• Contenu principal
  • Menu
OpenEdition Books
  • Accueil
  • Catalogue de 15893 livres
  • Éditeurs
  • Auteurs
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Partager
    • Facebook

    • X

    • Accueil
    • Catalogue de 15893 livres
    • Éditeurs
    • Auteurs
  • Ressources numériques en sciences humaines et sociales

    • OpenEdition
  • Nos plateformes

    • OpenEdition Books
    • OpenEdition Journals
    • Hypothèses
    • Calenda
  • Bibliothèques

    • OpenEdition Freemium
  • Suivez-nous

  • Lettre d’information
OpenEdition Search

Redirection vers OpenEdition Search.

À quel endroit ?
  • Éditions Quæ
  • ›
  • Update Sciences & Technologie
  • ›
  • Public policies and food systems in Lati...
  • ›
  • Part V - The challenges of specific food...
  • ›
  • Chapter 19 - Soy on one side, livestock ...
  • Éditions Quæ
  • Éditions Quæ
    Éditions Quæ
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Liens vers le livre
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Formats de lecture

    Plan

    Plan détaillé Texte intégral Introduction The indigenous peoples of Paraguay: the food issue The pressure of agribusiness on the sustainable food systems of indigenous people Indigenous people on the government agenda: the establishment of the National Program for Indigenous Peoples (PNPI) Final considerations Bibliographie Notes de bas de page Auteurs

    Public policies and food systems in Latin America

    Ce livre est recensé par

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Chapter 19 - Soy on one side, livestock on the other: the food issue with regard to indigenous people and public policies in Paraguay

    Silvia Aparecida Zimmermann, Diana Jazmin Britez Cohene et Noelia Riquelme

    p. 419-438

    Texte intégral Bibliographie References Notes de bas de page Auteurs

    Texte intégral

    Introduction

    1Paraguay has slightly more than seven million inhabitants, where around 1.6 million people (23.5%) live in households whose per capita income is lower than the cost of a basic food basket, and are therefore considered poor (DGEEC, 2020). Around 284,000 people, or 4% of the country’s population is in extreme poverty, where their monthly per capita income does even cover the cost of a minimum food basket. The highest proportion of those living in poverty and extreme poverty is found in rural areas, where 33% of the population is considered poor. Of the inhabitants considered to be in extreme poverty, 73% are also in rural areas (DGEEC, 2020).

    2The importance of the country’s agricultural sector (crops, livestock and forestry) is significant: the sector contributes an estimated 25% of GDP (IMAS, 2019). Data from the 2017 and 2018 Permanent Household Surveys show that 38% of the country’s total population lives in rural areas and 37% of the total employed population also lives in rural areas (DGEEC, 2020). According to the national production trade union, “agriculture, the economy and society are still very closely tied, especially in Paraguay, whose production system is sustained by agricultural crops and their respective chains, where rural areas are predominant” (UGP, 2015, p. 3).

    3As a result, although Paraguay has other important activities, the country maintains agrarian characteristics and supports agricultural and livestock production, with substantial inequality within rural areas in terms of income, land tenure, access to basic services and public policies (sectoral and non-sectoral), among other problems that contribute to the social vulnerability of the rural population (Wesz Jr., Zimmermann & Ríos, 2018; Riquelme, 2016). In addition, in recent years peasant and indigenous territories as well as food production have declined, and every year the country “increasingly depends on [food] imports to meet the demand for staple foods, which were previously provided by family farming” (Villalba, 2019, p. 7). Paraguay maintains food sovereignty only in its cassava and banana production. Likewise, family farming in Paraguay “accounts for 91% of the total number of agricultural holdings, while in terms of surface area, it totals only 6%” (Riquelme, 2016, p. 26).

    4The presence of indigenous people, especially the Guaraní, marks Paraguayan history and determines the agrifood system of farmers, who then migrate to the cities with their production, gathering and consumption practices (Doughman, 2011). A “people” is understood to be “a group of people who are characterized by their own culture and social life. In Paraguay, as in other places in America, during colonial times they were called a nation, because they had been born in a single territory, generally had their own language, and followed shared customs” (DGEEC, 2014, p. 129). In Paraguay, the areas held by indigenous people are gradually being reduced, which compromises not only their forms of production, gathering and consumption, but also those of the country’s entire population.

    5This chapter aims to present the productive, gathering and consumption reality of indigenous people in Paraguay, their agrifood system, and the national public policy initiatives for food sovereignty and security that attempt to guarantee the tekoporã, or “good life” in Guaraní, of indigenous people. The three dimensions of public policies – polity-politics-policy (Secchi, 2015; Souza, 2006) – are analysed. Polity deals with the institutional dimension of politics (i.e., the institutions and rules that establish how power is distributed and exerted). Politics deals with the conflicts and behavior of the actors (i.e., who are the political, state, economic and social actors involved?). Policy (or policies) refers to public policies, their operating rules, objectives, results and government actions (Jaime et al., 2013).

    6The methodology used for the analysis included a literature review; consultation of official documents and analysis of statistical data; and semi-structured interviews, conducted between November 2019 and August 2020 via WhatsApp and Skype, with political actors135 involved in implementing and studying food sovereignty and food security policies in Paraguay. For the qualitative study, interviewees were questioned about the policies they consider most relevant for food sovereignty and food security in their country, conflicts and progress. Seven experts were interviewed, including three with technical responsibility at the FAO; three representatives of organized civil society (national peasants’ movement of Paraguay – MCP; the National Coordinator of Organizations of Rural and Indigenous Women Workers – CONAMURI; and the national women farmers’ organization – ONAC); and one government representative (Senator Hugo Richer, member of the Parliamentary Front against Hunger).

    7After a brief introduction, this chapter discusses the data from the surveys of indigenous people in Paraguay, with a particular focus on data on the food system. The second part delves into the pressure of agribusiness on the sustainable food systems of indigenous people. Third, the establishment of the National Plan for Indigenous Peoples is described, where these peoples are recognized in national policy, while various segments of civil society have begun mobilizing for the development of public policy, a process that has been paralyzed by the Covid-19 pandemic.

    The indigenous peoples of Paraguay: the food issue

    8It is clear that the indigenous population of Paraguay has increased compared to previous censuses (table 19.1; figure 19.1). The data presented below comes from the third national census of indigenous people of 2012, from the General Directorate of Statistics, Surveys and Censuses (DGEEC), which produced several documents providing information that could shed light on the situation of the indigenous people of Paraguay and the sustainable agrifood systems where they live.

    Table 19.1. National and indigenous population by census year, 1981–2012, in Paraguay

    Population

    Census Year

    1981

    1992

    2002

    2012

    Total

    2,954,171

    4,152,588

    5,63,198

    6,435,218

    Indigenous

    38,703

    49,487

    89,169

    117,150

    % Indigenous

    1.3

    1.2

    1.7

    1.8

    Source: DGEEC (2014, p. 49).

    9The survey counted “493 [indigenous] communities and 218 villages or neighborhoods, totaling 711 communities, villages or neighborhoods, distributed in 19 towns, belonging to five linguistic groups, inhabiting 13 departments of the country and in Asunción. The people with the largest number of communities is the Mbyá Guaraní, and the one with the smallest number is the Tomárãho people” (DGEEC, 2015, p. 15). No indigenous communities were found in the Cordillera, Paraguarí, Misiones or Ñeembucú departments. The largest number of communities are in the eastern region, in the departments of Canindeyú and Caaguazú, with 106 (22%) and 59 (12%) communities, respectively. In the western region, the departments of Presidente Hayes (50 communities, 10%) and Boquerón (46 communities, 9%) had the largest communities (table 19.2).

