Brazil Is Naked! The Advance of Soybean Monoculture, The Grain That Grew Too Much

Brazil is naked!
The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that

grew too much
FASE – Solidarity and Education
Sustainable and Democratic Brazil
A Reflection and Social Mobilization Project
Brazil is naked! The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that grew too much
Summary
Pg. 6
Brazil is naked!
The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that grew too much
Pg. 16
When you take a close look, you see a different scenario
The expansion of soybean farms as seen by people living in rural areas
Pg. 25
Technology leads to more exclusion, more destruction
Modern equipment and inputs pave the way for greater productivity, but apart from expensive, they
can cause irreversible environmental damages
Pg. 28
For a Brazil with less soy
A discussion addressing the model adopted for raising animals for human consumption
Introduction
Brazil is the second largest soybean producer and exporter in the world today. Soybeans are being
grown in all regions of the country today, and those experiencing the greatest expansion are located
in the Cerrado (savannah) region and in the Amazon Forest, two of the richest biomes on the planet
in terms of biodiversity.
Public opinion is led to believe that soybeans bring huge benefits to the country and its farmers. The
media often disseminates stories highlighting the wealth generated by agribusiness: successful large
farmers, their mansions, cars and airplanes. Social and environmental devastation is disguised by
images of vast and green fields of soybeans, with their gigantic sowing and harvesting machines.
However, rural social movements, rural workers and various organizations which, like FASE, work
directly with these populations, are aware of constant violations of human rights associated with the
expansion of soybean farms: murders, acts of violence to expel people from their land, deaths by
contamination, slave labor, invasion of indigenous areas, situations that make traditional activities
unfeasible, unemployment, destruction and loss of access to natural resources are some examples.
This Publication summarizes information that we produced in a general study and four field studies
carried out in the states of Mato Grosso, Tocantins and Pará. Our objective is to address the
“invisible costs” of the current agricultural model, particularly in the mid-west and north regions of
Brazil, so that they can be publicly debated.
Testimonies from victims of this expansion, complemented by the data presented here, expose the
consequences of the agricultural model adopted in Brazil, based on large landownership and export
monoculture crops. Our work is dedicated to rural social movements, rural workers, various
domestic and international organizations and to all those who, knowing that they belong to the
nature that is being destroyed, are looking for appropriate information and action strategies to
change this reality.
Sergio Schlesinger
Rio de Janeiro, November 2006
Brazil is naked!
The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that grew most
2006, FASE (Federation of Social and Educational Assistance Organizations)
GENERAL AND EDITORIAL COORDINATION

Sergio Schlesinger
TEXT
Sergio Schlesinger and Silvia Noronha
PUBLICATION
FASE – Federation of Social and Educational Assistance Organizations
Phone: +(21) 2536-7350 – Fax: +(21) 2536-7379 www.fase.org.br
SUPPORT
ActionAid Brazil
Charles Stweart Mott Foundation
Heinrich Böll Foundation
Solidaridad
THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY FASE ON THE TOPIC OF SOYBEANS ARE ALSO
SUPPORTED BY THE FOLLOWING INSTITUTIONS:
ActionAid Americas
Catholic Committee against Hunger and for Development – CCFD
Ford Foundation
IDRC – International Development Research Center (through the Red ComAgri project)
Oxfam
GRAPHIC DESIGN
Plus Visual Programming
www.maisprogramacao.com.br
COVER PHOTOGRAPH (SOYBEAN GRAINS)

Vanor Correia
PHOTOLITH AND PRINTING

XXXXXXXXXXX
PRINT-RUN
3,000 copies
Brazil is naked! The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that grew too much / Sergio
Schlesinger and Silvia Noronha — Rio de Janeiro: FASE, 2006. 24 pp.
ISBN XX-XXXXX-XX-X
1. Brazil - agribusiness 2. Environment 3. Environmental impact 4. Sustainable Development I.

Sergio Schlesinger II. Silvia Noronha III. Sustainable and Democratic Brazil Project IV.
Federation of Social and Educational Assistance Organizations V. Title
The opinions expressed in this study are those of its authors and do not necessarily reflect those of
the organizations that supported it.
Brazil is naked!
The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that grew too much
In Brazil, soybean crops have been portrayed to its population as a promising business that
promotes development and progress in the country’s rural areas, apart from bringing foreign
currencies to the government. However, behind the impressive figures and statistics on the
expansion of soybean farms, the many negative impacts they cause contribute to increase
socioeconomic inequality in Brazil even more.
The problem to be discussed in this primer is not that of soybeans per se, but rather that of the
model and dimension of this monoculture, the expansion of which destroys biodiversity, expels
family farmers from their land, and generates unemployment in rural areas, benefiting only a small
group of large landowners and domestic and multinational companies that operate in this sector.
As we will see below, many Brazilians have become large landowners as a result of the donation of
public lands (as in Campos Lindos, in the state of Tocantins); others expelled family farmers from
their land, in some cases resorting to violence (as in the state of Pará). This situation shows that the
property right is not always valid for the poorer segments of the population. All of this often occurs
with the incentive of governments, affecting the country’s population at large, since what happens
in rural areas has a bearing on the nation as a whole.
The studies on four regions where agribusiness is expanding – Sorriso and Baixo Araguaia, in the
state of Mato Grosso; Campos Lindos, in the state of Tocantins; and Santarém/Belterra, in the state
of Pará – acquaint us with one part of Brazil’s history. Situations observed in these localities are
linked to the reasons that led – and still lead – this nation to have one of the worst inequality indices
in the world.
Biodiversity
All species of living beings in a given region.
Agribusiness
Years ago, the term that was used was agriculture/livestock, which included agriculture and cattle
raising, but it fell into disuse. The word being used today is agribusiness, which has a broader
meaning, as it includes related sectors such as transportation, inputs, industry and distribution.
Distribution of the area planted with grains in Brazil
Soybeans 47.1%
Other grains 3.5%
Cotton 1.8%
Wheat 5%
Rice 6.4%
Beans 8.9%
Corn 27.3%
Source: National Food Supply Company (CONAB) (newsletter of July 2006).
Soybean crops in Brazil are expanding at alarming levels from any point of view:
Social aspect – Soybeans do not generate jobs in rural areas1 and they also drive family farmers
away from their lands. As a result, soybeans have led to more social exclusion and poverty,
affecting cities also, as many rural workers are forced to leave rural areas in search of a job and
income elsewhere. They usually have no other alternative but to live in the outskirts of the cities
they migrate to, and it is difficult for them to find a job there. If they stay in rural areas they also
face difficulties, such as: having their crops poisoned by pesticides, land conflicts or jobs that are
only temporary, since large farms are capital-intensive, rather than labor-intensive.
Environmental aspect – The model that is growing most is that of soybean monoculture, which
causes deforestation and contaminates the soil and water resources (rivers, streams and ground
water). It also affects the air quality, as monoculture requires the use of pesticides and fertilizers in
large quantities. Consequently, it also affects the health of workers and people who live near these
crops.
Economic aspect – For the above-mentioned reasons, monoculture is not a sustainable economic
development model. In addition, many governmental policies stimulate soybean exports, that is,
commodity exports. However, competitiveness in today’s world is based on the creation of products
1
A survey carried out by the Seade Foundation/Sensor Rural shows that soybeans generate only
5.5% of all jobs in the agricultural sector, although they account for 47.1% of all the area planted
with grains in the country (newsletter of the National Food Supply Company of July 2006).
that involve something new, that have technology embedded in them – exactly the opposite of
commodities, whose financial return is decreasing more and more. Nevertheless, the federal
government celebrates the entry of foreign currency in the country from soybean exports. This
money has contributed to enable Brazil to balance its accounts (revenues less spending) and pay off
its foreign debt. But this is a futureless option, since as each year goes by we need to plant and
harvest more and more soybeans (and other commodities) to make the same money.
Capital-intensive
Capital-intensive activities need a lot of money to keep up with technological advances introduced
in machines and equipment such as harvesters, and often also to buy improved seeds, adapted to
local weather and soil conditions.
Sustainable economic development

Economic growth that is preserved in the long run, benefiting the population at large, based on the
balanced use of natural resources and improvements in the quality of life of humans.
Commodity
All raw materials or goods with a very small degree of industrialization that are negotiated through
international business transactions. Commodities include agricultural goods such as soybeans;
minerals such as steel; and forests such as eucalyptus forests.
World soybean production (million tons)
Country 1995 % Part. 2005 % Part.

