Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

This paper explores the role of private companies in agrarian colonization under Brazil's military regime, analyzing the Japanese-Brazilian PRODECER project. Aimed at transforming the Cerrado into modern farms, PRODECER sparked controversies over the future of Brazil's agriculture and sovereignty.

Paper long abstract:

This paper examines debates over agrarian development in the Brazilian Cerrado region from 1979 to 1985, focusing on the influence of private companies in state-led frontier expansion. During this period, private entities assumed an increasingly pivotal role in the colonization of agrarian landscapes, exemplified by the initiation of the Japanese-Brazilian Cooperation Program PRODECER launched in 1979. The primary objectives of PRODECER were to settle approximately 100 families from diverse Brazilian regions on land parcels ranging from 300 to 500 hectares, providing them with credit and technical support. The consequences of this endeavor included the transformation of vast stretches of north-western Minas Gerais into a modern agricultural system, accompanied by the conversion of native Cerrado vegetation. The project involved public and corporate stakeholders from Brazil and Japan. Notably, the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) envisioned the Cerrado as a key supplier of food products for the Japanese economy and international markets, sparking intense contestation in Brazil. These debates revolved around differing visions of Brazil's agrarian future, intertwined with questions of national priorities: should the focus be on domestic markets, aimed at sustaining the Brazilian population with staples like beans and manioc, or should it shift towards international markets, emphasizing cash crops like soy? These deliberations coincided with a burgeoning crisis in the Brazilian countryside, characterized by a growing population of landless peasants, and the re-emergence of civil society movements. Consequently, discussions surrounding land distribution, agricultural orientation, and national sovereignty constituted a potent mixture that challenged the legitimacy of the civil-military regime.