    Figure 19.1. Departmental distribution of indigenous communities (%) in Paraguay, 2012. Source: DGEEC (2015, p. 34).

    Image

    *The map does not show villages or neighborhoods, only communities.

    Table 19.2. Departmental distribution of indigenous communities (%) in Paraguay, 2012

    Region

    Department

    Indigenous Communities

    Number

    %

    Eastern

    Asunción

    1

    0.2

    Concepción

    20

    4.1

    San Pedro

    28

    5.7

    Guairá

    8

    1.6

    Caaguazú

    59

    12

    Caazapá

    29

    5.9

    Itapúa

    31

    6.3

    Upper Paraná

    38

    7.7

    Central

    6

    1.2

    Amambay

    45

    9.1

    Canindeyú

    106

    21.5

    Western

    President Hayes

    50

    10.1

    Boquerón

    46

    9.3

    Upper Paraguay

    26

    5.3

    Total

    493

    100%

    Source: DGEEC (2015, p. 34).

    10The vast majority of indigenous peoples live in rural areas (91%, or 103,396 indigenous people), with a smaller number in urban areas (9%, or 9,858 indigenous people) (table 19.3).136 Approximately 60% of those who live in urban areas are in the Boquerón department and 19% in the Central department, with the rest distributed across the remaining departments. The majority of indigenous people who live in rural areas are in the departments of Presidente Hayes (24%), Boquerón (18%), Canindeyú (13%) and Amambay (11%) (DGEEC, 2015).

    Table 19.3. Indigenous population by urban and rural areas and sex, by people and age groups in Paraguay, 2012

    Age groups (years)

    Total

    Areas and sex

    Urban

    Rural

    Total

    Men

    Women

    Total

    Men

    Women

    Total

    Men

    Women

    Total

    113,254

    58,563

    54,691

    9,858

    5,042

    4,816

    103,396

    53,521

    49,875

    0-4

    16,516

    8,443

    8,073

    1,378

    718

    660

    15,138

    7,725

    7,413

    5-9

    16,330

    8,362

    7,968

    1,302

    663

    639

    15,028

    7,699

    7,329

    10-14

    14,704

    7,633

    7,071

    1,177

    620

    557

    13,527

    7,013

    6,514

    15-19

    13,777

    6,891

    6,886

    1,205

    616

    589

    12,572

    6,275

    6,297

    20-24

    11,024

    5,702

    5,322

    1,015

    513

    502

    10,009

    5,189

    4,820

    25-29

    8,200

    4,276

    3,924

    784

    403

    381

    7,416

    3,873

    3,543

    30-34

    6,687

    3,472

    3,215

    721

    350

    371

    5,966

    3,122

    2,844

    35-39

    5,944

    3,070

    2,874

    585

    300

    285

    5,359

    2,770

    2,589

    40-44

    4,665

    2,491

    2,174

    404

    208

    196

    4,261

    2,283

    1,978

    45-49

    4,038

    2,156

    1,882

    365

    184

    181

    3,673

    1,972

    1,701

    50-54

    3,407

    1,824

    1,583

    314

    158

    156

    3,093

    1,666

    1,427

    55-59

    2,429

    1,293

    1,136

    181

    98

    83

    2,248

    1,195

    1,053

    60-64

    1,922

    1,003

    919

    152

    72

    80

    1,770

    931

    839

    65-69

    1,576

    856

    720

    117

    55

    62

    1,459

    801

    658

    70-74

    929

    482

    447

    72

    37

    35

    857

    445

    412

    75-79

    645

    370

    275

    54

    32

    22

    591

    338

    253

    80-84

    292

    158

    134

    20

    11

    9

    272

    147

    125

    85-89

    118

    55

    63

    9

    2

    7

    109

    53

    56

    >90

    51

    26

    25

    3

    2

    1

    48

    24

    24

    11Men make up a slight majority (52%) of the population compared to women (48%), and most of the population is very young, with around 54% of the indigenous people surveyed under 19 years of age (figure 19.2). Around 81% of the economic activities carried out by Paraguayan indigenous people are related to the primary sector; the main activities are crop and livestock production, hunting, fishing and gathering. Approximately 10% of indigenous people work in the tertiary sector (provision of services), and 7% in the secondary sector (industries and construction) (DGEEC, 2014, p. 74).

    Figure 19.2. Indigenous population by age group and sex in Paraguay, 2012. Source: DGEEC (2014, p. 53).

    Image

    12Hunting and fishing activities are found in 655 (92%) of the indigenous communities, with fishing being the most common, followed by hunting of armadillos, lizards and deer, along with forest birds, wild pigs, coatis, capybaras, crocodiles, monkeys, ostriches, rabbits, guinea pigs, tapirs, anteaters, tortoises, tigers and others. Indigenous peoples also raise livestock, with the activity found in 693 (97%) communities. Chickens, ducks and guineafowl were raised in 643 (93%) communities; other animals included dogs, cattle, pigs, goats, horses, sheep, mules and donkeys and oxen.

    13A total of 630 (87%) indigenous communities gathered food from forests, fields or other places for their food supply, including wild honey (78%), guavira (41%), carob (31%), green beans (29%) and coconuts (28%). Other foods included guembe, tuna, heart de palm, wild mango, yvaviju, chaga mushrooms, dwarf yatay palm, chili pepper, Brazilian cherry, among others (DGEEC, 2015). The practice of food gathering is historical among the Guaraní people, who have always lived in a symbiotic relationship with nature:

    The Guaranís had already developed a food system that was extremely well suited to the ecosystem of the northern part of the Río de la Plata basin. They produced more than enough food to meet their needs (Meliá, 1988). At the same time, theirs was a civilization of leisure: their food production and gathering was very efficient, allowing them sufficient free time for physical activities, games, arts, family and educating their children and young people, and developing a deep knowledge of the human body and nature (Bertoni, 2009). According to Bertoni, the Guaraní diet was almost vegetarian; given their agricultural achievements, their extensive knowledge of various wild fruits, and the abundance of fish in the rivers and streams, they did not overly depend on hunting (Bertoni, 2009) (…) Guaraní agriculture showed good agroforestry management, with its impact offset by changing crops periodically, opening new areas by slashing and burning, and leaving the old areas to recover and grow back into forests. Their agricultural production was extremely diversified; they had more than 24 species of manioc, 21 species of sweet potato and 13 species of corn. These base crops were accompanied by numerous species of squash, legumes including various beans, and peanuts, which the Guaraní were the first to master (Noelli, 1994) (Doughman, 2011, p. 81).

    14Crafts are an important part of the life of the communities, villages and barrios; around 535 (75%) produce crafts, where women do most of this type of work (68%). Among the materials used are vase plant (53%), wood (49%), wool (39%), elephant ears (36%) and palm leaf (35%). Other materials include takuapi, seeds, takuara, cotton, feathers, mud, wild animal skins and giant bulrush. Some materials are produced in the communities and others are collected from nature, which means that sustainable production practices must be ensured around the indigenous communities so that the forests remain diversified (DGEEC, 2015).

