The Journal of Peasant Studies ISSN: 0306-6150 (Print) 1743-9361 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fjps20 Confronting agrarian authoritarianism: dynamics of resistance to PROSAVANA in Mozambique Boaventura Monjane & Natacha Bruna To cite this article: Boaventura Monjane & Natacha Bruna (2020) Confronting agrarian authoritarianism: dynamics of resistance to PROSAVANA in Mozambique, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 47:1, 69-94, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2019.1671357 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2019.1671357 Published online: 22 Oct 2019. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 538 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fjps20 THE JOURNAL OF PEASANT STUDIES 2020, VOL. 47, NO. 1, 69–94 https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2019.1671357 FORUM ON AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM AND THE RURAL WORLD Confronting agrarian authoritarianism: dynamics of resistance to PROSAVANA in Mozambique Boaventura Monjane a and Natacha Brunab aCentre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal; bInternational Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This paper explores how varying degrees of authoritarianism and ProSAVANA; Mozambique; populism, although not always coinciding, have been intrinsic to authoritarianism; populism; the imposition of agrarian policies in Mozambique. Taking the rural resistance case of ProSAVANA, a highly controversial agrarian development program, we look at how its undemocratic imposition by the state has given rise to a vigorous resistance movement. By tracing a decade of electoral results in selected districts where ProSAVANA is intended to be implemented, we argue that due to its agrarian authoritarian policies which have had negative implications on rural livelihoods, the ruling party, FRELIMO, has recently been losing popularity to the strongest opposition party RENAMO. 1. Introduction Authoritarianism and undemocratic forms of imposing policies and measures on rural and peasant populations were a norm in colonial and post-colonial Mozambique. This contrib- uted, consequently, to the recurring failures to grasp the nature of the agrarian question1 in Mozambique in the context of changing regimes from central planning to market-based development policies (Wuyts 2001). Soon after independence in 1975, Mozambique’s dominant political party, Frente de Libertação de Moçambique – Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO), exhibited undemocratic, and to some extent populist, characteristics with regards to implementing agrarian policies. In the current neoliberal period, however, FRELIMO’s regime has come to clearly exercise varying and decreasing degrees of populism combined with authoritarianism when it comes to choosing and imposing agrarian policies. The Triangular Co-operation Programme for Agricultural Development of the Tropical Savannah in Mozambique Project (hereafter referred to as ProSAVANA), is one concrete example. CONTACT Natacha Bruna [email protected] International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands Editorial Note: This paper is part of the ‘JPS Forum on Authoritarian Populism and the Rural World’, framed and introduced by Ian Scoones and colleagues in their joint paper, ‘Emancipatory Rural Politics: Confronting Authoritarian Populism’, published in JPS in January 2018. The contributions to this forum will be published separately and in clusters in 2018 and 2019. This forum is one of the initial outcomes of the activities of the Emancipatory Rural Politics Initiative (ERPI, www.iss.nl/erpi). 1The agrarian question approached in this paper goes in line with the classic definition provided by Byres (1991, 9) where the continuing existence of poverty – and its political consequences – in the country side alongside with substantive obstacles to generate economic development both inside and outside agriculture. © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 70 B. MONJANE AND N. BRUNA ProSAVANA was first introduced in the beginning of the 2010s, as a developmental project in line with the main agrarian policy of Mozambique, the Plano Estratégico para o Desenvolvimento do Sector Agrário (PEDSA – Strategic Plan for the Develop- ment of the Agrarian Sector), which aimed to transform the agricultural sector to be more investment and business-friendly (RM 2011). To this end, the main objective of ProSAVANA has been to increase agricultural productivity, targeting 11 million hec- tares in north-central Mozambique, targeting areas in Niassa, Nampula and Zambézia provinces, a region known as the Nacala Corridor. Importantly, ProSAVANA was initiated and implemented by the Mozambican Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MASA), the Brazilian Cooperation Agency (ABC) and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). Public disclosure of the Master Plan quickly sparked resistance. This was largely due to the apparent lack of transparency and inclusivity in the planning process, and the apprehension coming from knowledge of the negative impacts of PRODE- CER, a large scale agricultural development project in Brazil, in the late 70’softhe last century (we develop more on PRODECER later). The emergence of a transnational campaign, called ‘Campanha não ao ProSAVANA – No to ProSAVANA Campaign’ (hereafter referred to as NPC), came to be central to the resistance process. NPC pre- sented an organized and explicit contestation to not only the ProSAVANA project itself, but the fundamental paradigm of rural development promoted by the project. Parallel to the constitution of the campaign and the resistance movement, FRELIMO was losing electoral support in the region where ProSAVANA is due to be implemented, the Nacala Corridor. The NPC, while demanding the discontinuation of ProSAVANA, also proposed alternatives to rural and agricultural development. This effort not only led to the current ‘hibernation’ of the project but created space to enable expanded participation of peasants and civil society throughout the decision-making process. 1.1. Key questions and structure of the paper This paper analyses the process and dynamics of resistance to ProSAVANA as a way of confronting authoritarian imposition of agrarian policies in Mozambique. The main objective is to explore how the varying political regimes and their varying degrees of populism and authoritarianism contribute to the triggering of resistance, particu- larly looking at how and why the NPC was able to ‘succeed’ in hibernating ProSA- VANA. The paper gives an explanation on how a combination of five elements, in the right timing regarding FRELIMO’s popularity and support, were strategically deter- minant in putting the program on hold: (1) political reactions from below, (2) inter- sectoral civil society alliance, (3) communication, outreach and media strategy, (4) transnationalization of the struggle, and (5) the proposal of alternatives to dominant narratives. Although these five tactics were strategically executed, opponents of Pro- SAVANA were sharp in maximizing the existing generalized rural discontent. The decrease in rural votes for FRELIMO across the Nacala Corridor was not an accident, but a result of FRELIMO’s strategy and policies on rural development as the paper demonstrates further. THE JOURNAL OF PEASANT STUDIES 71 The paper is organized into five main sections. Following Section 1, the Introduction, Section 2 briefly approaches the conceptualization of authoritarianism and populism, and its relation to Mozambique. This section also explores the presence of authoritarian- ism throughout the inception and early implementation of ProSAVANA. Section 3 exam- ines ProSAVANA: what are its main goals, its components, deficiencies as well as contradictions. Section 4 directly addresses how ProSAVANA was confronted, highlighting the role of the National Peasant Union (UNAC) in the NPC. Lastly, Section 5 has concluding remarks. 1.2. Methods and methodology This paper is based on data collected from a combination of methods during fieldwork conducted intermittently between 2014 and 2018 in the capital city of Maputo, and in the provinces of Nampula and Zambézia. Unstructured (open) and semi-structured inter- views were conducted throughout and directed to multiple stakeholders, such as pea- sants, peasant union representatives, organizations affiliated with NPC, government officials at district and province levels and ProSAVANA representatives at the provincial level. Additionally, participant observation was conducted, including participating in public hearings both at district and national levels, visiting ProSAVANA’s pilot-projects sites and participating in meetings with the Mozambican civil society at the international, national, provincial and district levels. Lastly, analysis of secondary sources on ProSAVANA – both officially and un-officially (leaked) disclosed documents, public statements and gov- ernment strategies – was held. Such activities were reinforced by extensive first-hand foundational knowledge by one author who had worked as a staff member of UNAC between 2009 and 2015. The qualitative primary data was processed through transcription of the inter- views and field notes. The body of empirical data was then analyzed using process tracing in order to trace the links between possible causes and observed outcomes (Bennett and George 2005). Validation of