rapid increase in urban areas, more than doubled from 1.5 persons per km2 in
1970 to 3.7 persons per km2 by 1996. Overall, population trends indicate that although both
urban and rural population growth rates have slowed, rural population actually declined
between 1991 and 1996, while urban population continued to grow at nearly 4% annually.
These numbers point to the premature character of urbanization in the Brazilian Amazon.
The most widely cited explanation of population redistribution from rural areas to cities is
small farm failure and violent land appropriation by large landed interests resulting in land
concentration (Schmink and Wood, 1992; Browder and Godfrey, 1997). Table 3 provides
land distribution data from the agricultural census that reveal changes between 1985 and
1996, attesting to such trends. As shown Table 3, from 1985 to 1996 the number of small

Table 2.

Rural and urban population growth in the states of the Brazilian Amazon, 19701996
Census year
1970
(1)

1980
(2)

1991
(3)

1996
(4)

Rural population

4,977,855

6,535,341

7,598,694

7,300,466

Urban population

2,738,772

5,239,736

9,383,770

11,445,808

Total population

7,716,627

11,775,077

16,982,464

18,746,274

Urban percentage

35.5

44.5

55.3

61.1

Rural population density (persons per km2 )

1.0

1.3

1.5

1.4

km2 )

1.5

Total population density (persons per

2.3

3.3

3.7

Average annual percent rural growth

2.72

1.37

0.80

Average annual percent urban growth

6.49

5.3

Source: IBGE, 1970, 1980, 1991, 1996.

3.97

108
Table 3.

SIMMONS ET AL.
Agricultural land distribution in the Brazilian Amazon, 19851995
Number of establishments

Size (ha)

1985

1995

Percent change

0-LT100

989851

730237

26.2

100-LT1000

142370

128304

9.9

1000 or greater

16315

17714

1148536

876255

8.6
24

Land Area (ha) in eastablishments

1985

1995

Percent change

14970619

13614655

9.1

31379168

31299081

0.3

69600799

75846467

115950586

120760203

9.0
4

Source: IBGE, 1985, 1996.

establishments less than 100 ha declined by 26%, and the land area in smallholdings was
reduced by 9%. Likewise, but to a lesser extent, the number of farms 100 to less than
1,000 ha declined by about 10%, and area in such holdings by 0.3%. To the contrary, large
establishments greater than 1,000 ha increased in number by 8.6% and land area in large
holdings expanded by approximately 9%. Overall, Table 3 shows that the number of large
establishments and the amount of land in these holdings increased, while the number and
land area of small farms declined. In fact, as of 1996, 83% of the agricultural establishments
in the Amazon are less than 100 ha, but occupy only 11% of the land. On the other hand,
only 2% of the establishments are greater than 1,000 ha and occupy an overwhelming 63%
of the agricultural land.
Another significant phenomenon is the increasing urbanization of landownership resulting from wealth accumulation of early colonists who moved to the city, and from land
purchases by successful urban residents. As shown in Table 4, the proportion of urban ownership of agricultural land increased by 19% between 1985 and 1996, despite an estimated
29% decline in the total number of agricultural establishments. In addition, the rural land
area under urban ownership during this period expanded by 23%, while total land area in
agriculture increased by a limited 4%. Overall, according to the 1996 census, urban dwellers
own more than 54% of the agricultural land, and their properties tend to be more than four
times larger than the average size of establishments in the region.
Local rural to urban moves have characterized the rural exodus from agricultural frontiers
plagued by violence or farm failure (Smith, 1982; Moran, 1983; Bunker, 1985; Schmink
and Wood, 1992). According to demographic data provided in the 1991 Brazilian Census,
migrants makeup about 34% of the urban population in the Amazon region. Of that migrant
population, 16% are rural-urban migrants, and the overwhelming majority came from within
the region. Nevertheless, other factors may draw migrants from the rural areas, such as
increasing opportunities and services provided by urban centers, and/or wealth accumulation
enabling farmers to move to cities where there are better amenities. Two urban circulation
patterns have been identified for the Brazilian Amazon. The first involves stage migration
with laborers moving initially from the rural area to a local administrative seat, and then
relocating to progressively larger urban areas where job opportunities are greater (Mougeot,
1985). Another noted pattern is the movement of laborers among boomtowns, as one towns
timber or gold economy goes bust (Godfrey, 1990, 1992). The 1991 Brazilian Census reveals
that urban to urban migration is also important, with about 18% of the migrants to the city

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

Table 4.

109

Land allocation on the agricultural frontier

Number of agricultural
establishments

State

Total

Rondonia

80,615

Urbanowned

% Urbanowned

Land area of agricultural

establishments (ha)
Total
(000)

Urban-owned
(000)

% Urbanowned

Average area (ha)

