Download File
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Columbia University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences Human Rights Studies Master of Arts Program Natural Resource Control and Indigenous Rights in Bolivia’s Santa Cruz Department: Post-neoliberal Rhetoric and Reality Hannah Howroyd Thesis adviser: Dr. Inga T. Winkler Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts October 2017 ii Acknowledgements: Thank you to the Columbia Global Policy Initiative, with support of The Endevor Foundation, for providing me with the Graduate Global Policy Award. I want to additionally thank my adviser, Dr. Inga T. Winkler, for her assistance and support throughout the thesis process. iii Abstract: In 2006, the Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) government led by Evo Morales took power in Bolivia. This government, supported by a pro-indigenous, anti-neoliberal electorate, has espoused indigenous rights and protections against neoliberal development in Bolivia’s national policies and Constitution. Through a case study of Bolivia’s Santa Cruz department, this paper examines Bolivia’s evolving state-social relationship and its increasingly divergent policies on economic development and indigenous rights. Santa Cruz’ marked presence of the transnational soy industry demonstrate the economic, social, and cultural rights challenges of a post- neoliberal, pro-indigenous Bolivia. This research investigates the nexus between transnational agribusiness and the indigenous rights movement in the Bolivian context, and the social movement strategies and response to the MAS’ contradictory policies. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 SECTION 1: RESEARCH STRATEGY 2 OBJECTIVE 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 3 SELECTION AND METHODS 6 CURRENT RESEARCH 9 HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS 13 SECTION 2: POWER ASYMMETRIES AND REGIMES 14 STATE-SOCIAL RELATIONSHIP 14 CONSULTATION AND CONTESTATION 16 CIVIL SOCIETY AND OPPOSITION SUPPRESSION 19 REGIONAL SOCIAL TENSIONS: CRUCEÑO CONTEXT 21 SECTION 3: SOY IN SANTA CRUZ 24 INDUSTRY BACKGROUND 24 INDUSTRY COMPOSITION 26 IMPLICATIONS 28 SMALLHOLDER IMPLICATIONS 28 RIGHT TO FOOD AND SANTA CRUZ’ AGRIBUSINESS 30 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 32 HARBINGERS FOR INCREASED PRODUCTION 35 SECTION 4: ANALYSIS 37 MOBILIZATION STRATEGIES: PAST 37 MOBILIZATION STRATEGIES: PRESENT 40 STATE RESPONSE 43 SECTION 5: CONCLUSION 45 v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CEJIS CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS JURÍDICOS E INVESTIGACIÓN SOCIAL CSUTCB CONFEDERACIÓN SINDICAL ÚNICA DE TRABAJADORES COMPESINOS DE BOLIVIA CIDOB CONFEDERACIÓN DE PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS DE BOLIVIA CONAMAQ ORGANIZACIÓN EL CONSEJO NACIONAL DE AYLLUS Y MARCAS DEL QULLASUYU CSO CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION FAO UN FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION FPIC FREE, PRIOR, AND INFORMED CONSENT ILO INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION INRA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF THE AGRARIAN REFORM LPP LAW OF POPULAR PARTICIPATION MAS MOVEMENT FOR SOCIALISM RPE REGLAMETO DE LA PAUSA ECOLÓGICA SD SUPREME DECREE SRA STRATEGIC RELATIONAL APPROACH TCO COMMUNAL LANDS OF ORIGIN TIPNIS ISOBORE SECURE NATIONAL PARK AND INDIGENOUS TERRITORY UNDRIP UN DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 1 Over the past decade in Latin America, a countercurrent to the neoliberal model of the late twentieth century has been termed the post-neoliberal “pink” tide. In this wave, burgeoning social movements and corresponding electoral shifts throughout Latin America have demanded an end the exploitative, globalized neoliberal model in favor of a new paradigm in which resource allocation and trade would be determined by the local, not the global. In 2006, Evo Morales and the Movement for Socialism (MAS) party came to power in Bolivia. The party ran on the platform of indigenous rights and a rejection of the neoliberal development model, and its electoral success was intrinsically tied to Morales’ coalescing of two main electorates: indigenous groups and peasant unions. This coalition took on a pro-indigenous platform (backed by the indigenous social movement base) and an anti-neoliberalism platform (backed by the peasant union base). In 2009, a pinnacle of this movement was seen with the newly adopted Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia that enshrined the ethos of post-neoliberalism. The new Constitution was landmark for its inclusion and enumeration of extensive indigenous rights that mirrored international human rights instruments.1 A decade later, it is an opportune time to reflect on how much has truly changed for the human rights and livelihoods of indigenous people in in Bolivia. Bolivia’s economic development model is at odds with its pro-indigenous, post-neoliberal rhetoric promulgated by the Morales administration at international fora2 and enshrined in the Constitution. Increasingly, domestic and foreign capital flows into the country’s extractives industry3, a sector that hinges on the global capital market and its subsequent volatile prices. This research explores the human rights implications on indigenous peoples in the context of this paradox of reality vs. rhetoric of Bolivian 1 Radoslaw Powęska, “State-led Extractivism and the Frustration of Indigenous Self-Determined Development: Lessons from Bolivia,” The International Journal of Human Rights 21, no. 4 (2017): 450, doi: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1284446. 