United States 59.2 46.7 85.0 39.5
Brazil 25.7 20.2 51.1 23.7
Argentina 12.1 9.5 39.0 18.1
China 13.5 10.6 17.4 8.1
Other countries 16.5 13.0 22.8 10.6
Total 127.0 100.0 215.3 100.0
Source: USDA.
Brazil – Production and number of jobs in soybean agriculture: 1985, 1996 and 2004
Production (thousand tons)

Jobs (thousand)
Source: O Grão que cresceu demais, by Sergio Schlesinger, based on data provided by FIBGE
(1985) and Gelder et al (2005).
Why so much soybeans?

The expansion of soybean farms is directly linked to a higher consumption of animal meat in the
world. Currently, 90% of the world harvest of this oleaginous plant goes to crushing industries that
turn the grain into bran, which in turn is used to prepare rations for bulls, chickens, pigs, and
shrimps, among other animals that are invariably raised in confinement.
The fast expansion of soybean production is mainly aimed at meeting demand from only three
regions of the planet: the United States, the European Union and China, which consume two of each
three kilograms of soybeans produced in the world2.
Crushing industry
Crushing turns about 80% of all the volume of soybeans into bran and 20% into crude oil.
The bran is almost exclusively used for preparing animal rations. But the crude oil can be used to
prepare different products, such as refined oil, hydrogenated fat, margarine, soybean lecithin, paints,
cosmetics, pharmaceutical and medicinal products.
2
Between 1995 and 2005, soybean production in the world increased by 60%.
Global consumption of soybean bran (million tons)

Country or 2004 Annual growth in 1994 - 2004 (%)
region
Asia 42.1 9.5
European Union 32.1 3.3
United States 28.4 2.17
China 21.5 15.47
Latin America 18.5 6.67
Other countries 17.0 7.17
Total 138.1 5.52
Source: Pereira, 2004.
Soybean is becoming the main food item for animals raised in captivity due to its high vegetal
protein content. According to the US company ADM, one of the multinationals operating in the
sector, the amino acids found in soybean bran are highly digestible. Soybean bran is used as a
source of amino acids for these animals in all phases of their lives. Corn, which is also largely used
for preparing rations, is utilized as an energy source.
According to projections of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), chicken
and dairy consumption tends to grow more than the average observed for other food products.
Many surveys, such as those carried out by FAO and by the Brazilian Institute for Geography and
Statistics (IBGE), suggest that people begin to eat more meat when they earn higher wages: the
higher the income, the lower the consumption of grains and tubers and the higher the consumption
of meat.
In addition, according to the anthropologist Sidney Mintz, food habits are tending to become
globalized and this phenomenon gives a social status to meat consumers. In Japan, for example, rice
consumption per person dropped by almost half between 1961 and 2000 (from 107 kg to 65 kg), but
meat consumption increased eight-fold over the same period (from 5 kg to 40 kg). In 1990, the
Chinese people were eating three times more meat than in 1961.
For this reason, the area planted with soybeans is expected to increase mainly in South America,
and particularly in Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia, where most “available lands”
that are appropriate for growing soybeans are located3. Developed countries, in turn, tend to grow
proportionally less soybeans than today. Therefore, some developing countries will have to carry
the burden of meeting demand for the product and bearing the social, environmental and economic
damages that it causes.
For this reason, to decrease the impacts of growing soybean in Brazil, it will be necessary to change
food habits and also how animals are raised. For this purpose, European non-governmental
organizations have been discussing campaigns designed to reduce the consumption of animal
3
According to calculations of the Ministry of Agriculture, there are still 70 million hectares
supposedly available for new soybean crops in the Cerrado region – more than the area already
being used for agriculture/livestock activities in this biome (57 million hectares, according to
official data). This figure would only keep intact the compulsory legal reserve provided for in the
Forest Code (35% of all savannah areas in the Legal Amazon region and 20% in all other areas).
Supposedly, there are still areas available in the Amazon forest
protein, while others have been encouraging the production of agroecological soybeans. Greenpeace
pulls up this evil by the roots: its recent campaigns have been warning that European meat
consumers are “devouring” the Amazon region as a result of the deforestation caused by the
expansion of soybean farms in forest areas.
Only a small percentage of the production of this oleaginous plant is directly consumed by humans.
Brazilians have the habit of cooking with soybean oil. The Chinese – who live in the region where
soybeans came from – have the age-old tradition of preparing shoyo (soy sauce), misso (soup), and
tofu (cheese). Nowadays, different industries also use soybean oil as an ingredient in products such
as chocolates, cookies, margarine, breads and ice creams.
Recently, large soybean entrepreneurs began to defend the use of its crude oil to produce biodiesel.
But, to do this, they want the government to grant them more incentives.
Agroecological
Model based on crop diversity in the same growing area, using only natural products (instead of
chemical products): plants, animals, microorganisms, water, minerals, etc. It favors family
agriculture and promotes food security.
Biodiesel
Fuel produced from renewable sources to replace diesel from petroleum.
Figures that impress the nation
Governments, media and organizations linked to agribusiness are not sparing efforts to disseminate
the “benefits” of expanding soybean crops, usually using figures designed to impress the nation and
to make it feel proud. As a result, economic statistics for the sector are given more attention than
data on the social and environmental destruction brought about by the expansion of monoculture
crops.
Since the Portuguese arrived in Brazil, the natural riches of the country have been exploited to the
greatest extent possible, mainly to be traded on the foreign market. The first one was brazilwood;
followed by the gold, diamond, coffee, sugarcane, and rubber rushes. The features of the current
“soybean rush” are similar to those of the exploitation of other natural resources. Once again,
monoculture is on the rise; and once again, workers are losing.
Brazil: production growth by state (in thousand tons)
REGION/Unit of the 1995/96 2005/06

Federation
NORTH 14.2 1,338.3
Roraima 4.9 56.0
Rondônia – 260.1
Amazon region – 8.4
Pará – 228.6
Tocantins 9.3 785.2
NORTHEAST 921.9 3,574.3
Maranhão 199.6 972.4
Piauí 23.0 618.3
Bahia 699.3 1,983.6
MID-WEST 8,846.4 27,787.4
Mato Grosso 4,686.8 16,768.5
Mato Grosso do Sul 2,045.9 4,460.5
Goiás 2,046.2 6,396.7
Federal District 67.5 161.7
SOUTHEAST 2,274.5 4,488.5
Minas Gerais 1,040.2 2,840.4
São Paulo 1,234.3 1,648.1
SOUTH 11,132.7 18,524.8
Paraná 6,241.1 9,682.9
Santa Catarina 489.3 831.8
Rio Grande do Sul 4,402.3 8,010.1
NORTH/NORTHEAST 936.1 4,912.6
CENTER-SOUTH 22,253.6 50,800.7
BRAZIL 23,189.7 55,713.3
SOURCE: National Food Supply Company (CONAB) – Survey: April 2006.
Among the figures for soybeans that the media has been emphasizing, the following ones
deserve special mention:
• Brazil is the second largest producer and exporter of soybeans in the world, behind the United
States only. In 2003 and 2004, the country was the largest soybean exporter in the world at one
point, a position that it is expected to occupy once again in coming years.
• One-third of all the soybean that is marketed on the international market is Brazilian soybean.
• In 2005, soybeans accounted for eight per cent of all the country’s exports. In foreign currencies,
it totaled about US$ 9.5 billion.
• Almost half of all grains planted in Brazil are soybeans, a crop that occupies an area4 that is
equivalent to five times and a half the territory of the Netherlands.
• Soybean production rose from 12.1 million tons in 1976-1977 to over 50 million tons since the
2004-2005 harvest, according to the National Food Supply Company (CONAB).
4
Totalling about 22.2 million hectares, according to the National Food Supply Company (CONAB)
(2005-2006 harvest).
• Productivity has increased from 1,748 kg/ha in 1976-1977 to 2,329 kg/ha in 2003-2004, the last
confirmed datum provided by the National Food Supply Company (CONAB) which, for the 2005-
2006 period, expected to see an even higher productivity: 2,511 kg/ha.
What is behind these figures
To reach these results, agribusiness – encouraged by the federal government and by state and
municipal administrations through tax exemptions, debt forgiveness and other incentives – ignored
and still ignores everything on its way. As a result, much of the Cerrado area – “where there was
nothing”, as people used to say – has been cultivated already. The “star” right now is the Amazon
forest, where the expansion of some areas planted with soybeans hit the mark of 300% between
1995 and 2003.
The Amazon and Cerrado regions are two of the richest biomes on the planet in terms of
biodiversity. Their forests, waters, animals, traditional peoples and culture are being impacted by
soybean crops, as they were decades ago by livestock. These events show that the Brazilian
economic logic is far from incorporating the sustainable development concept.
Tax exemptions
When the government exempts a certain sector from the obligation to pay taxes. The measure
affects society at large because it reduces the tax revenue of the State and, consequently, it
jeopardizes its capacity to invest in other areas, such as in the health and education areas.
Debt forgiveness
When the government waives debts owed by farmers, which also affects society at large, as it
jeopardizes the public budget.
Biomes
Each natural community made up of specific fauna and flora species, usually with a predominant
type of vegetation. Brazil has six biomes: The Amazon, Cerrado, Caatinga, Atlantic Forest,
Pantanal and Pampa biomes.
Pace of expansion of soybean growing in Brazil by state
Growth of the area planted with soybeans (1995-2003)

