1. New dynamics and trajectories of
agrarian change in Bolivia: The soy
complex and ‘depeasantization’
Ben McKay
International Institute of Social Studies
(ISS)
The Hague, Netherlands
mckay@iss.nl

2. Bolivia’s agrarian structure
 Rural population: 33.5% (pop=~10 million)
◦ Agriculture: 30% of total employment (INE,
2011; IFAD, 2010)
 Rural poverty = 66.43%
◦ Extreme rural poverty = 45.48% (INE, 2011)
 ~660,000 total farm units
◦ 87% of farms control just 14% of
cultivated land (Urioste, 2010; World Bank, 2007)

3. A brief history of Bolivia’s agrarian
structure since 1952
• 1953 agrarian reform
– 1950
• 50% of land controlled by
0.72% of farmers
• 0.23% of land controlled
by 60% (Malloy and Thorn,
1971)
– Bohan Plan and the
‘March to the East’

4. A brief history of Bolivia’s
agrarian structure since 1952
 Banzer’s military dictatorship 1971-79
◦ Millions of dollars and thousands of
hectares fraudently distributed to political
allies, some receiving up to 50,000
hectares (Urioste, 2010)
◦ Suppression of working class and
peasantry
◦ Backed by Washington for efforts to stop
coca growing

5. A brief history of Bolivia’s
agrarian structure since 1952
 Neoliberal restructuring 1985
◦ 1980s: High national debt; GDP declining; high inflation;
international price of tin plummeted
◦ 1985: New Economic Plan and structural adjustment*
◦ World Bank’s $56.4 million ‘Proyecto Tierras Baja’ and PLUS
1991-1997
◦ Land market liberalized*
◦ Many Brazilians, mainly from Rio Grande do Sul, Parana, Santa
Catarina, went to Bolivia
◦ Mechanization of agriculture began
 1996 INRA Reforma Agraria #2
◦ Land regularization
◦ Formalizing and distribution land rights to indigenous groups
(TCOs)
◦ Land must fulfill a ‘socio-economic function’ (FES)

6. A brief history of Bolivia’s
agrarian structure since 1952
 INRA Land Reform 1996
◦ 2004: Only10.7% of land was ‘regularized’
(saneamiento) (INRA, 2006)
◦ More than 50% of land distributed between 1953-
2002 went to large scale farmers with an average
of 1,596 ha and representing just 17% of total
land beneficiaries
◦ 8.41% of distributed land went to peasant and
family farmers (6-50ha) representing 33% of total
land beneficaries (Kay and Urioste, 2007)

7. Processes of depeasantization in
Santa Cruz
 ~1985 – present
◦ Model of agricultural production has
changed
 Capital intensive; limited labour requirements
◦ Social differentiation in the countryside

8. Processes of depeasantization in
Santa Cruz
 Character of agrarian change
◦ Mechanization of agriculture
◦ Industrial crops
◦ Export-oriented
◦ High levels of capital investment
◦ New technologies and innovative
techniques
◦ Liberalized land markets
◦ Foreign investment and land control
(Brazilians, Japonese, Argentinian,
Menonites)

9. ‘Agrarian Revolution’ 2006
 4 principal policies
1. Distribution/redistribution of fiscal and
private lands
2. Mechanization programme
3. Credit for small producers
4. Markets for small producers

10. Pequeño (0-50) Mediano (51-1000) Grande (Más de 1000)
% de productores de soya 78% 20% 2%
% de tierra de soya 9% 20% 70%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
%
Landholding structure for soya, Santa Cruz 2011
Type of producer(ha) Percentage Number of producers Percentage of land
Small (0-50) 78% 11,000 9% (98,253/1,091,070)
Medium (51-1000) 20% 2,800 20% (218,340/1,091,070)
Large (More than 1000) 2% 300 70% (775,107/1,091,070)
Total 100% 14,100 100%
ANAPO, 2011