Total

Urbanowned

1985 Urban landownership

Acre
Amazonas
Roraima
Para
Amapa

6,210

7.7

6,032

1,397

23.2

74.8

225.0

35,049

900

2.6

5,234

866

16.6

149.4

962.5

116,302

6,277

5.4

5,859

891

15.2

50.4

142.1

6,389

1,382

21.6

2,149

1,055

49.1

336.4

763.5

253,222

16,204

6.4

24,727

7,527

30.4

97.7

464.6

4,816

536

11.1

1,208

811

67.2

250.8

1,514.0

Tocantins

47,320

9,803

20.7

17,354

8,498

49.0

366.7

866.9

Maranhao

531,413

42,363

8.0

15,548

5,936

38.2

29.3

140.1

Mato Grosso

77,921

14,272

18.3

37,835

23,230

61.4

485.6

1,627.7

Rondonia

76,956

9,182

11.9

8,890

3,189

35.9

115.5

347.3

Acre

23,788

2,252

9.5

3,183

937

29.5

133.8

416.3

Amazonas

83,289

5,803

7.0

3,322

964

29.0

39.9

166.3

7,476

1,927

25.8

2,976

1,392

46.8

398.2

722.6

206,404

17,703

8.6

22,520

8,879

39.4

109.1

501.6

3,349

652

19.5

700

446

63.8

209.0

684.5

Tocantins

44,913

15,899

35.4

16,765

10,240

61.1

373.3

644.1

Maranhao

368,191

42,159

11.5

12,560

5,146

41.0

34.1

122.1

78,762

24,929

31.7

49,839

34,405

69.0

632.8

1,380.1

1996 Urban landownership

Roraima
Para
Amapa

Mato Grosso

TotalsUrban landownership for the North region

1985

1,153,047

97,947

8.5%

115,950

50,214

43.3%

100.6

512.7

1996

893,128

120,506

13.5%

120,759

65,603

54.3%

135.2

544.4

Change 1985
to 1996

29%

19%

4%

23%

Source: IBGE 1985, 1996.

coming from other urban areas. This urban to urban migration is of potential import because
it may reflect movement after an initial rural to urban move, which is characteristic in this
region following rural land dispossession (Browder and Godfrey, 1997).
The urban centers on the frontier function as a labor market, providing a cheap and abundant workforce for a variety of economic activities. Classic models of urbanization suggest
that rural to urban migration intensifies as the frontier closes, alleviating the excess pressure on agricultural lands by redistributing the population to cities where jobs are abundant.
This process continues until a modern urban system emerges (i.e., Turner, 1920; James,
1938), with a varied industrial base. The 1996 agricultural census for Brazil indicates that

110

SIMMONS ET AL.

employment in the urban frontier towns of Amazonia is still heavily tied to rural extractive
industries, accounting for an estimated 14% of the jobs for urban residents, most as farm
wage labor. Overall, nearly 20% of all laborers in agro-extractive activities in the Brazilian
Amazon live in urban centers (Perz, unpublished manuscript). Evidently, industrialization
associated with urbanization processes is still in its infant stages in this region.
While some suggest that the size of the workforce is a function of the employment
opportunities available in the city, others propose that the abundance of the workforce in
frontier towns in Amazonia contracts or expands with the availability of land as opposed to
jobs (Torres, 1988; Becker et al., 1990). According to this view, displaced farmers and other
landless migrants stay in urban centers until rural land becomes available. Consequently,
unemployed landless migrants have two optionsthey can either migrate to a larger city
with greater job potential, an urban to urban move, or wait until land becomes available and
return to the countryside, an urban to rural move.
A significant number of migrants to urban frontier towns have, in fact, recently left the
countryside (since 1980). According to an analysis of the 1991 Brazilian census microdata
sample of individuals and households, 22% of the urban population in the Amazon consisted
of rural to urban migrants, and approximately 20% of the urban population moved from rural
areas within the region (Perz, unpublished manuscript).4 As has already been noted, many
of these urban dwellers remain connected to the rural areas through employment in agroextractive activities, and often within close proximity to their previous residence. This paper
suggests that limited urban opportunities may leave many recent migrants discontented,
thereby creating a group of landless farmers desiring a return to the countryside, and one
that may be easily mobilized for land occupations on public (terras devolutas) or private land.
3.

Land conflict: Urban or rural experience?

Although the Brazilian Amazon is most often thought of as a large forested area affected
primarily by encroachment of the agricultural frontier, this region has experienced rapid
urbanization over the past several decades, and currently more than half the population lives
in an urban center. Implicit in the process of urbanization described in classical urban theory
is the reconfiguration of the population from rural to urban areas, and reduction in demand
for land in the countryside. Consequently, this paper contends that conflict over these land
resources should dissipate as urbanization progresses.
However, in the Brazilian Amazon, urbanization has not necessarily provided greater
wage opportunities (Becker, 1996), and many jobs remained tied to rural extractive activities
(Perz, unpublished manuscript). Further analysis of the land conflict dynamics reveals that
land struggle has not dissipated, despite the decline in land conflict-related deaths as revealed
in figure 2. In fact, figure 3 shows that both the number of conflicts and families participating
in such actions have steadily risen.
3.1.

Urban-rural dynamics of land conflict

This paper contends that the decline in the number of murders, in the face of increasing
land conflict, is reflective of the changing dynamics of land struggle. This section describes