    15The census identified a total of 28,926 indigenous dwellings (table 19.4); most are private, while eight are collective dwellings (religious communities, hospitals or health centers, educational boarding schools, etc.). A total of 27,905 of the individual indigenous dwellings are occupied, while for the others, people may be temporarily absent or the buildings are undergoing repairs or construction, or are abandoned (DGEEC, 2014). In these dwellings, the indigenous people were asked if the members carried out subsistence activities. Of those who responded, hunting, fishing, food gathering and cultivation for their own consumption were important for a significant portion of the population. Respondents mentioned product sales most with regard to growing crops.

    Table 19.4. Dwellings occupied by inhabitants who have at least one household member engaged in subsistence activities in Paraguay, by activity, 2012

    Type of livelihood activity

    Total

    Destination of the Activity

    Sales

    Consumption

    Sales and Consumption

    Not reported

    Hunting

    13,090

    336

    11,098

    1,455

    201

    Fishing

    15,104

    304

    13,690

    958

    152

    Food gathering from the forest, field or other places

    14,632

    330

    12,406

    1,612

    284

    Cultivation of crops

    18,356

    547

    13,843

    3,772

    194

    Source: DGEEC (2014, p. 161).

    16Other census data on food dynamics of the indigenous people is related to the way they obtain supplies (table 19.5). Most make cash purchases of foods in supermarkets, small grocery stores or stands, followed by indigenous grocery stores, cooperatives and warehouses/middlemen.

    Table 19.5. Dwellings occupied by inhabitants by means of obtaining food supplies in Paraguay, 2012

    Place where food is obtained

    Total

    Forma de obtención de Provista

    Cash

    Credit

    Voucher

    In exchange for work

    Bartering

    Other

    Not reported

    Country total

    27905

    23,016

    2,163

    453

    1,086

    103

    283

    801

    Supermarket/

    small grocery/

    stand

    15,265

    13,471

    1,010

    246

    423

    24

    43

    48

    Middlemen

    2,096

    1,768

    218

    –

    83

    5

    15

    7

    Warehouse

    1,004

    557

    163

    4

    223

    48

    4

    5

    Indigenous grocery

    6,036

    4,923

    662

    92

    241

    14

    54

    50

    Cooperative

    2,369

    2,132

    80

    100

    39

    –

    8

    10

    Other

    391

    120

    23

    7

    56

    11

    158

    16

    Not reported

    744

    45

    7

    4

    21

    1

    1

    665

    Source: DGEEC (2014, p. 156).

    17Over the years, it is clear that indigenous populations in Paraguay have declined and that their forms of food production, gathering and consumption have changed. However, what the following data shows is that a large part of these changes resulted from a change in the Paraguayan agrifood system due to the expansion of agribusiness.

    The pressure of agribusiness on the sustainable food systems of indigenous people

    18The food of indigenous people is marked by gathering, hunting and fishing, due to a historical experience of living in harmony with nature. However, the advance of agribusiness in Paraguay has altered this reality. The census shows that indigenous communities face similar problems as Paraguayan peasant family farmers, since they have problems with land tenure, access to natural resources, access to infrastructure (roads, housing, potable water, health services, etc.), among others. Census respondents mentioned difficulties associated with land tenure and recognition of rights, land titles, extension, use, the institutions that grant authorizations, official processes to legalize their situations, renting of land to third parties, and natural resources. The most frequently cited problems were a significant reduction of wild animals, spraying of agricultural chemicals by neighbours and contamination of waterways (DGEEC, 2015).

    19Over the years there has been a redistribution of the indigenous population by region in Paraguay (figure 19.3). In 1981 almost two-thirds of the indigenous people lived in the western region, but today more than 50% live in the eastern region, as can be seen in the figure below.

    Figure 19.3. Distribution of the indigenous population by region (%) in Paraguay, according to census year for the 1981–2012 period. Source: DGEEC (2014, p. 54).

    Image

    20To a certain extent, the redistribution of indigenous people occurred under the pressure of large producers, who plan land use and manage machinery. Most of these producers are foreigners, and especially Brazilians, Germans, Japanese and Mennonites. The Mennonites arrived in the western region in the 1930s and later also acquired land in the eastern region.

    In 1947, the Mennonites arrived in the area. They bought large tracts of land (also belonging to the aforementioned industrial Paraguay), including those occupied by the indigenous people. (…) Over time, they took over more and more land, until they reached the land on which our communities were still living. Until about six years ago, the situation was very difficult. We received an offer from the Mennonites themselves to rent our land, and we decided to rent 15 of the 30 hectares we have. Today, soy and wheat plantations surround our houses; and when they (the tenants, who are foreign entrepreneurs) spray, they affect us, killing our animals (chickens) and we start to feel unhealthy… (…) Meeting our needs, mainly for our sons and daughters, forces us to rent our land to the Mennonites. We know that, in time, they may take our land. But we have no other alternative if we want to eat. The money we receive is not enough…. The land is very good, very fertile, of a red clay color. We want to work on a production plan, to try to definitively recover our land and stop renting it (Report by an apud indigenous person, Baquero & Gómez, 2012, p. 422).

    21The reports point to the difficulties that indigenous people suffer in guaranteeing that their sustainable food systems are maintained. As with peasant family farmers, indigenous people are also pressured by foreign land acquisitions, whether by purchase, undue appropriation by entrepreneurs or renting. Furthermore, the penetration of foreign companies makes the situation more critical, and especially those located in the eastern region, in the departments bordering Argentina and Brazil, which have fertile land of high quality and constitute environmental spaces rich in basic natural resources: water and mountains. (Baquero & Gómez, 2012).

    22The problems related to land tenure in indigenous communities differ. Of the 493 indigenous communities, 143 (29%) indicate problems related to land tenure, with most (66%) in the eastern region compared to the western region (34%) (CENSO, 2015, p. 41). Among indigenous communities with issues, 47 (33%) declare having problems related to provision or renting land to third parties, 42 (29%) faced undue appropriation by business owners, 31 (22%) mentioned invasion by rural inhabitants, 23 (16%) superposition of legal titles, among other difficulties. In the eastern region, the majority of problems are found in the departments of Canindeyú, Caaguazú and Amambay, and in the western region, in the departments of Presidente Hayes and Boquerón.

    23The indigenous census recorded that the renting or provision of land is an important source of income for 182 indigenous communities (approximately 37%), where 95 communities rented to Paraguayans, 70 to Brazilians and 28 to others. Land that is rented or provided to third parties is used for extensive crop farming (93 communities), grazing (58 communities) and extraction of wood and coal production (12 communities). In the eastern region, most land is used for extensive crop farming, while grazing is more common in the northern part of the eastern region and central part of the western region. These divisions coincide with the dynamics of soy production and livestock grazing, and the regions where agribusiness is expanding (Wesz Jr., 2020; Silveira et al., 2019; Schmalko & Sarta, 2018). Not only is there pressure from grazing, but also pressure from agricultural products, and especially soy. Table 19.6 shows the increase between 2002 and 2017 of livestock production, while crop production is shown in table 19.7 for 2017.