2 U.N. General Assembly, 69th Session. 7th Plenary Meeting. 24 Sept 2014 (A/69/PV.7) Official Record. 3 Radoslaw Powęska, “State-led Extractivism and the Frustration of Indigenous Self-Determined Development: Lessons from Bolivia,” The International Journal of Human Rights 21, no. 4 (2017): 452, doi: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1284446. Powęska notes that the extractives sector generated 70% of all export value in 2013. Additionally, the overall area of gas and oil exploration has grown eightfold from 2006-2012 comprising about 22.5% of total national territory. 2 post-neoliberalism. Bolivia’s natural resource development as an economic pillar brings resource extraction and its impact on societies to the fore. This research will focus particularly on the burgeoning agro-industrial soy industry in the Santa Cruz region. The case study of Santa Cruz analyzes the various internal tensions that are coupled with the global soy complex.4 Bolivia was a foremost actor in the indigenous rights movement of the twentieth century. During this movement, indigenous groups formed part of the opposition, predominantly stressing claims to indigenous land and education.5 However, at present they are part of Morales’ MAS coalition in power. It is therefore essential to analyze and understand how Bolivia’s modern indigenous rights movement is responding to these new economic trends of natural resource extraction in a “post-neoliberal” Bolivia under a central government that purportedly represents their demands. Power asymmetries, lack of implementation and enforcement of indigenous and ecological rights protections, and foreign investment interests form a nexus that leads to infringements on human rights and livelihoods. This research explores the space between economic development and human rights practice in Santa Cruz, and what is being done by local social movement actors to reverse these dangerous trends. I. Research Strategy Objective Bolivia has espoused indigenous rights and protections in its national policies and discourse. Yet, in Santa Cruz, the state’s divergent policies on economic development and indigenous rights come to a head. Santa Cruz’ evolving socio-political tensions and the marked presence of the transnational soy industry demonstrate the human rights contradictions and challenges of a post-neoliberal, pro-indigenous Bolivia. 4 Saturnino M. Borras Jr. and Jennifer C. Franco, “Global Land Grabbing and Trajectories of Agrarian Change: A Preliminary Analysis,” Journal of Agrarian Change 12, no. 1 (2012), 34, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00339.x. As I define it, the global soy complex falls under Borras’ larger definition of land grabs and the “the explosion of (trans)national commercial land transactions and land speculation in recent years mainly, but not solely, around the large-scale production and export of food and biofuels.” 5 Bret Gustafson, "Manipulating Cartographies: Plurinationalism, Autonomy, and Indigenous Resurgence in Bolivia." Anthropological Quarterly 82, no. 4 (2009): 995, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20638677.995. 3 The indigenous social movement that propelled the Morales government to power in 2006 is now at a crossroads. How are the indigenous social movement actors in Santa Cruz mobilizing to realize their indigenous and socio-economic rights? Are their previous social movement models and strategies deployed to propel the MAS to power in 2006 sufficient? Or, given the evolving state-social relationship between themselves and the Morales administration, are these local social movement actors engaging and organizing differently? If new strategies are being adopted, to what aim, and with what success? Theoretical Framework To frame the research, three conceptual frames will be applied: global economic development models, the state-social relationship, and indigenous challenges to extractivism. This thesis builds off of definitions of neoliberalism and post-neoliberalism in the Latin American context. Latin American-style neoliberalism can be defined as the wave of structural adjustment policies and reforms that injected an ethos of the market-led incentives and social and economic policies.6 Bolivian neoliberalism in particular followed this definition and was typified by trade liberalization, privatization of industries, deregulation, and social spending