> 300%
150% - 300%
75% - 150%
< 75%
No production
Source: CONAB
Exports of “virtual” water
One of the factors that led South America to be “elected” as the main region for expanding
agribusiness is the “availability” of freshwater on the continent. Monoculture crops usually require
large amounts of water, an expensive and endangered resource in developed countries and also in
China, where rivers and ground water are so contaminated nowadays that agriculture cannot be
expanded in that country anymore. This is why China, a very large country, buys so much soybean
from Brazil and other nations instead of producing it itself.
What this means is that China bought 45 km3 of freshwater indirectly 5 as a result of having
imported 18 million tons of soybean in 2004, the average amount of water that was used to irrigate
crops to produce those 18 million tons of soybean. If it were to produce it in its territory, China
would have to use water resources that are scarce today in its territory.
Therefore, the undue use of water resources in soybean crops – and also in eucalyptus plantations,
pasture areas, etc. – jeopardizes water supply in the future also in Brazil.
5
This is equal to almost two-thirds of all the water consumed by humans worldwide.
Total soybeans bought by China
Total tons bought by China in 2004

18 million tons =
Water consumption in soybean crops 45 km3
Domestic water consumption in the world 65 km3
Source: Virtual water: the water we consume without seeing it. Vânia Rodrigues,
www.aesabesp.com.br/artigos_agua_vir tual.htm.
Who loses with the advance of monoculture crops
• Traditional and environmentally more sustainable family agriculture, which produces food
consumed by the Brazilian population and creates jobs in rural areas.
• Forestry, agroextractivism, small-scale fishing and other agricultural activities traditionally carried
out by people living in regions where soybean growing is being expanded.
• The food security of the Brazilian population, since almost three-quarters of the soybean
production in Brazil are used to feed chickens, pigs and bulls raised in captivity in soybean-
importing countries.
• Economic sovereignty. From seed production to the marketing of the end product, the presence of
multinational food companies in this chain is increasing.
• Brazilian biodiversity, including the availability of natural resources such as water.
Food security
When all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious
food to meet their dietary needs and food preference for an active and healthy life (FAO definition).
When you take a close look, you see a different scenario

The expansion of soybean farms as seen by people living in rural areas
Another Sorriso (“smile” in Portuguese) is possible
Up till the mid-20th century, the Cerrado region, “where there was nothing”, was inhabited by
tribes that were relocated to other areas – mostly to the Xingu Indigenous Park (state of Mato
Grosso) – for the purpose of populating the region. The history of Sorriso, in the state of Mato
Grosso, the old land of the Kaiabi People, is an example of this dynamic. Located between Cerrado
and Amazon Forest areas, this municipality has the largest area planted with soybeans on the planet,
accounting for 4% of Brazil’s total harvest. Two-thirds6 of Sorriso are occupied by monoculture
soybean crops!
Going back in time a little, in the 1950s and 1960s the government of the state of Mato Grosso sold
large land areas in the north and northwest regions of the state, where Sorriso is located, to be
occupied by private individuals. This initiative was not successful, at least back then: instead of
paving the way for new urban and rural centers to develop, large tracts of land ended up in the
hands of individual owners.
In most cases, land was bought for merely speculative purposes, so much so that, years later, these
areas began to be sold mainly to farmers from Brazil’s south region, who began to sell their lands in
the south to buy larger ones in the mid-west.
It should be mentioned that the first owners requested title deeds directly from the State, taking
advantage of their easy access to public lands. Later, these title deeds were sold to farmers from the
south with the intermediation of a land “colonization” company or directly bought from their
owners.
Currently, Sorriso is clearly marked by the historical traits of monoculture in Brazil, prominent
among which is a huge gap between a handful of rich farmers and poor, underemployed or landless
populations.
“In the 17 years that we have been living in the municipality of Sorriso, we have experienced many
different phases. When we arrived here [1990 and 1991] the labor market was quite strong, as large
capitalists were being attracted to the municipality and there were many job offers, but this was
never to be repeated... As soon as they established their farms, the labor market weakened more and
more (...). Work is hard to come by now. This year [2006] and in the past three, four years we have
seen a sharp decrease in job offers. One of the reasons is that Sorriso is a municipality that has
experienced the effects of corporate agriculture for longer than most other municipalities; here,
almost all areas are being exploited already and as soon as they begin to be exploited people begin
to experience exclusion, deep exclusion, because large farms usually have only four or five
employees and a lot of equipment, machines.”
Family farmer, currently a coordinator of the Landless Movement (MST) in Sorriso
6
According to the Satellite Amazon Forest Monitoring Program (Prodes), 56% of the original
vegetal cover in the municipality was made up of forests and 44% of savannah areas, most of which
have been deforested.
However, the focus of the media is usually on how rich the municipality has become as a result of
growing soybeans. Mansions, luxury cars and modern machines in crops attract more attention than
rising poverty levels in the region, meaning that this is a repetition of the “development” model
adopted in Brazil since the Portuguese arrived here.
Not everybody is fooled by this attitude of the press, according to an article posted on the Portal of
the Government of Mato Grosso (www.mt.gov.br). The text was written by Marcel Mayozer, from
the National Agronomy Institute of France.
“More globally, the downward trend observed in the prices of agricultural raw materials (such as
soybeans) can, for the world economy in the short term, benefit the manufacturing and distribution
industries, as well as consumers, apart from favoring savings. However, in the medium and long run
this situation will reduce the income of 3 billion farmers (throughout the world) and progressively
impoverish these populations until many of them begin to face malnutrition and even hunger.
Finally, this situation increases the rural exodus and maximizes unemployment, which already
affects 25% of the economically active population worldwide, exerting downward pressure on the
already very low wages paid to unskilled workers.”
Data from the government of the state of Mato Grosso also confirm a drop in the income of soybean
farmers for three years in a row. The situation changed after years in which soybean prices were up
and prosperity prevailed, thus leading more and more people to grow soybeans. However, between
2004 and 2006, the income of farmers in Mato Grosso dropped to less than half of what it used to
be.
Maximum price paid to a soybean farmer in the state of Mato Grosso (R$/bags of 60 kg)
Source: Seder / Government of the state of Mato Grosso (reference months: April 2004, April 2005
and March 2006, harvest months of the annual harvest).
This price dynamic has been observed in the agricultural sector for decades; and has affected coffee,
sugar, rice, cotton and other crops. In 50 years, the actual value of agricultural products has dropped
four- or five-fold. Also because of this factor, soybeans do not benefit the population, but rather the
manufacturing and distribution industries.
Actual values
Deduction of the inflation during a given period to determine the same purchasing power in that
period.
Manufacturing industry
Industry that buys the grain to turn it into bran, oil and other products.
BAIXO ARAGUAIA
1. Alto Boa Vista
2. Bom Jesus do Araguaia
3. Canabrava do Norte
4. Confresa
5. Luciára
6. Novo Santo Antonio
7. Porto Alegre do Norte
8. Ribeiro Cascalheira
9. São José do Xingu
10. Santa Cruz do Xingu
11. Santa Terezinha
12. São Félix do Araguaia
13. Serra Nova Dourada
14. Vila Rica
15. Cláudia
16. Feliz Natal
17. Gaúcha do Norte
18. Nova Ubiratã
19. Paranatinga
20. Querência
21. Santa Carmem
22. Sinop
23. Sorriso
24. União do Sul
25. Vera
Xingu National Park
Exclusion in the Baixo Araguaia region