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

111

the hypothetical two-stage model of land conflict evolution that acknowledges rural and
urban dynamics. The first represents a purely agricultural frontier involving individualized
conflicts between small farmers and large-landed interests, triggered by land occupation and
consolidation processes. The second stage considers an organized resistance, facilitated by
urbanization and incorporating institutional actors mobilizing on both sides of the land
struggle (i.e., Movement of the Landless Rural Workers (MST) and the Democratic Union
of Rural Landowners (UDR)).
According to this model, stage one is a disarticulated struggle that occurs in the early
decades of frontier expansion. During this period conflict over land involves spontaneous
struggle between landless farmers and large-landed interests, and political power and wealth
determines the outcome of conflict (Schmink and Wood, 1992). Large landowners have no
fear of retaliation from the dis-enfranchised peasantry. Consequently, the victims of the
struggle are many and mostly the landless.
Little data on land conflict are available for the entire Amazon region in the early development years prior to democratization (19701985), but data are available for Para,
which has historically experienced the greatest conflict. In order to assess the changing
face of the struggle, Table 5 presents a breakdown of victims of land conflict from 1964 to
1992. Throughout this time period the overwhelming majority of victims are the landless,
accounting for 67% of those killed. Violence intensifies in the 1980s, peaks in 1985, and
then begins to decline (figure 4); all told, more than half of all the land conflict-related
murders fall within this decade. Although the landless farmers incurred the greatest loss,
the faces of new victims are evident, including individuals on the side of large landowners
and movement activists.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s the sheer number of murder victims declines, but the
assassination of specific targets intensifies (CPT, 1996). As Table 5 shows, the proportion
of movement activists killed in the struggle is four times greater in the late 1980s and
early 1990s than in previous decades. This paper contends that a new form of struggle
emerged in the wake of urbanization, characteristic of stage two, representing a politically
mobilized landless movement. Since the mid 1980s, the organizational structure of the
landless movement in Para has expanded to include offices located in many frontier towns.
The organization of the landless movement and the expansion of opposition groups in the
Amazon frontier appear to have occurred around the same period, sometime in the late

Table 5.

Victims of the land conflict in the state of Para, Brazil, 19641992

196469 197074 197579 198084 198589 199092 Totals Percent

Landless farmer interests

27

41

74

193

32

375

Movement activists

11

23

Large landowners interests

17

82

104

19

Police

Others

45

54

10

Totals

28

43

98

337

47

562

Source: Almeida, 1994.

67

112

SIMMONS ET AL.

Figure 4.

Victims of the land conflict in the State of Para, Brazil, 19641992.

1980s. This new organized struggle may provide a deterrent to violent, solitary action.
Instead, action in numbers has become more viable. Although violent land clashes still
occur, the number of people killed has declined, while the struggle has actually intensified
in terms of number of occupations and participants.
The urban environment provides both the communicative and the interactive spaces for
the land struggle, enabling the landless and the movement activists to meet and organize
their invasion strategy, and, as a result, facilitating the creation of social capital linkages
(Fernandes, 2001). The actual space of struggle and resistance is in the rural areas, where
encampments are set up and land invasions are carried out. Consequently, urbanization may
facilitate an urban to rural exodus of the unemployed and landless city dwellers, representing
an important urban-rural link to land conflict. The discussion that follows examines the ruralurban connections between various organizations and participants involved in the landless
movement.

3.2.

Social mobilization of the land conflict

The main argument of this paper is that land conflict has not dissipated with urbanization;
instead the nature of the struggle has changed from a rural-based to an urban-based political
movement. One important factor contributing to this evolution has been intensified social
mobilization around the plight of Brazils landless population. In fact, there appears to
have been an upsurge in land conflict across Brazil pursuant to Democratization in 1985.
This may be attributable to the proliferation of social organizations that were banned under
the authoritarian administration of the previous government. In particular, agrarian reform
efforts pursued prior to the military coup were stymied under military rule, and mobilization
on behalf of the landless was suppressed. Despite such restraint, an important advocate of
reform was the Pastoral Land Commission (CPT) established in 1975, an organization linked

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

113

to the Brazilian National Conference of Bishops, which actively supports rural workers,
their organizations, and their movement for agrarian reform. After democratization, the
CPT facilitated much of the social organizing and mobilizing efforts across the country, and
currently has three main areas of activity in the Amazon including the main office in Belem,
and the Abaetetuba and Tucuma
regions, all in the State of Para (figure 2). Nevertheless,
the Catholic Church plays an influential role in most places in Brazil irrespective of official
CPT presence (Petras, 1998).
Other organizations have gained momentum in the landless struggle under post-military
rule. The three most widely recognized include: the Movement of the Landless Rural Workers (MST), the Rural Workers Union (STR), and the Democratic Union of Rural Landowners
(UDR). The MST was officially established in 1984 when various leaders of independent
landless movements joined forces in their struggle. The main objective of the MST is to mobilize the landless and force the government to follow through on their promise for agrarian
reform (Kelson, 1997; Stedile, 1997; Fernandes, 2000). The MST organizes encampments
on public land, assists the landless community in the selection of target properties for occupation, and, immediately following invasion, petitions the government for the legalization
of the squatters claims and for provision of food and supplies. Although land occupations
occur in rural areas, much of the recruitment efforts take place in the city. The MST, in fact,
holds that urban mobilization is an essential component of the National Political Struggle
(Petras, 1998).
Originally based in Southern Brazil, the MST began to move into the Amazon region in
the early 1990s (Fernandes, 2000), and currently has four regional offices in the State of Para,
the: (1) Araguaia region corresponding to the municipios of Maraba, Sao Joao do Araguaia,
and their neighboring cities with headquarters in the city of Maraba; (2) Carajas region that
encompasses the municipios of Parauapebas, Eldorado do Carajas, and their surrounding
cities with headquarters in the city of Parauapebas; (3) Chico Mendes region that covers
the municipios of Tucuru, Novo Repartimento, and nearby cities with the secretariat in the
city of Tucuru; and (4) Cabanos, which includes the municipios of Castanhal, Belem, and
surrounding cities with the main State office in Belem (figure 2).
Although the MST is the most visible proponent of agrarian reform, other important
organizations with local representation are the Rural Workers Unions (STRs) (Toni, 1999).
The STRs have gained independence from the corporatist state in response to the New
Unionism movement of the 1970s in the State of Para, and with significant support from the
CPT (Toni, 1999). Membership in STR provides local, state, and national representation
for small farmers, sharecroppers, permanent and temporary employees, and day labor, with
offices in numerous cities across Para (figure 2). The STRs have organized to improve
conditions for the rural workers with important issues such as access to agricultural credit,
infrastructure development and improvement (i.e., roads and schools), wages and benefits,
and agrarian reform.
An additional actor in the land struggle is the UDR, an association of large landowners
who have joined forces to stop the MSTs aggressive pursuit of land reform through the use of
political power and repression (Payne, 2000). This group has been accused of hiring private
militia to assassinate MST leaders and expel sem terra families from invasion sites. The UDR
was founded in the State of Goias, and presently has representatives in 18 states. Although