    Table 19.6. Number of livestock production in 2002 and 2017 in Paraguay

    Department

    Livestock production

    Increase

    Increase (%)

    2002

    2017

    2002-2017

    2002-2017

    Concepción

    651,631

    1,158,562

    506,931

    78

    San Pedro

    1,082,258

    1,319,848

    237,590

    22

    Guairá

    195,297

    150,923

    –44,374

    –23

    Caaguazú

    596,781

    552,926

    –43,855

    –7

    Caazapá

    294,950

    327,899

    32,949

    11

    Itapúa

    484,768

    436,357

    –48,411

    –10

    Upper Paraná

    392,751

    203,418

    –189,333

    –48

    Misiones

    461,154

    489,705

    28,551

    6

    Paraguari

    418,617

    471,508

    52,891

    13

    Ñeembucu

    398,768

    582,099

    183,331

    46

    Cordillera

    231,757

    254,156

    22,399

    10

    Central

    79,362

    57,604

    –21,758

    –27

    Amambay

    590,544

    970,061

    379,517

    64

    Canindeyú

    571,758

    713,660

    141,902

    25

    President Hayes

    1,695,542

    2,525,699

    830,157

    49

    Boquerón

    1,033,356

    1,949,310

    915,954

    89

    Upper Paraguay

    198,887

    1,659,916

    1,461,029

    735

    Total

    9,378,181

    13,823,651

    4,445,470

    47

    Source: Adapted from Schmalko and Sarta (2018, p. 59).

    Table 19.7. Land area occupied by crop production in 2017 in Paraguay

    Department

    Soybean (ha)

    Corn (ha)

    Wheat (ha)

    Rice (ha)

    Sugarcane (ha)

    Sunflower (ha)

    Total

    Concepción

    38,860

    7,223

    –

    50

    344

    44

    46,521

    San Pedro

    325,397

    103,539

    11,050

    3,610

    2,508

    1,465

    447,569

    Guairá

    12,603

    4,749

    3,400

    39

    44,693

    161

    65,645

    Caaguazú

    444,938

    146,442

    85,000

    492

    17,444

    7,909

    702,225

    Caazapá

    168,045

    56,598

    55,250

    16,017

    5,930

    2,929

    304,769

    Itapúa

    603,521

    70,352

    183,600

    41,511

    654

    14,646

    914,284

    Upper Paraná

    926,158

    269,632

    127,500

    810

    325

    8,788

    1,333,213

    Misiones

    35,137

    4,749

    8,500

    63,364

    2,262

    513

    114,525

    Paraguari

    48

    4,839

    –

    1,794

    25,468

    –

    32,149

    Ñeembucu

    –

    4,839

    –

    8,185

    108

    37

    13,169

    Cordillera

    –

    3,958

    –

    3,063

    7,291

    –

    14,312

    Central

    –

    341

    –

    798

    3,215

    –

    4,354

    Amambay

    169,955

    45,545

    10,200

    176

    1,475

    220

    227,571

    Canindeyú

    650,220

    216,695

    25,500

    93

    6,215

    4,189

    902,912

    President Hayes

    –

    361

    –

    –

    39

    –

    400

    Boquerón

    4,774

    8

    –

    –

    –

    –

    4,782

    Upper Paraguay

    344

    22

    –

    –

    –

    –

    366

    Total

    3,380,000

    939,892

    510,000

    140,002

    117,971

    40,901

    5,128,766

    Source: Adapted from Schmalko and Sarta (2018, p. 43).

    24The concentration of extensive crop farming, the production of pasture for livestock, as well as the extraction of wood in and around the indigenous communities’ lands has generated innumerable difficulties. As natural resources are affected, so are the food sources of the indigenous peoples due to the importance that hunting, fishing and gathering play in these communities. The census shows that of the total number of indigenous communities surveyed, 254 (52%) communities declared some difficulty with regard to natural resources. The most frequently reported difficulty is the significant decrease of wild animals (134 communities), followed by agrochemical spraying (109 communities) and contamination of waterways (101 communities). The problems related to agrochemical spraying and waterway contamination are mainly found in the eastern region, which coincides with the regions with the highest production of annual crops of soybeans, corn, wheat, rice, sugar cane and sunflower (Schmalko & Sarta, 2018).

    Indigenous people on the government agenda: the establishment of the National Program for Indigenous Peoples (PNPI)

    25Paraguay’s 1992 constitution marked a new stage because it recognized Guaraní as the official language of the country, established a series of recognitions and a legal framework of national and international laws regarding the protection of indigenous rights in Paraguay (Bote, 2019). For Bote, in the history of Paraguay, there were few moments of recognition of indigenous peoples in national politics until this period. One rare example was the creation of the Department of Indigenous Affairs in 1958, which occurred due to defense-related issues of the Cold War, where “it was necessary to control the movements in the jungle areas where the opposing forces were hiding” (Ibid., p. 62). Bote also noted that the most important achievement during president Stroessner’s time was the Statute of the Indigenous Communities, which recognized the legal personality of the communities and their land regime, and considered the Customary Law, although besides the “unclear and in some cases, contradictory provisions of this law, its most evident lack was the absence of a sanction mechanism for non-compliance” (Ibid., p. 64).

    26In the 2000s, after efforts by the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare, representatives of the indigenous people, civil society organizations, cooperation agencies and the Interinstitutional Indigenous Health Committee, the National Indigenous Health Policy was created through Resolution No. 143/2008, coordinated by the Directorate General of Assistance to Vulnerable Groups. In 2009, the Ministry of Public Health validated the National Indigenous Health Policy, and made the Directorate General of Health Service Development and the Directorate of Primary Health Care responsible for the monitoring and execution of the policy (MPS, 2009).

    27The policy mentions the health problems of indigenous people due to the changes in the agrifood systems in Paraguay. For example, the massive spraying and indiscriminate use of pesticides in the country have caused acute and chronic poisoning, while the practice “also affects their subsistence, since they drastically reduce their sources of food and natural medicine” (MPS, 2009, p. 16). The policy also emphasizes a concern with “changes in their lifestyles, reduction of their habitat, migration to urban areas, changes in eating habits, etc.” (Ibid., p. 16), which can lead to high blood pressure and diabetes, among other illnesses, and that “the primary occupation of indigenous people is aggravated today by high deforestation” resulting in “the destruction of the area from which they obtained the majority of their food” (Ibid., p. 17). For the reasons described above, among the specific objectives of the National Indigenous Health Policy, we point out the specific objective of “creating alliances with involved institutions to carry out actions related to food security” (Ibid., p. 25). Thus, the National Indigenous Health Policy continues to be an important action that also deals with food security.

    28In recent years, the government has promoted the creation of a National Program for Indigenous Peoples (PNPI), which aims to establish guidelines for action around seven thematic areas (land, legal framework, housing, education, production systems, food security and uncontacted peoples) to create a national policy developed by different indigenous leaders who have a deep understanding of the socioeconomic reality of their community (Bote, 2019).