The Baixo Araguaia region7, in the northeast region of the state of Mato Grosso – one of the recent
expansion fronts of the Brazilian agribusiness, with soybean crops and livestock as the main
activities –, also reflects the country’s socioeconomic inequality, which is invariably associated
with governmental and private actions that exclude local populations.
In the past, the Baixo Araguaia region was the habitat of the Xavante, Tapirapé, and Karajá peoples,
among other indigenous people who are now living in the Araguaia National Park (state of
Tocantins) or in the Xingu Indigenous Park (state of Mato Grosso). In the early 20th century, the
region also attracted groups of peasants who migrated from the north and northeast regions, many
of whom on foot, in search of land for developing family agriculture schemes.
In the 1940s, this scenario began to change. The Getúlio Vargas administration (1930-1945)
sponsored the “March to the West” program, designed to create population centers in various areas
in Brazil’s central region. The Vargas administration saw Mato Grosso as a huge “demographic
void”, with lands that could be used for economic production purposes. During this period, many
different indigenous tribes were expelled from their ancestral lands, which began to be divided into
lots to be sold by public authorities. Successive administrations continued to pursue this occupation
policy, which also affected family farmers.
“There are about 40,000 processes under way at the State Land Department [of Mato Grosso],
meaning that the whole state is, so to speak, being divided into lots and sold in installments. Prices
strongly contrast with those prevailing on the market [São Paulo], and you can buy 2.42-hectare lots
in vacant lands in the regions of Dúvidas, Barra do Garças, Bugre, Diamantino and Aripuanã,
among others, for 25 cruzeiros (the currency then) or even less! You pay the real estate broker, an
agent to register your title deed at the land registry, an engineer to measure your area and you
become a large landowner overnight, spending less than you would ever imagine.”
O Estado de São Paulo newspaper, 1954 (mentioned by SIQUEIRA, E. M. História de Mato
Grosso: da ancestralidade aos dias atuais. Cuiabá: Entrelinhas, 2002)
In the second half of the 1960s, the military government began to implement a new cycle of
occupation-oriented actions, also stimulated by settlement programs and incentives to large
agriculture/livestock projects. Families were attracted from different Brazilian states by the
possibility of having a land of their own. On the other hand, fiscal incentive programs controlled by
the Superintency for the Development of the Amazon Region (Sudam), led to the implementation of
large agriculture/livestock projects, particularly extensive cattle-raising for slaughter.
Projects that were financed included one called Agropecuária Suiá-Missu, which became a major
case of large landownership in Brazil, as the land in question had over one million hectares8 and
was located in areas belonging to the Xavante people. As pasture areas were expanded, old villages
were displaced, leaving crops, homes, cemeteries and other cultural references behind. There was
tension and conflicts between the agriculture/livestock farm and indigenous people and the solution
devised by their owners, in agreement with the now extinct Service for the Protection of Indigenous
7
It comprises 14 municipalities: Alto Boa Vista, Bom Jesus do Araguaia, Canabrava do Norte,
Confresa, Luciára, Novo Santo Antonio, Por to Alegre do Norte, Ribeirão Cascalheira, São José do
Xingu, Santa Cruz do Xingu, Santa Terezinha, São Félix do Araguaia, Serra Nova Dourada and
Vila Rica, which together occupy 9.4 % of the state’s territory.
8
For comparison purposes, The National Amazon Park is a little smaller: 994,000 hectares; the
Pantanal region in Mato Grosso occupies a 138,000-hectare area.
People (API), was to relocate the Xavante to the São Marcos Salesian Mission and to other areas in
1967. In 2004, in compliance with a judicial decision, the farm – now the Marãiwatsede
Reservation – was returned to the Xavante, but conflicts continued because many squatters,
woodcutters and farmers stayed in the area.
From 1985 to 2005, with the aim of reducing conflicts between squatters who had been living in the
region for decades and its new occupants, the federal government launched 56 land-reform
settlement projects in a 1,147,501-hectare area, where 13,903 families could be settled.
It should be mentioned that the Constitution of 1988 grants property right to squatters who occupy
areas of up to 50 hectares for at least five years. This is a provision known as usucapião rural
(adverse possession), which is not applicable if the owner of the land is the government.
Art. 191/Federal Constitution. The individual who, not being the owner of rural or urban property,
holds as his own, for five uninterrupted years, without opposition, an area of land in the rural zone,
not exceeding fifty hectares, making it productive with his labor or that of his family, and having
his dwelling thereon, shall acquire ownership of the land. (Official translation of the Brazilian
Constitution)
Soybeans began to be grown in the region in this scenario of relative instability in social relations in
rural areas; land prices went up as a result, leading to more conflicts between people who wanted to
buy land in the region and squatters, settled groups and indigenous people. Soybean crops grew at
an incredible pace; in only four years, the planted area9 increased nine-fold.
“We have felt a really strong impact in the municipality of Bom Jesus, where there used to be a very
large cattle ranch that has all been transformed into soy. This has had a very large impact. Even the
stream that runs through the city has been contaminated, and so the farmers are a bit worried
because the pests, as with the intensive use of poisons, the pests flock to the small producers’
plantations, because there’s no poison there. So, if you’re proposing a differentiated agriculture
which doesn’t use pesticides, if your neighbor’s using it, if he doesn’t use it too, he also runs the
risk of the pests coming and eating all his plants, because it has produced a very strong imbalance
here in the region. But there is still, in most of the region, a bit of a belt that separates this
monoculture (soy, cotton, rice) from the place where the family farmers are located. (...) (...) you’ve
got an intermediate forest area or a cattle ranch in between, most of the time there is no direct
contact with the soy plantations and if there is, it gets involved too.”
Tadeu Escamo, coordinator of the National Rural Environmental Management Program (Gestar)
of the Ministry of Environment
“Because that’s what they say, the big ones come and bring progress to the region. I’m against that,
depends on the progress, because if I came to the region, to the municipality and did just what they
do, took everything out of the soil, pulled up all the trees, pulled everything up and just left the
pesticide, the desert there, it would not be progress at all. Because their families don’t come here,
they stay in São Paulo, they stay in Cuiabá and here they only have the farm hands. The people here
can go hang, they spread the poison and they’re off. The animals that were in the forest, the fish that
were in the river, the trees that were growing to sustain the river, they all disappear. Because the
climate here has changed, 20 years ago it rained every day, and as you can see, today it rains a lot
less, as they keep on deforesting and its keeps raining less, a lot less.”
9
From 11,770 hectares in 2002 to 104,000 in 2005.
Antonio Silvino, settler under the Liberdade settlement project, Canabrava do Norte
Soybeans in Santarém: a terrible example
A long time before soybeans began to be grown in Pará, the state had already faced difficult
moments after the decline of the cocoa rush, in the first half of the 19th century, and of the rubber
rush, in the early 20th century. In the 1960s, the territorial occupation model adopted in Pará gave
rise to a cycle of disputes over land ownership and use that resulted in the state being marked by the
highest rates of violence in rural areas10 in Brazil until this very day.
Currently, it is one of the areas with the highest rates11 of soybean crop expansion, a phenomenon
that has been observed since the year 2000. As in the mid-west, large-scale farming is the
predominant model in the Amazon region, expelling family farmers from their plots of land. Two
municipalities deserve special mention in this regard: Santarém and Belterra, which were major
agricultural centers in the region already, with a decades-old diversified and consolidated family
agriculture framework, are now threatened by the expansion of monoculture soybean crops.
Most testimonies from small farmers and union leaders are marked by their concern with the sale of
land owned by family farmers to soybean farmers, a dynamic that has led to the disappearance of
many villages.
“And there are communities where the main problem is like this, because you sell and someone else
sells and some farmers get squeezed, and the time comes when they have to sell. To a certain
extent, it’s a peaceful expulsion. Because you’re used to family farming and there he farms
chickens, pigs, lamb and plants. Where soy is planted, there is a lot of poison. An example is the
community [of Tracuá, in Belterra] where there was a pig farm and now it’s gone. There was a
country chicken farm, it’s gone, there was a plan to farm bees, it’s gone. Why? Twenty meters
away, on the other side, there was a large soy plantation. Every animal that left there with signs of
poisoning was eaten by the chickens, the pigs, and they’d die. He had to sell his land cheap and go
somewhere else, because there was no way of continuing. His area was already small. The bees he
was going to farm would go off to the soy flowers and get poisoned. The children used to be going
to school at the time they were spraying the poison, the children getting contaminated was
unbearable.”
Venilson José Ferreira da Silva, President of the Lower Amazonas Rural Workers’ Study and
Training Center (CEFTBAM)
Testimonies of people whose names will not be mentioned at their own request, for safety reasons,
will be provided below:
“They bought from one side of the road to the other, people were stuck behind them, than they
stopped the people from crossing, because it was their property on one side and on the other, and
10
According to the Ombudsman’s Office of the Ministry of Land Development, 37.5% of all deaths
caused by land conflicts in Brazil in 2004 occurred in the north region; of these, 67% occurred in
the state of Pará.
11
Santarém and Belterra accounted for 44% of all the soybean production in the state of Pará in
2004. In the last harvest (2005-2006) alone, the area planted with soybeans in the state grew by
15.5% in relation to the previous harvest, according to the National Food Supply Company.
they even planted on the road so we had no road. That is something that they do a lot. They did that
in Jabuti, they did the same thing over in Baixa D’água too. The guy of the massacre would not let
people that lived on the other side cross the land. They had to go a very long way around.”
“I’m growing passion fruit, oranges, tangerines and they plant next to and behind my land, then
they start spraying poison on their rice and soy and harming my crops, I tell them that the poison
they’re using has reduced my fruit production then one of them says to me: ‘If he doesn’t want to
sell, I’ll buy two of the 13, then I’ll use poison there and he’ll not harvest anything and he’ll sell to
me’, that’s just what he said to me right here where we’re sitting.”
“When I was there, we were afraid of being cut off, because we already were, it was sad, I’d reach
the road and look to the side, there were no neighbors, there was no-one out. The bus that used to
come to the town didn’t run any more because there were very few people, because it wasn’t worth
it any more, we fought for it. At times, when we had been from here to Santarém and were coming
back, it would turn in and drop us off. But to catch it... There on the plateau, there’s a lot of mud, if
it rains it’s muddy. How can we take our products: flour, water melons, to the bus stop? So, we got
ourselves a wagon, others did the same. These were the kinds of difficulties we faced. So, we all got
very downhearted, and we couldn’t even leave our homes because of the stink on the days when
they were spraying. Because when we spray, even with home-made insecticide, we do it in the
evening. They do it through the day, because it’s such a large area.”
The testimonies of these residents of Santarém reveal the problems being faced by family farmers.
Many of them, including some of those we interviewed, left the countryside and are trying to make
a living in a city. These are current examples of a rural exodus that is not being caused by any
search for a better life in the city, but rather by the excluding economic development model Brazil
has been sponsoring in the past 500 years, relying on the support of its rulers.
Campos Bonitos (beautiful fields in Portuguese, but not anymore)
Once the land of the Xavante people, Campos Lindos leads the soybean production ranking in
Tocantins, a state created by the Constitution of 1988. The most striking feature of the recent
history of the municipality is that soybean plantations have expanded in lands donated by the state
government to people with good connections with public authorities. Through a decree (n. 436/97),
the government expropriated a 105,000-hectare area for public utility purposes in the Santa Catarina
development, located in the Serra do Centro mountain range.
The beneficiaries of this project were not the small farmers who lived in those lands – many of
whom for over five decades –, but rather entrepreneurs from the south and southeast regions of the
country, who received these areas virtually as a “present.”12 Almost all families that actually lived in
the locality were expelled from the land, which was divided into plots and transferred to politicians
such as the ex-president of Infraero (Brazilian Airport Infrastructure Company), Adyr da Silva; the
former minister of agriculture Dejandir Dalpasquale; and the then president of the Agricultural
Federation of the State of Tocantins (FAET), federal representative Kátia Abreu (Liberal Front
Party/Tocantins), who was elected senator in 2006.
12
This ‘present’ costed over R$ 1 million in state public funds paid as expropriation indemnity to
the alleged owners of the lands, most of whom had never been seen in the region.
Today, Serra do Centro concentrates most of the soybean production13 in Campos Lindos. It is
estimated that approximately 41,000 hectares, 3,000 hectares and 1,200 hectares have been planted
with soybeans, rice, and corn, respectively.
The production system developed by local communities before soybeans began to be grown in the
region was based on the extraction of bacury, buriti palm fruit, buritirana fruit, cashew fruit, souari
nut (for producing soap), bacaba fruit, mangaba fruit, piaçava palm straw (for producing oil) and
honey; on growing rice, corn, manioc, black-eyed pea, fava bean, squash, water melon, banana,
avocado, pineapple, cotton under a system referred to as roça de toco (slash-and-burn and clearing
of small areas for growing crops); on pig and poultry raising; on hunting wild animals (deer,
peccary, tapir, rhea, siriema (Cariama cristata), agouti, armadillo, partridge); and on fishing, when
fish abounded in the region’s streams. This production system ensured food security and a highly
diversified diet to the families, apart from income from selling their surplus in street markets.
Keeping this system is not possible any longer:
PICTURE: MARIANA CASTILHO
“Life was rich and plentiful; everybody helped on the land and planted together: rice, cassava, corn.
We farmed the animals because at that time there were no epidemics. There was a lot of hunting:
there were a lot of deer in the fields, there were boar, there were a lot of tapirs, there were a lot of
rhea.... there used to be everything. There were peccary, a lot of pacas, and a lot of armadillos. My
father brought us up on hunted meat. There were no cattle. Only the land where we farmed chicken
and ducks, but we didn’t go hungry (....) There was a lot of fruit, because all the trees bore a lot...
Initially there was pequi, and bacuri. There was plenty of everything. Wherever you wanted it. It
was easy to find wild animals everywhere. There were coconuts [babassu]... ... After I got married,
for the first few years I farmed pigs, there was a lot of hunting, my husband farmed wild cattle.
After this blight arrived, we’ve had to farm a smaller area, there’s very little. When they roamed
free there was a lot. We all had cattle, but when I have to lock them in, who would look after them?
I couldn’t. Now we have no animals.”
Maria Florência Ribeiro, from the Vereda Bonita rural community
“They say that Campos Lindos is pure wealth, but how can this be? Where does the wealth from the
soy go? It doesn’t stay here. If it does, it’s in someone’s pocket. The future looks very bleak for us”
Adão Macaxeira, ex-squatter of Sussuarana Ranch, Campos Lindos
Slave labor
In the 1997-2004 period, the area planted with soybeans in all the municipality increased one
13
hundred-fold: from 450 to 45,000 hectares; while production increased from 1,491 to 121,000 tons.
In all these localities where soybean farms are growing, there are records of slave labor or of similar
situations. The Brazilian Government and the Land Pastoral Commission (CPT) estimate that
25,000 people are working under slavery conditions in the country today. Records14 are particularly
abundant in states located in the Legal Amazon region, Brazil’s agricultural frontier today.
Cases of slave labor are commoner in cattle farms, but they also occur as new areas are made
available for growing soybeans. In the state of Tocantins, there were five reports involving soybean
farmers in 2005, three of them in Campos Lindos (CPT, 2006).
“In 2000 and 2001, I worked as a slave on the ranch of Dejandir Dalpasquale. There I worked on
cutting down the pequi and bacuri trees, I destroyed all the savannah and burnt it [the wood]. At the
time, there were about 40 of us. We lived in plastic shacks. We stuck it out for about three months
and decided to report it to the union. Inspectors arrived. I know it’s still the same there. Many
people don’t have the courage to report it.”
Pedro Piauí, squatter of Sussuarana Ranch, Campos Lindos
14
In 2005, there were 276 reports of slave labor, involving 7,707 workers, and 4,585 workers were
rescued from slave labor situations by the Mobile Inspection Group of the Ministry of Labor and
Employment. Pará (123), Tocantins (41) and Maranhão (33) occupy the top positions in this
ranking.
Technology leads to more exclusion, more destruction