114

SIMMONS ET AL.

there is no official presence in Para, the municipio of Xinguara is locally recognized as

their base of operation (Campos, 2002). Nevertheless, they provide alliance with numerous
organizations, and, when the need arises, large landowners facing invasion can contact the
UDR directly for assistance by phone or e-mail.5
3.3.

Urban-rural social capital networks

The presence and influence of the various urban-based social organizations (MST, CPT,
STRs, and UDR) have evidently transformed land conflict in the Amazon frontier. Although
far from conclusive, a comparison of the presence of these organizations with the areas of
land conflict depicted in figure 5 provides some limited insight. In particular, there appears
to be a concentration of organizing in the southeast corner of the State, the region referred
to as the South of Para, notorious for intense violent conflict.
Overall, state level evidence suggests that land invasions increased, but, as suggested earlier, conflict-related murders declined. At the municipio level the pattern is not so apparent.

Figure 5.

Land conflict and Urban-based political mobilization.

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

115

For example, about half the municipios with STR activity also experienced moderate levels
of land conflict, while the other half revealed no conflict. Nevertheless, in Paragominas STR
presence may have ameliorated levels of violence, which declined from an average of 7.25
deaths per year between 1985 and 1989 to 1.2 during the 1990 and 1995 period. Although
the CPT involvement is limited to a few municipios, one important center, Tucuma,
is located in the region of intense land struggle. From the data available, it appears as though
violence in this municipio has intensified in the early 1990s. However, it must be noted
that such an assertion may prove of little consequence since this municipio was created in
1988 from territory in Sao Felix do Xingu, the municipio with the greatest number of land
conflict-related murders.
In Maraba, where the MST has an office in the municipal seat, the average annual number
of conflict-related deaths indeed declined from 4 per year between 1985 and 1989, to an
average of 1.5 between 1990 and 1999. On the other hand, Eldorado do Carajas, also with
an MST presence, experienced its period of greatest land conflict violence in the mid 1990s,
shortly after the MST was established. However, it must be noted that this extreme violence
can be accounted for by one incidentthe Massacre at Eldorado do Carajas on April
17, 1996 that left 19 landless workers dead and 69 injured. The events and circumstances
that triggered this tragic encounter between the landless and the military police are well
documented, and provide limited support to some of the primary contentions in this paper. In
particular, this incident points to urban-rural political mobilization, with the overwhelming
majority of participants involved recruited from nearby urban centers.
Although the incident occurred in Eldorado do Carajas, the events leading up to it transpired as a region-wide mobilization effort on the part of the MST. Indeed, the South of
Para is the main target region for the MST, and between 1990 and 1999 an estimated 11,400
landless families, mostly from the frontier towns, were successfully mobilized to participate in 11 separate land occupations, including 5,000 families that camped at the INCRA
compound in the city of Maraba (Campos, 2002). Given the degree of land invasions occurring in this region, the actual incidence of violent conflict is low. The strategy pursued by
the landless movement has been successful, and as of September 1999 MST actions have
resulted in the permanent settlement of an estimated 2,636 families (Table 6).
Although available data reveal the spatial patterns of land conflict and social organizing,
more details are necessary to disentangle social capital linkages. Such information could be
derived from extensive field investigation, but such a study is beyond the current scope of
this paper. However, there exists anecdotal evidence from studies conducted in other parts
of Brazil that provide support to our assertion of an urban-rural connection. Numerous
studies of assentamentos (settlement areas) have shown that residents have strong links
to urban and rural areas. According to Bergamasco and Ferrante (1998), nearly all of the
residents in their study site had come from a nearby urban area, and more than half had
previously lived in the rural areas. Pedlowski et al. (2001), found a strong rural to urban
connection in their examination of settlers in an assentamento in Rio de Janeiro State. The
overwhelming majority of residents previously lived on the periphery of an urban center,
more than half last held urban-related jobs, and an estimated 38% worked in rural activities.
Fanelli (2001), in his analysis of a settlement in Rio de Janeiro State, describes a return
exodus of landless farmers that were previously displaced from their land and moved to the

116

SIMMONS ET AL.
Table 6.

