Neo-extractivism and the new Latin American developmentalism: the missing piece of rural transformation

Poisoned, Dispossessed and Excluded: A Critique of the Neoliberal Soy Regime in Paraguay

“…The fact that so many peasant farmers have become redundant to the requirements of agribusiness capital, combined with the lack of alternatives for gainful employment in other sectors of national economy, has rendered them as a ‘surplus population’ (Li ) or an ‘outcast proletariat’ (Davis ) – that is, a labour force without adequate livelihood alternatives. Hence, the neoliberal soy regime is best described as ‘the antithesis of development – it eliminates work opportunities and ejects labour to urban sectors that are already overwhelmed with unemployment and underemployment’ (North and Grinspun ).…”

Fuelling Social Inclusion? Neo‐extractivism, State–Society Relations and Biofuel Policies in Latin America's Southern Cone

“…These state actions result in a closure of democratic spaces in which people otherwise struggle for distributive policies and consequently cause serious setbacks in the democratization of the state (Siegel, ). Although a large proportion of critical scholarship has focused on the mining and hydrocarbon industries (see Bebbington, ), agricultural researchers have also offered valuable insights on how the new agro‐exports for food, feed and energy markets supported by progressive governments have encouraged new waves of land dispossession, enclosures and land concentration (Baletti, ; North and Grinspun, ). In most of these critiques, the state plays a coercive role in the dispossession, using the breadth of its powers to guarantee the consent of governed populations.…”

Canada's Role in Promoting Mining and Development Policy Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa

“…The issues raised by the experience of the "new-extractivist" development strategies in regime and a concern to strike a better deal with the mining companies and capture a larger share" of the resource rents (Veltmeyer 2013, 87). The evidence indicates that as long as the commodity price boom lasted, government mining regimes across Latin America successfully generated sufficient revenue from the extractives industries to invest in social programs that led to poverty reduction through out the region (North andGrinspun 2016, 1496).…”

“…But the new extractivism has also contributed to in increased concentration of capital, environmental degradation and social conflict within communities (North andGrinspun 2016, 1497-98;Veltmeyer 2016, 781). New-extractivism's reliance on attracting FDI assigns a "central role to powerful multinational corporations that are intent on blocking any substantive structural change" (North andGrinspun 2016, 1496). States have become key players in facilitating the access of foreign investors to mineral deposits and this has, in the context of the social and environmental disruption associated with the mining, and the ensuing resistance by some communities, has led to situations in which states sided with mining companies in struggles over land rights and the environment (Veltmeyer 2016, 781).…”