Controv?rsias sobre a Dimens?o Social da Agroecologia: uma compara??o entre os discursos pol?ticos da FAO e da Via Campesina

• Ano de defesa: 2020
• Autor(a) principal: Reinach, Mariana Homem de Mello
• Orientador(a): Ferreira, Andrey Cordeiro
• Banca de defesa: Schmitt, Cl?udia Job, Carvalho, Igor Simoni Homem de, Silva, Selmo Nascimento da
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Ci?ncias Sociais em Desenvolvimento, Agricultura e Sociedade
• Departamento: Instituto de Ci?ncias Humanas e Sociais
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Agroecologia; Ecologia Social; Sistemas agroalimentares; Natureza e Sociedade; Agroecology; Social Ecology; Agri-food systems; Nature and society
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: Ci?ncias Sociais
• Link de acesso: https://tede.ufrrj.br/jspui/handle/jspui/6288

The advocacy of agroecology has brought together diverse people and institutions, representing divergent and even antagonistic social strata and interests. The objectives of this research were, on the one hand, to carry out a critical reading on the global geopolitical context that accompanied the emergence and diffusion of agroecology throughout the world, and on the other, to identify the political and ideological content of what is stated as the ?social dimension of agroecology ?. To this end, we follow the development trajectory of the term ?agroecology? from the 1930s to the present day, as well as the trajectory of its antagonistic pair - conventional agricultural science anchored by the technological package of the Green Revolution and which in its second stage has been incorporating elements of technical ecologization and valorization of ?local? knowledge, integrating them in a subordinate way in the accumulation tables. We paid special attention to the period between the 1990s and the 2000s - the emergence of neo-extractivism and the proposals for ?sustainable development? and ?neoliberal multiculturalism? disseminated by multilateral organizations - which coincides with the moment when agroecology gains more prominence and space in the public debate. Then, we carried out an empirical analysis on the political discourses of Via Campesina and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) on agroecology. Because they have international reach, both organizations influence and are influenced by a wide range of actors and institutions, which makes their discourse particularly relevant. Using official documents, reports and statements from these entities, we were able to observe how the concept of agroecology was constructed in each case. Using Murray Bookchin's Social Ecology and Mikhail Bakunin's anarchist theory as theoretical lenses and analytical and interpretative tools, we identify that the fundamental distinction between "types" of agroecology lies in the fields of class differentiation, ideology, social organization, and the established relationship between humanity, society, and nature. We conclude that today there is a coexistence of agroecological knowledge that tends to assume a hegemonic-dominant-central form, aligned with the second stage of the Green Revolution and the centers of power, based upon a liberal economic policy as a government practice; and agroecological knowledge in its subaltern-peripheral-insurgent form, aligned with the peripheries of power, built from emancipatory practices in search of autonomy and territorialization of the peasantry. These two ?types? of agroecology, while excluding one another, reinforce each other, following the dialectic between authority and freedom.