MST-initiated settlement areas in Para as of September 1999

Name
Assentamento 1st of March

Municipio

Number of families settled

Sao Joao do Araguaia

350

Assentamento Palmares

Parauapebas

535

Assentamento 17 of April

Eldorado do Carajas

690

Assentamento Rio Branco

Parauapebas

250

Assentamento Joao Batista

Castanhal

182

Assentamento Chico Mendes

Tucuru

190

Assentamento Onalcio Barros

Parauapebas

Assentamento Cabanos

Eldorado do Carajas

250

Assentamento 26 of March

Maraba

500

Assentamento Martires de April

Belem

120

69

Source: Campos, 2002.

city, but due to economic hardships and a desire for the idyllic rural life, participated in
land invasions to return to the countryside. These studies have also suggested that the MST,
in particular, actively seeks out the urban poor to participate in their movement. In fact,
Pedlowski et al. (2001) found that almost 90% of settlers had no involvement with social
organizing until the MST approached them in the city, and encouraged them to participate
in the land occupation.
4.
4.1.

Environmental implications of stage two in the land conflict dynamic

Mitigating effects of urbanization?

Deforestation alongside of urbanization may be partially explained by the increase in urban

ownership of agricultural land resulting from land consolidation and, consequently, wealth
accumulation that enabled farmers to move to urban centers (Section 3.1; Table 5). So,
although the owners reside in the city, they are economically dependent on agro-extractive
activities in the countryside. Likewise, as previously discussed, a substantial number of
urban dwellers are employed as wage labor in the rural areas. In general, despite the rapid
pace of urbanization, economic activities in the Brazilian Amazon are heavily tied to agroextractive production systems that, by default, lead to deforestation.
Another obstacle to forest recovery is that urbanization in this region does not appear
to mitigate land conflict. To the contrary, data on the land struggle show that the number
of occupations and participation have increased dramatically. The conventional model of
frontier expansion, which suggests the evolution from an agrarian structure to a mature
central-place urban system, appears to unravel in light of actual processes in the Brazilian
Amazon. The economy of the region, and the limited wage opportunities offered to city
dwellers, are still largely tied to the agro-extractive sector and the uncertainties that come
with commodity markets. Consequently, economic hardship of city life provides motivation
for participation in the larger landless movement, and the incentive for an urban exodus.

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

117

The model of land conflict dynamics presented in this paper suggests that urbanization
may, in fact, be facilitating the mobilization and organization of the struggle. This proposition presents important implications for both greater and accelerated rates of deforestation
in the future. In particular, during the initial period of frontier settlement, small farmers
had little capacity for extensive deforestation (Walker et al., 2002), and much of the large
landholdings were maintained primarily for speculation (Hecht, 1985, 1992). Nevertheless,
unlike other regions in Brazil, forested land in Amazonia is the most likely target for individual small farmer occupation and organized land invasions (Alston et al., 2000; Fearnside,
2001). In particular, invasion of forest is seen as less risky than pasture, which is considered
productive and more likely to provoke an armed resistance by private security hired by large
ranchers (Fearnside, 2001). Another deterrent to invading pasture areas relates to their compacted soils and entrenched weeds that make annuals production nearly impossible given
the limited technology available to most small farmers. In addition, the organic composition of trees provides an endowment of fertility derived from the slash and burn technology
used by almost all agriculturalists in the tropics. Finally, an invasion of forest area may
go unnoticed for some time under the cloak of trees, providing the movement activists the
opportunity to file the necessary paperwork to begin the process of expropriation before the
landowner realizes his land has been occupied.
Overall, land reform efforts between 1964 and 1997 are said to have contributed to 30%
of the deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, and an estimated 5 million ha of forest in Para
have recently been opened for this purpose (Fearnside, 2001). Although INCRA has formally prohibited new settlement in forested areas (medida provisoria 2.166-67, 8/24/2001,
article 2, statute 6), reality reveals that most new land invasions are occurring almost exclusively in these regions. The reason is that INCRA is not initiating new settlements, but
instead is responding to land invasions instigated by the large-scale urban-based landless
movements organized by the MST and others. Once the invasions occur, and land is indeed
expropriated, INCRA proceeds to formalize these settlement areas by building infrastructure, such as roads, further exacerbating deforestation (Laurance et al., 2001).
The urban-based landless movement described in this paper presents unique threats to
the environmental quality of the Amazon. In particular, the number of land invasions and
participants has increased dramatically, and, consequently, the magnitude of forest impacted
is much greater than the small scale rural-based squatting that proliferated during stage one
of the land conflict dynamic. In addition, many of the urban dwellers that participate in these
land invasions are not experienced agriculturalists (Pedlowski et al., 2000). As a result, once
the land is cleared and their agricultural production fails, they abandon the land and return
to the city where they once again join the growing pool of landless and unemployed, and
possibly participate in another land invasion, perpetuating the cycle of deforestation.
5.