11. Expansion of the agricultural
frontier
 1990-2011: Soy plantations increased 530%
 2010-2011: Soy plantations occupied 36% of
Bolivia’s total cultivated area
 Export Value
◦ Soya and derivatives = $USD 1.175 billion (IBCE,
2014)
 Top 4 exports: gas natural (37.1%), zinc (13%),
plata (11.5%), y soya (10.6%)* (INE, 2012)
 Development for whom? Prof. Philip M. Fearnside
of the National Institute for Research in the
Amazon (INPA) in Manaus, suggests that soy
plantations displace 11 agricultural workers for
every one it employs (Fearnside, 2001)

12. Expanding the agricultural frontier
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
1990-1991
1991-1992
1992-1993
1993-1994
1994-1995
1995-1996
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011(p)
Total Cultivated Area (ha)
Industrial Oilseeds**
(excluding soy)
CEREALES*
Soya
Total
**Cotton, sugarcane, sunflower
Peanut oil
*Rice, barley, grains, maize, quinoa,
sorghum, wheat
Source: INE, 2011

13. Table 1: Regional evolution of principle crops in Bolivia (in hectares), 1950-2014
Crop/Year 1950(a) 1972(a) 1991(a) 1997(a) 2002(b) 2004(b) 2006(b) 2008(b) 2010(b) 2012(b)* 2014(b)*
Andean Region (c)
Maize 94,291 157,500 180,625 166,144 185,071 185,321 190,609 195,979 182,469 197,619 177,894
Potato 111,680 107,200 135,881 121,914 121,352 136,765 154,434 172,875 173,855 186,532 190,209
Onions 61,194 101,000 95,297 86,508 6,415 6,948 7,638 8,483 8,772 9,014 9,020
Wheat 82,950 61,066 77,933 81,536 76,546 76,740 77,440 78,698 83,181 86,418 88,230
Quinoa 18,998 15,000 38,791 38,680 37,325 40,541 46,316 50,356 63,010 96,544 169,093
Broadbeans 9,226 21,000 27,210 27,649 29,432 30,679 32,117 33,640 33,516 35,187 36,596
Alfalfa 6,325 15,200 17,705 20,880 22,225 23,933 26,593 29,574 30,237 30,110 31,585
TOTAL 384,664 477,966 573,442 543,311 478,366 500,927 535,147 569,605 575,040 641,425 702,627
Growth
Index
100 122 140 130 124 130 139 148 149 167 183
Department of Santa Cruz
Maize 19,177 57,940 43,500 99,300 124,225 124,957 156,465 209,221 128,522 206,622 188,989
Wheat 1,755 2,097 38,493 76,860 55,800 30,200 48,000 56,072 93,250 72,878 99,516
Rice 10,151 34,220 72,318 83,776 85,000 120,000 133,200 132,631 144,507 133,275 116,471
Sugar cane 10,548 37,500 67,458 75,120 87,525 91,242 99,624 135,415 136,217 131,680 139,957
Cotton 109 68,222 16,523 52,000 2,200 9,300 7,500 4,500 700 8,000 2,989
Soya 0 1,100 183,865 513,190 629,000 796,100 940,000 832,098 918,847 1,091,700 1,239,825
Sunflower 0 150 10,217 89,000 178,300 83,000 99,350 259,214 235,430 220,768 203,000
Sorghum 0 0 28,000 45,000 60,500 72,000 95,000 134,292 87,000 192,850 273,268
TOTAL 41,740 201,229 460,374 1,034,246 1,222,550 1326799 1579139 1763443 1744472.81 2057773 2264015
Growth
Index
100 482 1,103 2,478 2,929 3,179 3,783 4,225 4,179 4,930 5,424
Fuentes: (a) Kay and Urioste (2007); (b) INE, various years; (c) The Andean region includes the departments of La Paz, Oruro, Cochabamba,
Chuquisaca, Potosí and Tarija; *indicates preliminary results.