Modern equipment and inputs pave the way for greater productivity, but
apart from expensive, they can cause irreversible environmental damages
Inputs
These include all spending and necessary production-related investments in items such as seeds,
machines and chemical products.
Transgenic products
Products containing one or more genes artificially transferred to another species (Source: Houaiss
Dictionary).
In the modern world, those who have the technology excel. In rural areas, producers need to spend
more and more with inputs that are becoming more and more sophisticated and expensive. The new
technologies found today in harvesters, sowers and in seed types – such as transgenic seeds – force
farmers to spend a lot of money. The necessary investment is only feasible for large farms 15, which
have gains of scale, that is, because of the large area planted in them, they can invest proportionally
less in relation to future gains.
For small farmers, keeping up with technological innovations is difficult; and the consequence is
loss of competitiveness, since their production cost is higher than that of large landowners. They
often don’t make any profit.
Given this situation, some farmers have two options: the first one is to lease neighboring lands to
expand their crops, a common solution in settlement areas, as it allows for technology investments
costs to be shared by many families. The second one is to sell plots of land, allowing for small
farmers to buy larger areas in more distant regions, a practice adopted by small, medium and large
farmers to expand their crops. Another solution is to set up cooperatives and other joint work
mechanisms, such as buying a harvester to be used by a whole group of smaller farmers in the same
region.
Socio-environmental costs
This scenario could be different if prices embedded the social and environmental damages caused
by monoculture crops, which require a much larger amount of chemical products 16, affecting the
soil, rivers, lakes and streams, small plantations and animal farms in surrounding areas and in local
communities.
15
In large farms in the Cerrado and Amazon Forest regions, jobs average ten workers for each one
thousand hectares, four of whom are permanent workers and six are temporary workers (WHITE,
C., 2004).
16
In conventional systems, soybean crops are highly dependent on pesticides in all production
phases, from seed treatment to harvest. The emergence of new diseases, such as the Asian rust
disease or new insects such as the white fly, has increased farmers’ dependence on chemical inputs.
“Several important rivers have disappeared, including waterways that are very important for cattle
raising and for the survival of the families that lived along their banks. There are examples such as
the Cedro River, which crosses the Santarém-Cuiabá road at km 130, which was the largest river in
our region, and where the water volume has been reduced quantitatively and qualitatively in recent
years, because the area where all the sources and springs lie is in the area of a large estate that has
been used to plant soy. The river is completely dry; we now have 10 km of dry river bed, and we
are monitoring the water that remains, but it is still a very low volume of water. It is no longer its
original color; there used to be clear bluish water. Now it is clay colored and contains a lot of
fermented products, especially twigs, leaves, bits of wood, because when the tractor drivers destroy
the woods near rivers, they usually throw all the bits of the forest apart from the wood onto the river
beds, completely burying the areas where they rise.”
Edson Azevedo, from the Manancial Institute, Santarém (Pará)
“The poison reaches us and affects our health when we work on the projects [on the soy farms].
Luzia and Antônio’s son, Arlindo, from Serra do Centro was poisoned in 2002. He swelled up all
over. He was examined in Riachão/Maranhão, but the doctor didn’t release the results of the exam,
it was necessary to go back and argue with the doctor to get the results. When he got them, he took
them to Balsas/Maranhão. The doctor said it was poisoning. We spent a lot on medicines. At the
same time that Arlindo was poisoned, Aleixo’s young son died and he was swollen all over. So did
Zé Boiote, a man with a family. At this time [2002], a lot of people living and working in Serra [do
Centro] showed signs of poisoning [swelling] and they were treated away from Campos Lindos.”
Squatter from the São Francisco Community, Campos Lindos (Tocantins)
Public policies: society as a whole bears the costs
Despite the negative impacts, strong public support is available through different mechanisms,
including government investments in infrastructure, such as roads, and fiscal exemptions such as
the Kandir Law (LC n. 87/1996), which exempts exporters of commodities and semi-processed
products from the Tax on Industrialized Products (IPI, a federal tax) and from the Value-Added Tax
(ICMS, a state-level tax).
The problem is that this law ensures the transfer of money from the federal government to the states
as a means to compensate them for losses. In the end, the tax revenue of the states is affected.
Brazilian society as a whole bears the cost of the Kandir Law twice: when the government does not
collect certain taxes; and when the Federal Government covers the damages of states. Not to
mention losses derived from the non-processing of the product, considering that after the Law was
passed, in 1996, Brazil began to export more grain17 than bran, a situation that has not changed so
far.
Another initiative of the federal government led to the introduction of soybeans in the Cerrado
region. The Japan-Brazil Cooperation Program for the Agricultural Development of the Cerrado
Region (Prodecer), signed between the then military government of Brazil and Japan and
implemented between 1970 and 2001 (in its different phases), was mainly designed to support
soybean growing. The incentive took the form of financings granted to Brazil by the Japanese
International Cooperation Agency (Jica), and also by private banks of Japan.
In 2005, one ton of grains sold for US$ 238 in the international market, while crude oil sold for
17
US$ 462. However, oil accounted for less than 7% of all exports of the Brazilian soybean complex.
Commodities and semi-processed products