Conclusions and future research implications

This paper has described a two-stage model for understanding the changing dynamics of land
conflict in the Brazilian Amazon. The first stage is reflective of a purely agricultural frontier
expansion process, which leads to land consolidation and land appropriation. In this first
stage, landless farmers may leave the countryside and move to the urban centers. Some find

118

SIMMONS ET AL.

employment, but others may wait until land becomes available. During this first stage violent
land conflict is intense and murders are frequent outcomes. In this phase, deforestation is
only indirectly linked with land conflicts, resulting as individuals establish their farming
systems and cut down trees to demonstrate land claims. The second stage of the conflict is
referred to as organized resistance, which is facilitated by urbanization. In this stage, the
landless farmers who moved to the city join forces with various organizations mobilizing
for agrarian reform (i.e., MST and CPT). The strategy behind these new movements is
large-scale land occupations, with security and power offered in numbers. In addition, the
organization of large landowners is facilitated by urbanization (i.e., UDR). This new form
of land struggle has resulted in a decline in violent conflict, but has intensified the frequency
of occupations and number of participants. This new form of land conflict can have dramatic
impacts on land cover given that it most often occurs as large-scale land invasions, targeting
almost exclusively forested areas.
This paper has proposed a hypothetical model and has presented data that are consistent
with, but not evidence of, the two-stage process of land conflict described. Further research,
however, may provide additional clues. In particular, a logical step in this line of inquiry may
include a detailed examination of the geographic distribution of social organization (MST,
CPT, UDR) and the actual occurrence of land invasion and conflict on the Amazon frontier.
In addition, surveys of those involved in the struggle, whether on assentamentos or in MST
encampments, could provide important information as to where they came from, why they
moved, and how they were mobilized. Some evidence presented in this paper suggests that,
in fact, a large proportion of settlers in assentamentos were previous rural residents that
moved to the city, and later became participants in land occupations. Such accounts support
the notion that cities embody the communicative spaces for the land struggle, while the
rural areas represent the actual spaces of resistance.
Urbanization in the Brazilian Amazon should, as classical models of frontier expansion
pose and experience from industrialized countries suggests, mitigate land conflict and deforestation. Nevertheless, evidence demonstrates that this is not the case. Both deforestation
and land conflict have intensified alongside rapid rates of urbanization. The compounding
effect between land conflict and deforestation, as discussed in this paper, may serve to
exacerbate the environmental problems in the future. Contrary to conventional notions of
frontier development, urbanization in this region has not alleviated pressure for agricultural
land. Although there has been a movement of people from the countryside to the urban areas, the regional economy is still agrarian based, and the employment opportunities limited.
While creating a comprehensive development plan for the Amazon is not an insurmountable
task, an obvious need is to improve conditions for the landless immigrants in the city so as
to impede the urban exodus. How this is to be accomplished is the challenge, one that is
beyond the scope of this paper.

Notes
1. See the Brazilian Constitution, Article 191, 1988.
2. The main strategies of the National Integration Plan (PIN) in 1971 was the development of an extensive
highway network, an elaborate system of central places, and small farmer settlement schemes meant to provide

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

119

land for landless peasants, seasonal labor for extractive industries, increases in food production, and, finally,
security on the frontier through demographic occupation (See Browder, 1988; Browder and Godfrey, 1997).
3. For urban growth rates see Table 2. For deforestation estimates see Skole and Tucker (1993).
4. The microdata consist of 10% household samples in municipios with resident populations of greater than
15,000, and 20% sample of those with fewer than 15,000. Data provided include: State/Municipio of residence;
type of residence (urban/rural); whether respondent was born in municipio of current residence, and if not, the
duration of residence since 1991. This information allows for the identification of people who moved since the
previous census of September 1980.
5. See the official UDR website at www.udr.com.br. We tried to contact the main office to find out where their
Para influence lies, but they would not release the information. Nevertheless, rumor has it that their base of
operation is Xinguara, located in the so-called South of Para, a region known for its violence.

References
Almeida, A.L.O. (1992) Colonization of the Amazon. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas.
Almeida, A.W.B. (1994) Carajas: A Guerra dos Mapas. Falangola, Belem, Para, Brazil.
Alston, L.J., Libecap, G.D. and Mueller, B. (1997) Violence and the development of property rights to land in the
Brazilian Amazon. In The Frontiers of the New Institutional Economics (J.N. Drobak and J.V.C. Nye, eds.),
pp. 145163. Academic Press, San Diego.
Alston, L.J., Libecap, G.D. and Mueller, B. (2000) Land reform policies, the sources of violent conflict, and
Implications for deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
39(2), 162188.
Alston, L.J., Libecap, G.D. and Schneider, R. (1995) Property rights and the precondition for markets: the case of
the Amazonian frontier. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 151(1), 89107.
Barata, R. (1995) Inventario da Violencia: Crime e Impunidade no Campo Paraense. Cejup, Belem, Para, Brazil.
Becker, B.K. (1996) Brazils frontier experience and sustainable development: a geopolitical approach. In Frontiers
in Regional Development (Y. Gradus and H. Lithick, eds.), pp. 7399. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.,
Lanham.
Becker, B.K., Miranda, M. and Machado, L. (1990) Fronteira Amazonica: questoes sobre a gestao do territorio.
Editora da UnB-Editora da UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.
Branford, S. and Glock, P. (1985) The Last Frontier: Fighting Over Land in the Amazon. Zed Press, London.
Brannstrom, C. (2001) Producing possession: labour, law, and land on the Brazilian agricultural frontier, 1920
1945. Political Geography 20, 859883.
Browder, J.O. and Godfrey, B. (1997) Rainforest Cities: Urbanization, Development, and Globalization of the
Brazilian Amazon. Columbia University Press, Columbia.
Brown, L.A., Sierra, R., Digiacinto, S. and Smith, W.R. (1994) Urban-system evolution in frontier settings.
Geographical Review 84(3), 249264.
Bunker, S. (1985) Understanding the Amazon: Extraction, Unequal Exchange, and the Failure of the Modern
State. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
Bylund, E. (1960) Theoretical considerations regarding distribution of settlement in inner north Sweden. Geografiska Annaler B42, 225231.
Campos, A.S. (2002) O Confronto em Eldorado do Carajas. Promev Grafica e Editora, Belem, Para, Brazil.
Cardoso, E. and Helwege, A. (1992) Below the line: poverty in Latin America. World Development 20(1),
1937.
Cleary, D. (1990) Anatomy of the Amazon Gold Rush. MacMillan, London.
Commissao Pastoral da Terra (CPT) (1996) Conflitos No Campo. CPT, Belem, Para, Brazil.
Covert, H.H. (1998) Fighting for Agrarian reform in Brazil: an analysis of the strategies and dialogue of the Sem
Terra movement. Latin Americanist 33(2), 16.
Deininger, K. and Squire, L. (1998) New ways of looking at old issues: asset inequality and growth. Mimeo,
Brasilia.
Fanelli, L. (2001) Movimento Sem Terra and Migrations. Paper presented at the meeting of the Latin American
Studies Association, Washington, DC, Sept. 68, 2001.