    29Taking into account this process and the reported reality, in 2014 the Inter-Institutional Committee on Food Security and Nutrition was created, headed by the Paraguayan Indigenous Institute. According to the report of one of the FAO representatives interviewed for this research: “(…) between 2012 and 2013 a consultancy [at the FAO] was developed where participatory dialogues were held with representatives of indigenous people and institutions to work on a food security diagnosis and proposal (…)”

    30The result of the process, which took more than a year of work, was a diagnosis of the situation of indigenous peoples in Paraguay (MAG, 2014). This diagnosis was carried out within the framework of the TCP/RLA/3403 Project “Food Security and Nutrition Policies and Indigenous People in Paraguay,” coordinated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, through its Department of Technical Assistance to Indigenous Communities under the Directorate of Agricultural Extension, the support of the Paraguayan Indigenous Institute (INDI), and the cooperation of the FAO. As stated by the FAO representative in Paraguay: “The result of this process, which took more than a year of work, was a diagnostic document about the food security of indigenous people in Paraguay, and a proposal to work on a Food and Nutritional Security Plan. (…) This first process was released by the Ministry of Agriculture through this department of Technical Assistance to Indigenous Communities” (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    31The diagnosis concluded that public policies have a low impact on indigenous people and lack differentiated strategies. There is also a dispersion of interinstitutional coordination bodies in the indigenous context, and the level of institutionalization is low. Indigenous participation is low in influential forums for public policy, compounded by the existing weakness of indigenous coordination. The problem persists with regard to the recovery, assurance and possession of ancestral territories, as well as long-standing structural issues and an ignorance about the culture and worldview of these people around food security (MAG, 2014, p. 15). The diagnosis was the first work specifically carried out with indigenous people, and was conducted between 2012 and 2013.

    32In 2015, the follow-up of the diagnosis took place with the leadership of INDI and its Resolution 302/2015, which created the Inter-Institutional Committee for Food Security and Nutrition. Its purpose is to strengthen the INDI by coordinating interinstitutional actions with indigenous people in the framework of the Food Security Program in an advisory capacity and to follow up on the commitments made by public and private institutions and indigenous organizations in this area (STP, 2016, p. 47). In the process of building the Committee, representatives of departmental governments were incorporated. The changes in the presidency of INDI contributed to the discontinuity of the meetings and decisions for the creation of the plan:

    In the second stage, now with the leadership of INDI, to strengthen this forum for coordination. We worked… it was not easy to establish a common forum and work on the objective, the regulations of this group. We needed several forums for dialogue and discussion, and we ended up having institutionalized this interinstitutional committee, where local and departmental governments were also included in this process (…) And we ended this process with the institutionalization of this interinstitutional committee in the INDI. Since then, the INDI president has changed, there have been several sticking points on standby until now (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    33The Committee is comprised of an executive component and two indigenous organizations. In 2018, the Committee was responsible for the creation of the “Protocol for the process of consultation and free, prior and informed consent of indigenous people living in Paraguay,” which basically guarantees the right of indigenous people to be consulted about any project that could affect their traditional lands, territories, natural resources and livelihoods. The protocol also guarantees the right of the affected indigenous peoples to give their free, prior and informed consent to the proposal, as well as to decide if they want to participate in the consultations or to terminate the consultations at any time. The Paraguayan state is required to hold the consultation (Paraguay, Decree No. 1039/2018). Thus:

    Specific actions were carried out with this committee (…) because this committee is presided over by an executive coordinator, who nominated INDI and two indigenous organizations alongside it, which are responsible for the executive coordination of this committee (…) through this body. The executive coordination was the one that also supported the reactivation of the process of creating the protocol for consultation and free, prior and informed consent. This had already been under discussion for several years with the indigenous people and the executive coordination reactivated and able to revalidate the protocol to presented it to the executive, which was then approved. Today, after several back and forths, we already have Decree 1039 for the consultation and free, prior and informed consent (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    34Since 2015, Paraguay has been subject to the commitment to carry out informal free consultation for the creation of the National Plan for Indigenous Peoples (PNPI) of Paraguay, which was carried out between 2016 and 2019. The process of building the PNPI was coordinated by the INDI with a lead team that includes the Technical Secretariat for Economic and Social Development Planning. The Directorate of Indigenous Education of the MEC, the Department of Technical Assistance to Indigenous Communities of the Directorate of Agrarian Extension of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Directorate General of Human Rights of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the National Secretariat of Culture, the Guarani Federation, the Federation for the Self-determination of Indigenous People, and the FAO were also involved in the discussions.

    35The plan, which has a 2020 timeline that is almost ready, is the result of a participatory construction in which approximately 600 community leaders recognized by the INDI and representing the indigenous people of the departments took part (STP, 2019). The plan presents thematic issues defined by the lead team, based on the particular contexts of each area, such as land, territory, natural resources, spirituality, food security, craftwork, women, identity, housing, children, health, education and youth, among others. In the words of the FAO representative, it is understood that:

    The plan has four strategic focus areas. The first focus area deals with conceptual issues, on the worldview of indigenous people, where we touch on quite specific themes that can strengthen the identity of indigenous people. In which we speak of participation, free determination, identity, culture, worldview and above all what is essential for them, which are natural resources, land and territory, truth. The second focus area is based on social and economic rights, where we have all the thematic issues related to basic services: health, education, food security, roads, electricity (…) During this consultation process, we worked on understanding their vision to be able to build the plan with them and put forward the main issues. We developed the thematic focus areas with them (…) The first point with them was what was their feeling, their worldview with regard to this thematic focus area (…) and after this analysis, after they told us how they see this thematic focus areas, we tried to get a deeper understanding of the current situation that they are going through in their communities with a broader vision in the department and at the national level. After that, we had a proposal for improvement. We also discussed with them from their worldview, how they see, what we should do, what they should also do to improve the situation in which they are in terms of this thematic focus area. (…) Then, we had another axis that is basically directed at the population… so, for those with special needs, such as women, children, elderly people, children living on the street. (…) Each thematic focus area has general and specific objectives, central measures, and as I said, we are seeing apart from the institutions which existing initiatives can contribute and which initiatives/programs have to be established in order to be able to comply with the central measures, really (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    36While Covid-19 paralyzed the final implementation of the plan, one interviewee said that it was possible that it would be finalized by August. Despite not having a specific public policy, the indigenous peoples of Paraguay have access to policies that guarantee their sovereignty and food security, although it is fragile as mentioned in the diagnosis (MAG, 2014). Accordingly:

    On the one hand, this is the budget issue. However, more than anything, it was due to the political instability that we had in the institution, in the governing body, the INDI. Because we had leadership changes and when this happened, it took us time to be able to bring the new leader up to speed, and then when we started to start up, leadership changed again. So this process was not continuous, it was really a challenging process, and today we already have the draft plan of indigenous peoples that in April we had to approve with the leaders that were designated in each territory, and well, because of the pandemic we could not develop that forum to do so and have the plan validated by the indigenous peoples and then request an extension by the executive. Today we are hoping that we can create this forum, we are assessing, analyzing alternatives to be able to get the approvals so that we don’t miss out again this year and still not have the plan. And this plan is the most historic and the biggest thing that we have here at a national level for the indigenous peoples. So, this is a broad process that we are reaching towards the end (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    37Another initiative emerged between 2015 and 2018. The Joint Programme on Food Security and Nutrition (PC-SAN) was created and implemented with the financial support of the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation and six other United Nations agencies, funds and programs, under the leadership of the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization, the FAO, the World Food Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund, UN Women and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. On the government side, nine public institutions were involved, under the leadership of the Technical Secretariat for Economic and Social Development Planning, the Paraguayan Institute of Indigenous People, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Ministry of Education and Science, the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare, the Secretariat of Environment, the Secretariat of Social Action, the Ministry of Women, the Secretariat of National Emergency and the support of the governors and municipalities of the PC-SAN’s area of influence. Around 3,000 indigenous families and 600 rural families benefitted, with Spain contributing USD 1.5 million in the period from 2015 to 2018 (AECID, 2018; STP, 2018).