Products with a minor degree of industrialization, such as the soy grain, bran and oil.
Prodecer was actually a Japanese strategy to reduce Japan’s dependence on food products from the
United States. However, Brazil will be paying loans granted by Japan under the program until 2014.
It is, therefore, a small percentage of the Brazilian foreign debt. Japan, in turn, achieved its
objective of diversifying its supply sources, which contributed to ensuring price stability in that
country and on the international market.
This program was the basis for institutions such as the Embrapa (Agriculture/Livestock Research
Corporation) to develop agricultural technologies for the Cerrado region, a biome threatened by
extinction18 due to successive occupation policies, among which the introduction of cattle at the turn
of the 19th-20th centuries.
The domination of multinational companies
Only four multinational companies dominate the grain market in the world: the US companies
ADM, Cargill and Bunge, and the French company Dreyfus, which in Brazil is called Coinbra.
These four companies traded about 60% of all Brazilian soy grain, oil and bran exports in 2005,
apart from crushing 60% of all grains sold in the domestic market. These companies also produce or
supply seeds, agricultural machines, fertilizers, etc. Their own banks finance the purchase of many
of these products, and profit once again.
The main Brazilian companies that are active in the soybean market are the Ammagi company,
owned by the family of Blairo Maggi, governor of Mato Grosso, and the Caramuru company.
In general terms, these companies operate in a similar way: they supply seeds, machinery,
fertilizers, etc. to farmers, in exchange for the guarantee that they will be the ones that will trade the
future harvest. For small farmers, this trade relationship developed into a perverse cycle of
dependence, mainly because they find it difficult to keep up with the advance of new technologies.
Trading companies enjoy yet another advantage: that of not suffering the economic impact of losing
a harvest for climatic reasons or due to the onset of a new plague, for example. Small farmers are
the ones that are most affected; they have to pay these companies even when they lose a harvest,
while the companies can buy the product in other parts of the world, where there was a good
harvest.
18
Of the original 204 million hectares of the Brazilian Cerrado region, 57% have been completely
destroyed already and half of the remaining areas have suffered significant changes. However,
deforestation continues at a rate of 1.5% a year, according to the NGO Conservation International
Brazil.
For a Brazil with less soy

