InstitutionalHistoryandBrazilian

LandOwnershipIssues

BastiaanPhilipReydon
RobertoResendeSimiqueli
VitorBukvarFernandes
AnaPauladaSilvaBueno
UniversidadeEstadualdeCampinas
rrsimiqueli@gmail.com

1.Introduction
AgrarianderegulationandBrazilianHistory
Pastconflictscrystallizedinattemptsatreform
providebasisforagrarianchaos
Twodistinctcaseswithimportantcommon
elementsthestateofMatoGrossoandthe
peculiaritiesofFazendaNacionaldeSanta
Cruz(RJ)

1.Introduction
MatoGrosso:
Howcanthecountryslargestagriculturaloutput
coexistwithrampantconcentration,landfraudand
violenceagainstsmalllandholders?

FazendaNacionaldeSantaCruz:
Throughfourcenturiesofagrarianderegulation,
thefederalgovernmenthasbecomeitsown
irregulartenant

1.Introduction
PolicymakingBrazilianstateandfederal
governmentsaredeeplyinterestedinsolvingsomeof
thecountrysglaringagrarianissues
Severalinterestsarepushingforreform
Butdoesitreallytranslateintochangeorisitjustaveiled
attemptatpreservingtheprerogativesofvestedinterests?

AssessingthecountrysconvolutedAgrarianHistory
canhelpusbetterplanforawidereachingreformof
thelegalsystemrulingoverlandownership

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
LandinthePortugueseEmpire
Sesmarias:legalinnovationintheKingdomofPortugal
tomakesurelandholderswould(a)remainlinkedtothe
limitedstretchesoflandinthecountryand(b)tendto
them,improvingthefieldsasmuchaspossible
Designedwiththeriskoftheabandonmentand/or
speculationoverlandinmind;implementedthrough
thekingsauthority(givenasrewardstopartsofthe
nobility)
Systemisincorporatedintocolonialadministration
withlittletonochanges

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
HoldinglandinColonialBrazil
Threefeasibleuses:(1)mining/logging/foraging
(extractivefinalities),(2)colonialagricultural
enterprises(sugarcane),(3)militarydefense
MatoGrosso
Awayfromthecoastprimaryinterestismilitary
defense
Extensionofminingregions(MinasGerais)conforms
aspecificrural/urbanpattern(smallcities,impoverished
population,repressivecolonialauthorities)

MatoGrosso,lateXVIIIthcentury

MatoGrosso
Area
Total

903,357km2(348,788sqmi)

Population(2014)
Total 3,224,357
Density 3.6/km2(9.2/sqmi)
GDP
Year 2006estimate
Total R$35,284,000,000(15th)
Percapita R$12,350(8th)

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
Firstattemptatlegislatingoverlandfroma
BrazilianperspectiveLandLaw,1850
Explicitobjectives:toestablishparametersfor
regulatinglandownershipandtransferenceinthe
BrazilianEmpire
Implicitobjectives:providingnewleveragefor
loans(landsvs.slavery),limitingaccesstoland,
maintainingcolonizingenterprisesasasourceof
cheapworkforce
Plantationownersandpoliticalpower

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
MatoGrosso
AnArmedPeople:WarofParaguayand
pervadingmilitaryinterestsbecomestronger
Borderdefenselegitimizesauthoritarianism
Economicchanges:
Miningventuresareexhausted
Landownersturntheirattentiontocattle

XXthCentury:firstcolonizingenterprises
Defenseisstillthemainpriority
Impressivemigratoryflowswithverylittleland
distribution

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
FazendaNacionaldeSantaCruzatimeline:
1656:establishedasaJesuitencampmentintheoutskirtsofRiodeJaneiro
Thedemandforenslaveringnativepopulationssparkstensionsbetweenpriestsandcolonists

1759:priestsaredrivenoutofthefarmanditbecomestheFazendaRealdeSanta
Cruz
Indigenoustribesbecomeeasypreyforcolonists,withconflictculminatinginthedestruction
ofvillagesexistingwithintheboundariesofthefarm

1855:oncethelandssurroundingthecolonistcampsarefreeofnatives,landsare
taken(throughlegalandcleanformalprocedures)forthemuniciplaityof
Mangaratiba.
1891:FazendaNacionaldeSantaCruztheRepublicanGovernment
indiscriminatelyrecognizespreviousclaimstotheland,regularizingfour
centuriesofirregulartenurewhilepreserving,atthesametime,theunresolved
conflictsonlandownershipintheregion

ThefoundationsoflandinstitutionsinBrazil
Legalandinstitutionalframeworkbendsitselftothe
politicalandeconomicdesignsoflargelandholdersand
slaveowners
Withtheindependence,thepoliticalaristocracyofRiode
Janeiroiscomprisedmainlyoftheseentrepeneurs,who
havenoqualmsonmassacringnativepopulationsand
adaptingtheforeignidealsofprogressandreasontothe
realityoftheslavetrade
TheFazendabecomesatestinggroundforbudding
industrialistsandplantationowners
Coffee(1817),silk,ceramicsandindustrypavethewayforits
urbanization(1818).ThemetropolitanareasurroundingRiode
Janeirocoversupmuchofitsgrounds.

Concludingremarks
ThecasesofMatoGrossoandoftheFazendaNacional
deSantaCruzareeachintheirownwayrevealingof
someofthehistoricalrootsoftheproblemsfacedby
attemptsatchangingtheinstitutionsresponsibleforland
regulationinBrazil.Each,thoughmarkedbytheir
specifics,isrepresentativeofabroadandcomplex
generalframeworkinwhichtherevalidationofprevious
legalcodes,successivelylegitimatesthemechanismsof
concentrationandillegallandgrabineffectsincethe
implementationoflandgrantsinthecolonialterritory.

Concludingremarks
Insummary,webelievethatthinkingofadeep,widereachingreformofthelegalmechanismsof
regulationofproperty,useandaccesstolandisonlypossibleifwestartfromthehistorical
specificityoftheinstitutionalconstructionofthesemechanismsonBraziliansoil.Itisessentialthat
wekeepinmindthefragilityofpreviousstatutesoflandownership,foundedontheshortcomings
ofthelandgrantsschemeandtheselectiveadjustmentofthe1850Law,andthatnewmechanisms
arenotbuiltasrepairsoflegislationthatproveddeficientinsomanyoccasions,butasawayof
facingtheinequalityandrampantviolenceintheBrazilianagriculturallandscape.Therefore,itis
necessaryto(a)focusonareformofexistinginstitutionstakingintoaccountthedisparityof
politicalrepresentationmechanismsandaccesstoeconomicdistributionchannelsbetweenlargeand
smallowners,bynotclassifyingthesedifferentstrataasagentswhichareindividually
indistinguishablefromeachother;(b)upholdingtheprerogativeofthesocialfunctionofland,as
definedbytheFederalConstitutionof1988,understandingtheruralareasnotonlyasaspacefor
productionandwealth,butasaanotherviablelocusforofaddressingthedifficultiesfacedby
Braziliansocietyinitslongwaytomodernization;and(c)providingmeansofregularizingtenure
anddistributinglandtosmalllandowners,beforethesepossibilitiesareblockedoutduetothelack
ofmaterialmeanstoaffordthedemarcationandsettlementcosts(suchasthosefacedby
smallholdersinimplementingthe1850Act)orbypoliticalpressurefacedbyfarmersandsettlersin
variousregionsofcontemporaryBrazil."