    38The PC-SAN aimed to protect the vulnerable population, ensure food and nutritional security and reduce child and maternal malnutrition in the departments of Presidente Hayes, Caazapá and Caaguazú. The program’s main contributions were: i) coordination of actions between the USF and regional health centres to regularly deliver milk to communities; ii) production of participatory diagnostics focused on sustainable lifestyles of those involved; iii) promotion of food production, with provision of seeds and technical support to participating indigenous and rural families; iv) installation of school gardens, orchards and demonstration plots and teaching of sustainable management practices; v) promotion of the commercialization of products (agricultural and handicrafts) and income generation, the creation of fairs and teaching about the processes of commercialization, from product presentation to marketing and linking with local markets through the fairs; vi) income generation capacity building through leadership training for women to promote social and financial inclusion; vii) promotion of “Semilla Róga” seed banks, to ensure the survival of native species and seeds for the next season; viii) development of public spaces for safe water and hygiene adapted to rural population and indigenous communities; ix) training and technical inputs for honey gathering; and x) participatory production of intercultural training and food security materials with indigenous peoples (STP, 2018). With the Covid-19 pandemic, indigenous people have become even more fragile, especially those who live with food insecurity. They were included in the beneficiaries of the Ñangareko Food Security Program (ñangareko means “take care of” in Guaraní). The program consists of monetary transfers of 230,000 Paraguayan guaraní (USD 35137), which can be used only for the purchase of food and hygiene products or direct delivery of food. Data from the National Emergency Secretariat, on April 4, 2020, show that more than 100,000 kilograms of food were distributed to approximately 6,000 indigenous families in the towns of Fuerte Olimpo, Carmelo Peralta, Puerto Sastre and Isla Margarita in the department of Alto Paraguay (AIP, 2020).

    Table 19.8. The dimensions of the Policy for Indigenous Peoples in relation to food sovereignty and security in Paraguay, 2020

    Policy dimensions

    Policy

    Polity

    Politics

    National Indigenous Health Policy (2009 to present)

    Resolution No. 143/2008: the Ministry of Public Health validated the National Indigenous Health Policy

    General Directorate for the Development of Health Services and the Directorate of Primary Health Care.

    Mesa Interinstitucional de Salud Indígena

    Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare

    Organization of civil society

    Federation for the Self-determination of Indigenous People (FAPI)

    National Coordinator of Pastoral Indigenous – CONAPI

    Cooperation agencies

    Directorate General for Assistance to Vulnerable Groups

    National Indigenous Peoples Plan (PNPI)

    Interinstitutional Commission on Food and Nutritional Security (SAN)

    Paraguayan Indigenous Institute (INDI)

    Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock

    Department of Technical Assistance to Indigenous Communities

    Directorate of Agricultural Extension

    Resolution 302/2015 (INDI)

    Decree No. 1039/2018 – Protocol for the process of consultation and free, prior and informed consent with indigenous peoples living in Paraguay.

    United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

    600 community leaders recognized by the INDI

    Joint Program for Food Security and Nutrition (PC-SAN) (2015–2018)

    Technical Secretariat for Economic and Social Development Planning

    Paraguayan Indigenous Institute (INDI)

    Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock

    Ministry of Education and Science

    Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare

    Secretariat of Environment

    Secretariat of Social Action

    Ministry of Women

    National Emergency Secretariat

    Governments and municipalities in the area of influence of the PC-SAN (in the Presidente Hayes, Caazapá and Caaguazú departments)

    Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID)

    Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO)

    United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

    World Food Programme (WFP)

    United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

    UN Women

    Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

    39Within public policies for indigenous people (table 19.8), the actions of indigenous organizations in Paraguay stand out. Palau et al. (2018, pp. 94-95) indicate that the organizations ask “for respect of their territories, compliance with legal requirements, public policies for communities, and that the National Indigenous Institute (INDI) serve as the representative body for request for social movements to the Paraguayan state administered by an indigenous representative.” The same study touches on the complex relationship between the Paraguayan state and indigenous people, above all due to the colonial heritage that historically excluded indigenous people from territories and public policies. Demands for public policies from two associations for the country’s indigenous people (the Mesa de Articulación Indígena y Mujeres Indígenas del Paraguay and Indigenous Women of Paraguay), report the stalled efforts of Territorios (“territories”), an INDI administered by an indigenous representative, the non-compliance with Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization and the United Nations Declaration on the right to prior consultation, but above all, the lack of public policies for indigenous communities.

    40In recent years, many of the organizations were mobilized for the approval of Act No. 6286/2019 on “Defense, Restoration and Promotion of Family Farming,” approved and published on May 25, 2019. The law’s first article recognizes the responsibility of the state in the:

    (…) recovery, preservation and stimulation of the economy; social protection and improvement of the quality of life of rural families and indigenous people, so that their economic and productive endeavors develop with dignity through the implementation of programs that facilitate access to land, housing, public services, communications and transportation; training and generation of science and technology for the countryside, price stabilization mechanisms, markets, as well as adequate technical and financial assistance to the entire production chain linked to rural family farming. (Paraguay, Act No. 6286/2019)

    41Having a law does not guarantee that the Paraguayan state will direct its actions to farmers and indigenous people, but it is a political instrument for social organizations to “fight for rural reform that democratizes access to land and recovers its role as a producer of healthy food for the population” (Riquelme, 2020, p. 40).

    Final considerations

    42Although indigenous people, especially the Guaraní people, have a long history in Paraguay, despite the fact that their recognition in public policies is very recent. Moreover, indigenous people face various structural problems in their everyday lives, where “poverty, exclusion and disenfranchisement are issues that seriously threaten the development of these populations, keeping them enclosed in a vicious cycle that is very difficult to escape” (Rojas & Bote, 2019, p. 83).

    43The creation and execution of the census of indigenous peoples was fundamental for the visibility of indigenous people in Paraguay, and the recent construction of the PNPI demonstrates the mobilization of civil society involved in the planning of the plan, which exerts pressure to include indigenous people in the government agenda. With regard to progress, the interviews underlined a decline in investment from the INDI. Rojas and Bote (2019, p. 84) point out that in “2019 the Paraguayan Indigenous Institute’s budget fell by 35% compared to the prior year.”

    44The food system and habits are a reflection of the ways in which they are organized. In today’s world, the expansion of agribusiness – mainly soy production and livestock farming – has forced indigenous people to abandon their territory and move to the cities. New intensive production practices (use of modified seeds, fertilizers and pesticides) and occupation of the territory increase deforestation, which has an enormous impact on the indigenous people, their food system, their production practices, food gathering, production of handicrafts and food consumption. For Rojas Brítez (2012, p. 14), “it is the dispossession of the Guaraní people from their ancestral lands that marks the accelerated destructuring of their tekoporã. It is now what defines their sociocultural profile.”