A discussion addressing the model adopted for raising animals for human
consumption
The main problems caused by soybeans in Brazil are the social, environmental and economic
impacts of its fast expansion under a monoculture regime. Even in Brazil’s south region, where
family agriculture prevails, the consequences are alarming. First, because various neighboring plots
of land with only one type of crop reproduce, in practice, the damages caused by monoculture
crops. Second, because there was a remarkable expansion in farms growing transgenic soybean, a
species that requires increasing spraying of chemical products as each year goes by.19
This means that Brazil ignores the so-called “precaution principle,” according to which practices
that cause still unknown risks should be limited. Transgenics fit this category. Glyphosate and
aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) are the main chemical products used in these crops, which
are included in the Round-up, a product manufactured by Monsanto, the leading transnational
company in the transgenic seed market. The Brazilian Government increased the glyphosate index
allowed for soybeans 50-fold, even without knowing for sure what possible damages it can cause to
human health and to the environment.
Small farmers in the south region who opted for organic and agroecological models have been
constantly reporting that their crops are being contaminated by transgenics. Agroecology, which
doesn’t use any chemical products, is based on a diversity of crops in the same area. Its benefits can
be seen in experiences carried out throughout Brazil, including in the semi-arid region in the
northeast, where many families opted for this production model and are reaping the fruits of a better
quality of life.
This is the ideal model, because it respects the environment; however, it cannot be defended as a
solution for soybeans. The volume of soybeans produced today is environmentally unsustainable. It
is therefore impossible to replace all crops being grown right now with the agroecological model.
The focus of the reflection should be on demand for soybeans in the world, including a debate on
the model being used for raising animals in confinement20. To be slaughtered in the shortest time
possible, they underwent genetic changes and must be given antibiotics as a means to prevent
diseases. This has to be done because any overpopulation of animals in a confined environment
favors the easy and rapid dissemination of any disease. This is the quality of the meat that most
consumers in the world have at their table.
Organic model
19
According to Greenpeace, an assessment carried out in the first nine years of transgenic crops in
the United States shows that, in the first three years, the amount of pesticides used in agriculture in
that country decreased. However, from the sixth year onward, the amount of pesticides used in
transgenic crops increased at an alarming rate. This was mainly due to the onset of “superplagues.”
20
In Europe, 20 - 25 chickens are raised by square meter and in Brazil the numbers are 15 - 17. New
laws passed by the European Union to ensure the well-being of animals were designed to reduce
this overpopulation.
Also free from chemical products; but its difference in relation to the agroecological model is that it
allows for a single crop to be grown, provided that it is interspersed with natural vegetation.
Agroecological model
Requires a diversity of crops in the same farm and the preservation of part of the natural vegetation.
Apart from this, a true development project for Brazil should not ensure privileges to large
landowners and a handful of trading companies, most of which are multinational companies which
appropriate Brazil’s natural resources, while thousands of people are forced to live in the outskirts
of cities in search of work. It should promote socioeconomic inclusion for local populations and
respect for the environment.
For this purpose, public incentives to soybean monoculture should be banned and domestic policies
should be focused on promoting family agriculture and agroecology on a priority basis.
Domestic policies should foster:
• feasible agricultural schemes in small and medium-sized farms,

• a transition of part of conventional crops to the agroecological model,
• land reform,
• crop diversification,
• preservation of the biodiversity and of the country’s natural resources,
• research and development of new technologies capable of ensuring the feasibility of mechanizing
small farms,
• incentives to associativism and rural cooperatives,
• measures to keep families in rural areas.
These policies constitute the basis of a sustainable development model for the country. These are
the seeds that can truly enable Brazil to ensure social and economic equality and environmental
preservation.
The soybean production chain
Soybeans occupy almost half of the area planted with grains in Brazil. Although large
landownership is the production modality that has been growing most, many family farmers were
attracted to this market.
1. Family farmers are caught in the so-called “dependence cycle”: they receive raw material (seeds,
agrochemical products, equipment) that they need to grow their crops from large trading companies.
2. Their harvest is sold to these companies, which discount the value of the raw material that they
gave to the family farmers from the price they pay them.
3. Over half of the harvest is exported, mostly in grain form, that is, without any added value.
4. Of the total soybean production, about 38% are turned into bran right here in Brazil. But this
grain crushing process yields 80% of bran and 20% of crude oil.
5. From crude soybean oil, industries manufacture hydrogenated fat, margarine, breads and
chocolates, paints, cosmetics, pharmaceutical and medicinal products.
6. Almost all the soybean bran produced in Brazil and in the world is used to feed animals such as
chickens, cattle, pigs and shrimp in captivity.
Bibliographic References
ABREU, S. Planejamento governamental: a Sudeco no espaço mato-grossense – contexto,

propósitos e contradições. São Paulo. Thesis (Doctor’s degree in Geography), Philosophy,
Literature and Human Sciences School of the University of São Paulo (USP), 2001.
ALVES Jr., G. O planejamento governamental e seus reflexos na estrutura fundiária de Mato

Grosso, in Caminhos de Geografia, 4(9)17-30, June 2003. http://www.ig.ufu.br/revista/
volume09/ar tigo02_vol09.pdf
BERTI, M. Balanço de uso e aplicação de fertilizantes e agroquímicos em duas sub-bacias do

município de Sorriso/MT. Master’s degree thesis in Engineering. Rio de Janeiro. UFRJ, 2001.
BORTOCELLO, O.; DIAS, E. Resgate Histórico do Município de Sorriso. Cuiabá, 2003.
BRUM, A. Economia da soja: história e futuro – Uma visão desde o Rio Grande do Sul. http://
www.agromil.com.br/econosoja.html, 2005.
CASTILHO, M. Relatório Ambiental. Terra Indígena Kanela/Buriti Velho. Administrative Ruling

n. 1449 of 11/01/2004 Funai-Unesco, 2005.
National Food Supply Company (CONAB). Indicadores da agropecuária. Brasília, April 2006. Year
XV, n. 04.
National Food Supply Company (CONAB). Indicadores da agropecuária. Brasília, July 2006. Year
XV, Eighth Survey.
CPT. Conflitos no Campo Brasil 2006.
GUIMARÃES NETO, R. B. A lenda do ouro verde. Cuiabá: Entrelinhas publishing house, 2003.
_____, R. B. Vira mundo, vira mundo: trajetórias nômades. Projeto História. São Paulo, 2003.
GREENPEACE. Eating up the Amazon. 2006.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/eating-up-the-amazon
IANNI, O. Ditadura e agricultura. O desenvolvimento do capitalismo na Amazônia: 1964 a 1978.

Rio de Janeiro. Civilização Brasileira publishing house, 1979.
JR., J. “Terra sem povo”, crime sem castigo. Pouco ou nada sabemos de concreto sobre a
Amazônia, in Amazônia revelada: os descaminhos ao longo da BR-163. Brasília. CNPq, 2005.
LEROY, J-P. Uma chama na Amazônia. Rio de Janeiro. Vozes and FASE, 1991.
MAYOZER, M. Desigualdades agrícolas e alimentares no mundo: causas e conseqüências. Lecture

delivered at the Economic Sciences School of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul– Porto
Alegre/ state of Rio Grande do Sul, during an event organized by the university’s Graduate Program
in Rural Development (PGDR/UFRGS) and promoted by PGDR and the Center for Land Studies
and Rural Development (NEAD/MDA). July 2003.
MB Associados, 2004. O sucesso da agroindústria: o que se pode aprender? São Paulo. FIESP, June
2004.
MINTZ, S. Comida e antropologia: uma breve revisão. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, Oct.
2001, vol.16, n° 47.
OLIVEIRA, A. BR-163, Cuiabá-Santarém: geopolítica, grilagem, violência e mundialização, in

Amazônia revelada: os descaminhos ao longo da BR-163. Brasília. CNPq, 2005.
PEREIRA, S. A evolução do complexo soja e a questão da transgenia. Rio de Janeiro, Revista de

Política Agrícola, Apr/May/Jun 2004.
SACHS, I. Redescoberta e invenção do Brasil rural. http://www.cndrs.org.br/documentos/

texto_sachs_capitulo_iii.doc
SCHLESINGER, S. O grão que cresceu demais. Rio de Janeiro. FASE, 2006.
SENRA, K. Kaiabis, 1999. http://pegue.com/indio/kaiabi.htm
SHIKI, S. O futuro do Cerrado: degradação versus sustentabilidade e controle social. FASE, 2000.
SIQUEIRA, E. M. História de Mato Grosso: da ancestralidade aos dias atuais. Cuiabá: Entrelinhas
publishing house, 2002.
TORRES, M. Fronteira, um eco sem fim. Considerações sobre a ausência do Estado e exclusão
social nos municípios paraenses do eixo da BR-163, in Amazônia revelada: os descaminhos ao
longo da BR-163. Brasília. CNPq, 2005.
WHITE, C. et al. Soy Expansion in the Brazilian Amazon Region: a local and global social and
environmental dilemma. http:// www.ambafrance.org.br/refeb/projets
USDA. Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade. February 2006.

