IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/veagro/316883.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

La cuestión agraria, la producción agroalimentaria y la apropiación de la tierra y del trabajo en Venezuela: una revisión histórica

Author

Listed:
  • Delahaye, Olivier

Abstract

This article relates the Venezuelan crises of the 19th, part of the 20th, and 21st centuries with the obsolescence of the form of appropriation of land and labor in the face of technological and economic transformations, the most outstanding feature during the Venezuelan crises registered in both periods. The essential sources used in the research were the compilations of historical documents made during the 1960s and 1970s by the Council of Scientific and Humanistic Development (CDCH) of the Universidad Central de Venezuela (UCV), as well as by the Congress of the Republic in 1980. After the synthesis of the historical forms of production, the essential features of the exploitation, appropriation, and transmission of land ownership are analyzed, highlighting the expropriations by the opposing sides in the successive wars, the importance of looting in the appropriation of goods, racism as an ideological justification and the decline of slavery as a form of appropriation of labor in the 19th century. The study also showed that the forms of illegal appropriation of land (such as the illegal/informal market, occupations of all kinds, including the deviant application of legal texts) became the norm. Likewise, the will to prevent the realization of a reliable cadastre by successive governments in these centuries favored such de facto situations. Paradoxically, the most recent agrarian policies (in particular, the laws of 1960 and 2001) have not significantly influenced the evolution of land appropriation or the de-concentration of land ownership, but they have allowed the play of factors such as the informal market and local pacts. In terms of the appropriation of labor, at the beginning of the period studied, slavery and the coercive appropriation of manumiso’s labor predominated, and although there have been many subsequent regulations to regulate it, in practice it continues to be very complex and fluctuating. Therefore, the evolution of both the appropriation of labor and land has been obsolete in the face of the economic and technological evolution registered during the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries.

Suggested Citation

  • Delahaye, Olivier, 2020. "La cuestión agraria, la producción agroalimentaria y la apropiación de la tierra y del trabajo en Venezuela: una revisión histórica," Agroalimentaria Journal - Revista Agroalimentaria, Centro de Investigaciones Agroalimentarias, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Universidad de los Andes, vol. 26(50).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:veagro:316883
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.316883
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/316883/files/Articulo_9_Delahaye_R50.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.316883?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cornia, Giovanni Andrea, 1985. "Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: An analysis for fifteen developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 513-534, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tasso Adamopoulos & Diego Restuccia, 2014. "The Size Distribution of Farms and International Productivity Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(6), pages 1667-1697, June.
    2. Majiwa, Eucabeth Bosibori Opande & Lee, Boon & Wilson, Clevo, 2015. "Multi-lateral multi-output measurement of productivity: the case of African agriculture," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212769, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Jia, Lili, 2012. "Land fragmentation and off-farm labor supply in China," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 66, number 66.
    4. Munir Ahmad & Sarfraz Khan Qureshi, 1999. "Recent Evidence on Farm Size and Land Productivity: Implications for Public Policy," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 38(4), pages 1135-1153.
    5. Zhigang Chen & Qianyue Meng & Kaixin Yan & Rongwei Xu, 2022. "The Analysis of Family Farm Efficiency and Its Influencing Factors: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Pacheco de Castro Flores Ribeiro, Paulo & Osório de Barros de Lima e Santos, José Manuel & Prudêncio Rafael Canadas, Maria João & Contente de Vinha Novais, Ana Maria & Ribeiro Ferraria Moreira, Franci, 2021. "Explaining farming systems spatial patterns: A farm-level choice model based on socioeconomic and biophysical drivers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    7. Lucie Ménager & Christine Valente, 2011. "Market power and voluntary land redistribution," Working Papers hal-00867615, HAL.
    8. Barrett, Christopher B., 1996. "On price risk and the inverse farm size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 193-215, December.
    9. Nusrat Abedin Jimi & Plamen V. Nikolov & Mohammad Abdul Malek & Subal Kumbhakar, 2019. "The effects of access to credit on productivity: separating technological changes from changes in technical efficiency," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 37-55, December.
    10. Colnago, P. & Dogliotti, S., 2020. "Introducing labour productivity analysis in a co-innovation process to improve sustainability in mixed family farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    11. Morel, Kevin & San Cristobal, Magali & Léger, François Gilbert, 2017. "Small can be beautiful for organic market gardens: an exploration of the economic viability of French microfarms using MERLIN," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 39-49.
    12. Alexis Rampa & Yiorgos Gadanakis & Gillian Rose, 2020. "Land Reform in the Era of Global Warming—Can Land Reforms Help Agriculture Be Climate-Smart?," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, November.
    13. Tasso Adamopoulos & Diego Restuccia, 2020. "Land Reform and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis with Micro Data," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 1-39, July.
    14. Elodie Blanc & Aurelia Lepine & Eric Strobl, 2014. "Determinants of crop yield and profit of family farms: Evidence from the Senegal River Valley," Working Papers 2014-596, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    15. Song, Chunxiao & Liu, Ruifeng & Oxley, Oxley & Ma, Hengyun, 2018. "The adoption and impact of engineering-type measures to address climate change: evidence from the major grain-producing areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(4), October.
    16. Mensah, Edouard R. & Kostandini, Genti, 2020. "The inverse farm size-productivity relationship under land size mis-measurement and in the presence of weather and price risks: Panel data evidence from Uganda," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304477, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Thapa, Sridhar, 2007. "The relationship between farm size and productivity: empirical evidence from the Nepalese mid-hills," 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France 7940, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Tao Wu & Yuelong Wang, 2015. "Did the Establishment of Poyang Lake Eco-Economic Zone Increase Agricultural Labor Productivity in Jiangxi Province, China?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    19. Michael Pammer, 2017. "Did higher inequality in agriculture enhance productivity? The case of Cisleithania, 1902," Working Papers 17006, Economic History Society.
    20. Scandizzo, Pasquale Lucio & Savastano, Sara, 2009. "Optimal Farm Size under an Uncertain Land Market: the Case of Kyrgyz Republic," 111th Seminar, June 26-27, 2009, Canterbury, UK 52844, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:veagro:316883. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciulave.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.