    45It is therefore necessary to reflect on the permanence of indigenous people, their knowledge, and their sustainable contribution to the Paraguayan population:

    With so little, you do so much with them. You do not need many resources. Often, your support, your presence, your accompaniment can do a lot for them. That is what I always say, they are so few here in Paraguay, in terms of population percentage, and the fact that they are as they are is because in reality at the moment of planning, at the moment of implementing actions, we are not really trying to improve their living conditions (…) There is no recipe, (…) you may have a base to start from, here the important thing is to listen and build on that together. There is a lot to do for them. And Paraguay has much to give to indigenous people” (Interviewee 1, June 13, 2020).

    46The Federation for the Self-Determination of Indigenous Peoples (FAPI) in its Five-Year Strategic Plan 2017–2021 states:

    In recent decades, the pressure for land and territories of indigenous people and communities has increased, leading to dispossessions and violations of collective rights, usurpations and evictions of communities from their traditional lands for the subsequent dismantling and cultivation of soybeans or other cereals in the eastern region and cattle farming in the western region. A very worrying factor to highlight in the framework of the accelerated expansion of the agricultural frontier is the attempt to modify Act No. 904/81, which guarantees the right to land for indigenous people, although its parameters do not sufficiently contemplate the cultural aspects in terms of the quality and quantity necessary for the cultural reproduction of indigenous people (FAPI, 2017, p. 09).

    47In Paraguay, a visible process of “disenfranchisement of the rights of indigenous people over their lands, territories and resources, vital for their survival and dignity, which generates conflicts and violations of human rights” (Guereña & Rojas Villagra, 2016, p. 83) in rural areas to contact the population while changing its food system, its forms of food production, gathering and consumption. It was observed that the process does not only affect indigenous people in the country, but also the entire population (we recommend reading of the chapters 5 and 10 of this book). In this sense, one cannot fall into the trap of thinking that the PNPI will have strength by itself. Thus, in addition to ensuring that the PNPI is implemented, other processes in Paraguay must be rethought, such as rural development, the advance of agribusiness, and the various forms of production and exploitation of nature. Otherwise, the soy-and-livestock diptych will continue to suffocate the agrifood system of the country, the indigenous people and also of the entire Paraguayan nation.

    Bibliographie

    Des DOI sont automatiquement ajoutés aux références bibliographiques par Bilbo, l’outil d’annotation bibliographique d’OpenEdition. Ces références bibliographiques peuvent être téléchargées dans les formats APA, Chicago et MLA.

    Format

    • APA
    • Chicago
    • MLA
    (2020). Revista Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura. https://doi.org/10.36920/esa-v28n1
    Wesz Junior, V. J., Zimmermann, S. A., & Carreras Rios, F. D. (2018). LA INSTITUCIONALIZACIÓN DE POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS PARA LA AGRICULTURA FAMILIAR EN PARAGUAY. Raizes Revista de Ciencias Sociais e Economicas. https://doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2018.v38.40
    Estudos Sociedade E Agricultura. Revista Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura, February 1, 2020. doi:10.36920/esa-v28n1.
    Wesz Junior, Valdemar João, Silvia Aparecida Zimmermann, and Francisca Danaides Carreras Rios. “LA INSTITUCIONALIZACIÓN DE POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS PARA LA AGRICULTURA FAMILIAR EN PARAGUAY”. Raízes: Revista De Ciências Sociais E Econômicas. Raizes Revista de Ciencias Sociais e Economicas, October 10, 2018. doi:10.37370/raizes.2018.v38.40.
    “[]”. Estudos Sociedade E Agricultura, vols. 28, no. 1, Revista Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura, 1 Feb. 2020. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.36920/esa-v28n1.
    Wesz Junior, Valdemar João, et al. “LA INSTITUCIONALIZACIÓN DE POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS PARA LA AGRICULTURA FAMILIAR EN PARAGUAY”. Raízes: Revista De Ciências Sociais E Econômicas, vols. 38, no. 1, Raizes Revista de Ciencias Sociais e Economicas, 10 Oct. 2018, pp. 80-97. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2018.v38.40.

    Cette bibliographie a été enrichie de toutes les références bibliographiques automatiquement générées par Bilbo en utilisant Crossref.

    References

    ABC Color. (2018, September 3). Recortaron 24.000 millones al Indi. Editorial AZETA. https://www.abc.com.py/edicion-impresa/locales/recortaron-24000-millones-al-indi-1737063.html

    AECID. (2018, July 30). Programa Conjunto de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional. https://www.aecid.org.py/programa-conjunto-de-seguridad-alimentaria-y-nutricional/

    Agencia de Información Paraguaya (AIP). (2020, April 4). Gobierno benefició hasta la fecha a 41.662 familias por medio de Ñangareko. Ministerio de Tecnologías de la Información y Comunicación. https://www.ip.gov.py/ip/gobierno-beneficio-hasta-la-fecha-a-41-662-familias-por-medio-de-nangareko/

    Baquero, F.S., & Gómez, S. (2012). Dinámicas del mercado de la tierra en América Latina y el Caribe: concentración y extranjerización. FAO. https://www.fao.org/3/i2547s/i2547s.pdf

    Da Silveira, C.V., Da Silveira, G.S., Kukiel, E.D.G., & Vieira, R.M. (2019, May 27–31). Dinâmica regional da economia paraguaia: o caso da soja e carne [Conference presentation]. XVIII ENANPUR, Natal, Brazil. http://anpur.org.br/xviiienanpur/anaisadmin/capapdf.php?reqid=1031

    Dirección General De Estadística, Encuestas y Censos. (2014). Pueblos indígenas en el Paraguay. Resultados finales 2012 de población y viviendas. Gobierno Nacional de Paraguay. https://www.ine.gov.py/Publicaciones/Biblioteca/indigena2012/Pueblos%20indigenas%20en%20el%20Paraguay%20Resultados%20Finales%20de%20Poblacion%20y%20Viviendas%202012.pdf

    Dirección General De Estadística, Encuestas y Censos. (2015). Censo de comunidades de los pueblos indígenas, resultados finales 2012. Gobierno Nacional de Paraguay. https://www.ine.gov.py/Publicaciones/Biblioteca/comunidad%20indigena/Censo%20de%20Comunidades%20de%20los%20Pueblos%20Indigenas%20Resultados%20Finales%202012.pdf

    Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos. (2020). Principales resultados de pobreza monetaria y distribución de ingreso – 2019. Gobierno Nacional de Paraguay. https://www.ine.gov.py/Publicaciones/Biblioteca/documento/5781_Pobreza%20Monetaria%202019_Boletin.pdf

    Doughman, R. (2011). La chipa y la soja: la pugna gastro-política en la frontera agroexportadora del este paraguayo. BASE Investigaciones Sociales. http://www.baseis.org.py/adjuntos/La%20chipa%20y%20la%20soja.pdf

    Federación por la Autodeterminación de los Pueblos Indígenas (FAPI). (2017). Plan Estratégico Quinquenio 2017–2021. https://www.fapi.org.py/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Plan-Estratégico-FAPI.pdf

    Gómez Bote, J.M. (2019). La política indigenista en el Paraguay desde 1992 hasta nuestros días: Integración y desafíos de las comunidades nativas actuales [Master’s thesis, University of Bergen]. Bergen Open Research Archive. https://hdl.handle.net/1956/20215

    Guereña, A., & Rojas Villagra, L. (2016). Yvy jára: Los dueños de la tierra en Paraguay. OXFAM.