Our publications
O grão que cresceu demais – a soja e seus impactos
sobre a sociedade e o meio ambiente
Sergio Schlesinger
FASE, 76 pP.
Petrobras: integración o explotación?

Jean-Pierre Leroy and Julianna Malerba
FASE, 129 pp.
Brazil is naked! – the expansion of soybean monoculture,

the grain that grew too much
Silvia Noronha and Sergio Schlesinger
FASE, 148 pp.
Cadernos de Debate Series
Cadernos de Debate nº 1
Novas Premissas da Sustentabilidade Democrática
Henri Acselrad
Jean-Pierre Leroy
BSD/FASE, 70 pp.
Os Desafios das Políticas de Consumo Sustentável
Manus van Brakel
BSD/FASE, 48 pp.
Critérios Integrados para a Elaboração do Conceito
de Sustentabilidade
Joachim H. Spangenberg
BSD/FASE, 48 pp.
Sustentabilidade e Desenvolvimento: modelos,
processos e relações
Henri Acselrad
BSD/FASE, 68 pp.
Exportar é Preciso, Viver...
Sérgio Schlesinger
Os Mitos do Bem-estar Alcançado com a Exportação
de Matérias-primas
Maria Isabel Manzur
BSD/FASE, 48 pp.
OUT OF PRINT
Produção, Consumo e Sustentabilidade: o Brasil
e o contexto planetário
José Augusto Pádua
A Dívida Ecológica Brasileira. Quem deve a quem?
Jean-Pierre Leroy
BSD/FASE, 69 pp.
Cadernos Temáticos Series
Cadernos Temáticos nº1

Sustentabilidade Energética no Brasil - limites e
possibilidades para uma estratégia energética sustentável e
democrática
Célio Berman
Osvaldo Stella Martins
BSD/FASE, 152 pp.
OUT OF PRINT

O Futuro do Cerrado: degradação versus sustentabilidade
e controle social
Shigeo Shiki
BSD/FASE, 64 pp.

A Insustentável Civilização do Automóvel. A indústria
automotiva brasileira em tempos de reestruturação produtiva.
Flávio Limoncic
BSD/FASE, 108 pp.
Cadernos Temáticos nº 4
Democracia e Sustentabilidade na Agricultura: subsídios para
a construção de um novo modelo de desenvolvimento rural.
Carlos Eduardo Mazzetto Silva
BSD/FASE/AS-PTA, 114 p.
O Desafio da Sustentabilidade Urbana
Grazia de Grazia
Leda Lúcia R. F. Queiroz
Alexandre Mello Santos
Athayde Motta
BSD/FASE/IBASE, 127 p.
Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Setor Mineral. Pesquisas
Iniciais para Promover a Discussão
Zenon Schueler Reis
BSD/FASE/CEBRAC, 105 pp.
Indústria no Brasil: produção sustentável, consumo
democrático
Sergio Schlesinger
BSD/FASE, 136 pp.
Sustentabilidade e Democracia para as Políticas Públicas
na Amazônia
Ana Cristina Barroso (org)
BSD/FASE/IPAM/AVINA, 128 pp.
Certificação Florestal do FSC - Forest Stewardship Council -
Inclusão do debate social e ambiental no manejo florestal
Sandra Tosta Faillace
BSD/FASE, 68 pp.
Eixos de Articulação Territorial e Sustentabilidade do
Desenvolvimento no Brasil
Henri Acselrad
BSD/FASE, 100 pp.
Cadernos sobre Comércio e Meio Ambiente
Cadernos sobre Comércio e Meio Ambiente 1

Exportando a Nossa Natureza – Produtos intensivos em
energia: implicações sociais e ambientais
Célio Bermann
BSD/FASE, 70 pp.

Comércio e Investimento Externo: aprofundando um
modelo insustentável
Reinaldo Gonçalves
BSD/FASE, 192 pp.

Frango com camarão: receitas do agronegócio para um
Brasil insustentável
Lisa Gunn, Pedro Ivo de Souza Batista and Soraya Vanini
Tupinambá
BSD/FASE, 86 pp.

Comércio, sociedade e meio ambiente na América Latina
Sergio Schlesinger
BSD/FASE, 64 pp.
Como o Brasil exporta natureza: os impactos dos produtos

eletrointensivos
Silvia Noronha and Célio Bermann
BSD/FASE 24 pp.
Que agronegócio é esse? – Por que a agricultura e a pecuária

crescem sem beneficiar a população brasileira
Silvia Noronha
BSD/FASE 24 pp.
WHERE YOU CAN BUY THESE PUBLICATIONS

FASE: Rua das Palmeiras, 90 – Botafogo
CEP 22270-070 – Rio de Janeiro – state of Rio de Janeiro
Phone: (21) 2536-7350 – Fax: (21) 2536-7379
or on the website www.fase.org.br/loja

Brazil Is Naked! The Advance of Soybean Monoculture, The Grain That Grew Too Much

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brazil Is Naked! The Advance of Soybean Monoculture, The Grain That Grew Too Much

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brazil is naked!

The advance of soybean monoculture, the grain that

GENERAL AND EDITORIAL COORDINATION

COVER PHOTOGRAPH (SOYBEAN GRAINS)

PHOTOLITH AND PRINTING

1. Brazil - agribusiness 2. Environment 3. Environmental impact 4. Sustainable Development I.

Distribution of the area planted with grains in Brazil

Source: National Food Supply Company (CONAB) (newsletter of July 2006).

Sustainable economic development

World soybean production (million tons)

Country 1995 % Part. 2005 % Part.

Production (thousand tons)

Why so much soybeans?

Global consumption of soybean bran (million tons)

Figures that impress the nation

Brazil: production growth by state (in thousand tons)

REGION/Unit of the 1995/96 2005/06

What is behind these figures

Pace of expansion of soybean growing in Brazil by state

Growth of the area planted with soybeans (1995-2003)

Exports of “virtual” water

Total soybeans bought by China

Total tons bought by China in 2004

Who loses with the advance of monoculture crops

When you take a close look, you see a different scenario

Xingu National Park

Exclusion in the Baixo Araguaia region

Soybeans in Santarém: a terrible example

Campos Bonitos (beautiful fields in Portuguese, but not anymore)

Keeping this system is not possible any longer:

PICTURE: MARIANA CASTILHO

Technology leads to more exclusion, more destruction

Public policies: society as a whole bears the costs

Commodities and semi-processed products

The domination of multinational companies

For a Brazil with less soy

Domestic policies should foster:

• feasible agricultural schemes in small and medium-sized farms,

The soybean production chain

ABREU, S. Planejamento governamental: a Sudeco no espaço mato-grossense – contexto,

ALVES Jr., G. O planejamento governamental e seus reflexos na estrutura fundiária de Mato

BERTI, M. Balanço de uso e aplicação de fertilizantes e agroquímicos em duas sub-bacias do

BORTOCELLO, O.; DIAS, E. Resgate Histórico do Município de Sorriso. Cuiabá, 2003.

CASTILHO, M. Relatório Ambiental. Terra Indígena Kanela/Buriti Velho. Administrative Ruling

CPT. Conflitos no Campo Brasil 2006.

GREENPEACE. Eating up the Amazon. 2006.

IANNI, O. Ditadura e agricultura. O desenvolvimento do capitalismo na Amazônia: 1964 a 1978.

MAYOZER, M. Desigualdades agrícolas e alimentares no mundo: causas e conseqüências. Lecture

OLIVEIRA, A. BR-163, Cuiabá-Santarém: geopolítica, grilagem, violência e mundialização, in

PEREIRA, S. A evolução do complexo soja e a questão da transgenia. Rio de Janeiro, Revista de

SACHS, I. Redescoberta e invenção do Brasil rural. http://www.cndrs.org.br/documentos/

SCHLESINGER, S. O grão que cresceu demais. Rio de Janeiro. FASE, 2006.

SENRA, K. Kaiabis, 1999. http://pegue.com/indio/kaiabi.htm

USDA. Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade. February 2006.

Petrobras: integración o explotación?

Brazil is naked! – the expansion of soybean monoculture,

Cadernos de Debate Series

Cadernos Temáticos Series

Cadernos Temáticos nº1

Cadernos Temáticos nº2

Cadernos Temáticos nº3

Cadernos sobre Comércio e Meio Ambiente

Cadernos sobre Comércio e Meio Ambiente 1