14. 50%
2%
4%
4%
25%
14%
1%
Cultivation area by crop type (1990-1991)
CEREALES
ESTIMULANTES
FRUTALES
HORTALIZAS
ALEAGINOSAS
INDUSTRIALES
TUBÉRCULOS Y RAÍCES
FORRAJES
34%
1%4%
4%
47%
7%
0%
3%
Cultivation area by crop type (2011-2012p)
CEREALES
ESTIMULANTES
FRUTALES
HORTALIZAS
ALEAGINOSAS
INDUSTRIALES
TUBÉRCULOS Y
RAÍCES
FORRAJES
OTHER
75%
53%
25%
47%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
%
Year
Land use change for industrial and staple
crops, 1991-2012
% of land for
staple crops
% of land for
industrial
commodities
(INE, 2013)

15. Expanding the agricultural
frontier
 Food security?
 Food sovereignty? (Law 337)
 “Never before has Bolivia imported as
much food as in the years 2006-2010,
with imports calculated at a value of
over US$1.1 billion”
- Miguel Urioste, 2012

16. Expanding the agricultural
frontier
 1996-2009: 3.3 million ha illegally
deforested
◦ ~330,000 ha/year, which represents one
of the highest levels of deforestation in the
world (UN-REDD; INE 2011)
 A study by Muller et al (2013)
suggests that 81.1% of deforestation
in Bolivia is caused by the soy industry
and cattle grazing

17. Deforestation in Bolivia
 Areas under pressure
of deforestation
 Areas deforested
UNDP-Bolivia,
2008

18. Source: Google Earth
Soy expansion, Santa Cruz 1984-2012

20. Bolivia and the global food
regime
 GM seeds, machinery, and chemical
inputs imported from Brazil and
Argentina
 Prices derived from Chicago Board of
Trade
◦ China and EU demand
◦ Financialization of food and the food
system
◦ Monopolization of silos, processing, and
export markets

21. Bolivia and the global food
regime
 Principal markets
for Bolivian soy
and derivatives,
2013
◦ Colombia 44%
◦ Perú 27%
◦ Ecuador 9%
◦ Venezuela 7%
◦ Spain 4%
(IBCE, 2014)
 .
Source: Probioma,

22. *87% of soy production
is for export

23. Foreign companies cultivating
soy in Bolivia
Country of origin Company Hectares cultivated per year
Brazil Grupo Mónica 50.000 has
Brazil Grupo Gama (Sojima y Tierra Azul) 90.000-100.000 has
Brazil Unisoya 50.000 has
Argentina Varios grupos 100.000 has
(Urioste, 2011); **original de un estudio por Mamerto Pérez Luna
de CEDLA y su fuente era El Deber, 15 mayo 2005

24. (Urioste, 2011; Probioma, 2010;
*datos de ANAPO, varias años)

25. GRAVETAL
Bolivia S.A
31%
Industrias de
Aceite S.A
(FINO)
22%ADM SAO S.A
13%
GRANOS
9%
Industrias
Oleaginosas
S.A. (RICO)
9%
Cargill Bolivia
S.A
11%
Cooperativa
Agropecuaria
Integral
Colonias de
Okinawa
(CAICO)
1%
Otras
4%
Market share of Bolivia’s soy
(+derivatives) export market, 2012
Fuente: AEMP,
2013
GRAVETAL
Bolivia S.A
19%
Industrias de
Aceite S.A
(FINO)
19%
ADM SAO S.A
16%
GRANOS
12%
Industrias
Oleaginosas
S.A.
11%
Cargill Bolivia
S.A
8%
Cooperativa
Agropecuaria
Integral
Colonias de
Okinawa
(CAICO)
3%
Otras
12%
Market share of silos and processing,
2011
Fuente: AEMP,
2013