120

SIMMONS ET AL.

Fearnside, P.M. (2001) Land-tenure issues as factors in environmental destruction in Brazilian Amazonia: the case
of Southern Para. World Development 29(8), 13611372.
Fernandes, B.M. (2000) A Formac a o do MST No Brasil. Vozes, Petropolis.
Fernandes, B.M. (2001) The Occupation as a Form of Access to Land. Paper presented at the meeting of the Latin
American Studies Association, Washington, DC, Sept. 68, 2001.
Foresta, R.A. (1992) Amazonia and the politics of geopolitics. Geographical Review 82(2), 128142.
Foweraker, J. (1981) The Struggle for Land: A Political Economy of the Pioneer Frontier in Brazil, 1930 to Present.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gasques, J.G. and Conceica o, J.C. (1999) Ademanda de terra para reforma agraria no Brazil. Rio de Janeiro:
www.dataterra.org.br.
Godfrey, B.J. (1990) Boom towns of the Amazon. Geographical Review 80(2), 103117.
Godfrey, B.J. (1992). Migration to the gold-mining frontier in Brazilian Amazonia. Geographical Review 82(4),
458469.
Hall, A.L. (1987) Agrarian crisis in Brazilian Amazonia: the grande carajas programme. Journal of Development
Studies 23(4), 522552.
Hall, A.L. (1989) Developing Amazonia: Deforestation and Social Conflict in Brazils Carajas Programme.
Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Hecht, S.B. (1985) Environment, development, and politics: capital accumulation and the livestock sector in
Eastern Amazonia. World Development 13(6), 663684.
Hecht, S.B. (1992) Logic of livestock and deforestation: the case of Amazonia. In Development or Destruction:
The Conversion of Tropical Forest to Pasture in Latin America (T.E. Downing, S. Hecht, H. Pearson and C.
Garcia-Downing, eds.), pp. 726. Westview Press, Boulder.
Hoffman, R. (1998) A estrutura fundiaria no Brasil de acordo com o cadastro do INCRA: 1967 a 1998. Working
Paper: INCRA/UNICAMP.
Hudson, J.C. (1969) A location theory for rural settlement. Annals of the Association of American Geographers
59, 365381.
Ianni, O. (1979) Colonizacao e Contra-Reforma Agraria na Amazonia. EditoraVozes, Petropolis.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica (IBGE) (1985) Agricultural Census of 1985. Secrataria de Planejamento, Orcamento e Coordinaca o, Rio de Janeiro.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica (IBGE) (1996) Demographic Census of 1996. Secrataria de Planejamento, Orcamento e Coordinaca o, Rio de Janeiro.
Instituto Nacional de Alimentaca o e Nutrica o (INAN) (1989) Pesquisa Nacional Sobre Saude e Nutric a o: Resultados Preliminar. INAN, Brasilia.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE) (2000) Desmatamento da Amazonia Brasleira, 19981999.
Available at INPE website: http://www.inpe.br/Informacoes Eventos/amz1998 1999/pagina7.htm, May.
James, P. (1938) Changing patterns of population in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Geographical Review 28, 353
362.
Katzman, M.T. (1977) The Brazilian frontier in comparative perspective. In Cities and frontiers in Brazil (M.T.
Katzman, ed.), pp. 1183. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Kelson, G.C. (1997) Brazil Up-Close. The Brasilians, May 1997: 7E8E.
Kotscho, R. (1981) O Massacre Dos Posseiros: Conflicto de Terras no Araguaia-Tocantins. Brasiliense, Sao Paulo.
Langevin, M.S. and Rosset, P. (2000) Land reform from below: the landless workers movement in Brazil.
http://www.mstbrazil.org/rosset.html.
Laurance, W.F., Cochrane, M.A., Bergen, S., Fearnside, P.M., Delamonica, P., Barber, C., DAngelo, S. and
Fernandes, T. (2001) The Future of the Brazilian Amazon. Science 291, 438439.
Mahar, D.J. (1979) Frontier Development Policy in Brazil: A Study of Amazonia. Praeger Publishers, New York.
McCracken, S., Brondizio, E., Nelson, D., Moran, E. and Siqueira, A. (1998) The Use of Remote Sensing and
GIS in the Collection of Survey Data on Households and Land Use. Proceedings of the IX Brazilian Remote
Sensing Congress.
Moran, E.F. (1983) The Dilemma of Amazonian Development. Westview Press, Boulder.
Moran, E.F. (1989). Adaption and maladaption in newly settled areas. In The Human Ecology of Tropical Land
Settlement in Latin America (Debra A. Schumann and William L. Partridge, eds.), pp. 2039. Westview Press,
Boulder.

THE CHANGING DYNAMICS OF LAND CONFLICT IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON

121

Mougeot, L.J.A. (1985) Alternative migration targets and Brazilian Amazonias closing frontier. In Change in the
Amazon Basin, Vol. 2: The Frontier After a Decade of Colonisation (J. Hemming, ed.), pp. 5191. Manchester
University Press, Manchester.
Mueller, B., Alston, L.J., Libecap, G.D. and Schneider, R. (1994) Land, property rights, and privatization in Brazil.
The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 34(1), 261280.
Oliveira, I. (2000) Guerra Na Selva. Amazonia: Vinte E Um. May 2000, 3439.
Olsson, G. (1968) Complementary models: a study of colonization maps. Geografiska Annaler B 50, 118.
Payne, L.A. (2000) Uncivil Movements: The Armed Right Wing and Democracy in Latin America. Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.
Pedlowski, M.A., Vieira, R.R., Zinga, M.R. and Cavadas, L.S. (2000) The Limits of Agrarian Reform in A Rural
Settlement in The Northern Fluminense Region, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil. Paper presented at the 10th Congress
of the International Rural Sociology Association, Rio de Janeiro, 2000.
Perz, S. (1998) The Rural Exodus and the Rurban Labor Force of the Brazilian Amazon. Unpublished Manuscript.
Petras, J. (1998) The new revolutionary peasantry: the growth of peasant-led opposition to neoliberalism. Z
Magazine, October 1998. http://www.mstbrazil.org/petras1098.html.
Roberts, J.T. (1992) Squatters and urban growth in Amazonia. Geographical Review 82(2), 441469.
Roberts, J.T. (1995) Trickling down and scrambling up: the informal sector, food provisioning and local benefits
of the Carajas mining growth pole in the Brazilian Amazon. World Development 23(3), 385400.
Rudel, T. (2002) A tropical forest transition? Agricultural change, out-migration, and secondary forests in the
Ecuadorian Amazon. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 92(1), 87102.
Sawyer, D. (1987) Urbanizaca o da fronteira agrcola no Brasil. In A urbanizac a o da fronteira (L. Lavinas, ed.),
pp. 4355. Publipur, Rio de Janeiro.
Schmink, M. and Wood, C.H. (1992) Contested Frontiers in Amazonia. Columbia University Press, Columbia.
Schneider, R.R. (1995) Government and the Economy in the Amazon Frontier. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Silva, J.G. (2001) Quem Precisa de uma Estrategia de Desenvolvimento. In Debatem O Brasil Precisa de uma
Estrategia de Desenvolvimento (Jose Graziano and Jean Marc e Bianchini, eds.). Ministerio do Desenvolvimento
Agrario/Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Rural Sustentavel/NEAD. Braslia, D.F.
Skole, D.L. and Tucker, C.J. (1993) Tropical deforestation and habitat fragmentation in the Amazon: satellite data
from 1978 to 1988. Science 260, 19051910.
Smith, N. (1982) Rainforest Corridors: The Transamazon Colonization Scheme. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
Smith, N., Serrao, E.A., Alvim, P.T. and Falesi, I.C. (1995) Amazonia: Resiliency and Dynamism of the Land and
Its People. United Nations University Press, New York.
Stedile, J.P. (1997) A Reforma Agraria a Luta do MST. Vozes, Petropolis.
Toni, F. (1999) State-Society Relations on the Agricultural Frontier: The Struggle for Credit in the Transamazonia
Region. Ph.D. diss. Department of Political Science, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Turner, F.J. (1920) The Frontier in American History. Holt Press, New York.
Veiga, J.E. (2001) O Brasil Rural de uma Estrategia de Desenvolvimento. Ministerio do Desenvolvimento
Agrario/Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Rural Sustentavel/ NEAD. Braslia, D.F.
Velho, O. (1972) Frentes de Expansaao e Estructura Agraria. Zahar, Rio de Janeiro.
Walker, R.T. (1993). Deforestation and economic development. Canadian Journal of Regional Science 16(3),
481497.
Walker, R.T. and Homma, A. (1996) Land use and land cover dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon: an overview.
Ecological Economics 18, 6780.
Walker, R.T., Moran, E. and Anselin, L. (2000) Deforestation and cattle ranching in the Brazilian Amazon: external
capital and household process. World Development 28(4), 683699.
Walker, R.T., Perz, S., Caldas, M. and Texeira da Silva, L.G. (2002) Land use and land cover change in forest
frontiers: the role of household life cycles. International Regional Science Review. 25(2), 169199.
Welch, C. (1999) The Seed was Planted: The Sao Paulo Rot of Brazils Labor Movement, 19241964. Pennsylvania
State University Press, University Park.
Wood, C.H. (1983) Peasant and capitalist production in the Brazilian Amazon: a conceptual framework for the
study of frontier expansion. In The Dilemma of Amazonian Development (E. Moran, ed.), pp. 259277. Westview
Press, Boulder.