26. 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
2000 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
$US/MT
MetricTons
Year
Soybean seed imports, Bolivia 2000-2012
Seed Imports (MT)
Prices ($USD/MT)
Source: INE; AEMP,
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
MetricTons
Año
Prices and quantities of fertilizer imports, Bolivia 2000-2012
Fertilizantes (Tm.)
Precios Imp.
Fertilizantes ($usd/Tm)

27. 157
195
155
135
155
140
154
165
235
155
185
205
400
295
280
400
372.5
333.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Price of soybean, Bolivia, 1995-2013
Precio (US$/t)
(ANAPO, 2014)

28. 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Production(t)
Area(ha)
Source: ANAPO 2013. Memoria Anual.
Santa Cruz: Land area, yields, and production of soy, summer harvest 1972-
2012
Superficie (ha)
Rendimiento (t/ha)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
%oflandcultivatedwithsoya
Año
Percentage of land cultivated with transgenic (GM) and conventional seeds, Bolivia
2005-2010
Convencional
Trangénica
Fuente: IBCE, 2011; ISAAA, 2012

29. Processes of ‘depeasantization’
in Santa Cruz
◦ 2002: Costs of production of soy $263
USD/ha
◦ 2010: $460 USD/ha
◦ 2002: Costs of production of maiz $236
USD/ha
◦ 2010: $576 USD/ha

30. Processes of ‘depeasantization’
in Santa Cruz
 Key challenges for small producers in
Santa Cruz
◦ Capital investment and access to credit
 Small producers cannot use land as collateral
(asset) for a loan
 Rent services for sowing, fumigating, harvesting + cost
of inputs = ~$536/ha
 Enter into ‘sharing contract’ where landowner receives
25-35% of harvest (private negotiation)

31. Processes of ‘depeasantization’
in Santa Cruz
 Risks and challenges for (small) farmers in Santa
Cruz
◦ Natural disaster and climate change (floods, drought,
pests, erosion)
◦ Lack of tree/vegetation buffers
 Obligated to plant monocultures
 Wind brings agro-chemicals and pests from afar
◦ Monopolization of intermediaries
 7 companies control ~90% of silos/processing.
◦ Access to capital
 Very difficult to receive credit + terms/interest rates are high
without assets (14-20%)
◦ Access to land now and for future generations
 Price of land in Santa Cruz ‘soy region’ ~$2000-$5000 USD
◦ Debt due to harvest/emergencies/nat’l dis./etc = selling
land

32. Processes of ‘depeasantization’
in Santa Cruz
◦ 3 principal pathways for small scale
farmers integrated in the soy complex in
Bolivia
1. Accumulate capital and advance in the soy
complex as a small capitalist agricultural
producer with machinery
2. Rent land and receive between $100-
$200/ha and perhaps find non-farm rural
work
3. Sell land and likely migrate to the city for
more employment opportunity

33. Building social capital:
organization and mobilization
 Plurality of peoples, cultures, histories
 Political divisions within communities
 Lack sufficient support from state
 EMAPA, credit programmes,
‘mechanization programme’, AR –
lacking in coverage, capacity, and
design

35. Final thoughts and discussion
• ‘Agrarian Revolution’ has failed to benefit the majority of rural
population; unequal agrarian structure persists
• New laws strenghtening private property and against land
occupation (MST-Bolivia)
• Internal conflicts between/within principal CSOs
 Bolivia’s model of ‘development’ remains based on extraction of raw
materials for export (from minerals, natural gas, soy) with very little
industrial development for value-added production
 Current rural development trajectory: ‘depeasantization’ and the end
of small scale family farming?
◦ Where will the 594,000 (2M+ppl) small farming families go?
 Urban economy absorption?
 Expanding informal economy (highest % in Latin America)?
 Increased poverty (2009=51.3%)?

36. Final thoughts and discussion
 Inevitable process of modernization?
 Contradictions of the agro-industrial
complex
◦ Environment
◦ Employment
◦ Food Security