    Imas, V.J. (Ed.). (2019). Seguridad y soberanía alimentaria en Paraguay. Sistema de indicadores y línea de base. Centro de Análisis y Difusión de la Economía Paraguaya. https://www.conacyt.gov.py/sites/default/files/upload_editores/u294/seguridad_soberania_alimentaria_cadep.pdf

    Jaime, F.M., Dufour, G., Alessandro, M., & Amaya, P. (2013). Introducción al análisis de políticas públicas (1st ed.) Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche. https://www.unaj.edu.ar/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Pol%C3%ADticas-públicas2013.pdf

    Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, Paraguay. (2014). Informe Nacional – Diagnóstico y propuestas para el desarrollo de una política pública de seguridad alimentaria y nutricional de los pueblos indígenas en Paraguay. FAO. https://www.fao.org/3/i3863s/i3863s.pdf

    Ministerio de Educación y Ciencias, Paraguay. (2018). Decreto nº 1039, Protocolo para el proceso de consulta y consentimiento libre, previo e informado con los pueblos indígenas que habitan en el Paraguay. https://www.mspbs.gov.py/dependencias/portal/adjunto/7fdaf1-DECRETO1039Protocolodeconsultayconsentlibreprevioeinformadopueblosindigenas.pdf

    Ministerio de Salud Pública, Paraguay. (2009). Política nacional de salud indígena. https://www.mspbs.gov.py/dependencias/portal/adjunto/a25a59-PoliticaNacionaldeSaludIndigenaParaguay.pdf

    Palau, M., Coronel, C., Irala, A., & Yuste, J.C. (2018). Canalización de demandas de los Movimientos Sociales al Estado paraguayo. Base Investigaciones Sociales.

    Riquelme, Q. (2016). Agricultura familiar campesina en el Paraguay. Notas preliminares para su caracterización y propuestas de desarrollo rural. Centro de Análisis y Difusión de la Economía Paraguaya.

    Riquelme, Q. (2020). Ley de la Agricultura Familiar Campesina en Paraguay, Ley n°6286: logro y desafío para las organizaciones campesinas e indígenas. Centro de Documentación y Estudios. https://www.cde.org.py/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Estudio-Ley-6286-Paraguay-1.pdf

    Rojas Brítez, G. (2012). Los pueblos guaraníes en Paraguay: una aproximación socio-histórica a los efectos del desarrollo dependiente (Documento de trabajo no. 13). Centro de Estudios y Educación Popular Germinal. http://germinal.pyglobal.com/pdf/documento_trabajo_13.pdf

    Schmalko, C.A., & Sarta, A.M. (2018). Mapeando el agronegocio en el Paraguay. Base Investigaciones Sociales.

    Secchi, L. (2014). Políticas públicas. Conceptos, esquemas de análise, casos práticos (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning.

    Secretaria Técnica de Planificación del Desarrollo Económico y Social, Paraguay. (2016). Gobierno Aperto Paraguay. Informe final de autoevaluación del 2do plan de gobierno abierto. Julio 2014 a Junio 2016. https://informacionpublica.paraguay.gov.py/public/10697123-AutoevaluacinfinalSegundoPAGApdf-AutoevaluacinfinalSegundoPAGA.pdf

    Secretaría Técnica de Planificación del Desarrollo Económico y Social, Paraguay. (2018). Apuntes de experiencias y lecciones aprendidas: Esta es la historia que construimos en el periodo 2013–2018. https://www.stp.gov.py/v1/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/STP_-Apuntes-de-experiencias-y-lecciones-aprendidas-2013-2018.pdf

    Secretaría Técnica de Planificación del Desarrollo Económico y Social, Paraguay. (2019, September 26). Avanza construcción del Plan Nacional de Pueblos Indígenas en Paraguay. https://www.stp.gov.py/v1/avanza-construccion-del-plan-nacional-de-pueblos-indigenas-en-paraguay/content/uploads/2014/12/pnd2030.pdf

    10.1590/S1517 :

    Souza, C. (2006). Políticas públicas: uma revisão na literatura. Revista Sociologias, 8(16), 20–45. doi:10.1590/S1517-45222006000200003

    Unión de Gremios de la Producción. (2015). Agricultura y desarrollo en Paraguay.

    Villalba, A.M. (2019). Políticas públicas diferenciadas para la agricultura familiar campesina. Paraguay (2004–2017). CLAEH.

    10.36920/esa-v28n1 :

    Wesz, Jr., V.J. (2020). A rentabilidade dos produtores de soja no Paraguai: concentração e exclusão. Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura, 28(1), 156–179. doi:10.36920/esa-v28n1-7

    10.37370/raizes.2018.v38.40 :

    Wesz, Jr., V.J., Zimmermann, S.A., & Carreras Rios, F.D. (2018). La institucionalización de políticas públicas para la agricultura familiar en Paraguay. Raízes: Revista de Ciências Sociais e Econômicas, 38(1), 80–97. doi:10.37370/raizes.2018.v38.40

    Notes de bas de page

    135 We are grateful to the interviewees for their time and the support of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) as part of the public call MCTI/CNPq nº 01/2016 and the support of the Federal University for Latin American Integration through the calls PRPPG/UNILA no. 110/2018, PRPPG/UNILA no. 137/2018 and PRPPG/ no. 80/2019.

    136 The information only includes data from the national population and household census of indigenous peoples, with a total of 113,254 indigenous people living in urban and rural areas (DGEEC, 2015).

    137 Dollar amounts are converted based on the February 16, 2021 quotation table on the Banco Central del Paraguay website. Available at: https://www.bcp.gov.py/webapps/web/cotizacion/monedas

    Auteurs

    • Silvia Aparecida Zimmermann

      Professor at the Universidade Federal da Integraçao Latino-Americana (UNILA), researcher of the Observatorio de Políticas Públicas para la Agricultura (OPPA/UFRRJ) and Observatorio de las Agriculturas Familiares Latinoamericanas (AFLA/UNILA/UFRGS). Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil. silvia.zimmermann@unila.edu.br

    • Diana Jazmin Britez Cohene

      Student in rural development and food security at the Universidade Federal da Integraçao Latino-Americana (UNILA), Brazil. jazminbritez2010@hotmail.com

    • Noelia Riquelme

      Graduated with a degree in rural development and food security from the Universidade Federal da Integraçao Latino-Americana (UNILA). Former program assistant at FAO Paraguay. (In memoriam)

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

    Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

    Voir plus de livres
    Paroles de chercheurs

    Paroles de chercheurs

    Environnement et interdisciplinarité

    Évelyne Brun, Jean-François Ponge et Jean-Claude Lefeuvre

    2017

    La question des échelles en sciences humaines et sociales

    La question des échelles en sciences humaines et sociales

    Sébastien Boulay et Sylvie Fanchette (dir.)

    2019

    Systèmes agraires et changement climatique au Sud

    Systèmes agraires et changement climatique au Sud

    Les chemins de l'adaptation

    Hubert Cochet, Olivier Ducourtieux et Nadège Garambois (dir.)

    2019

    Les terres agricoles face à l’urbanisation

    Les terres agricoles face à l’urbanisation

    De la donnée à l’action, quels rôles pour l’information ?

    Roel Plant, Pierre Maurel, Éric Barbe et al. (dir.)

    2018

    Sociologie des changements de pratiques en agriculture

    Sociologie des changements de pratiques en agriculture

    L’apport de l’étude des réseaux de dialogues entre pairs

    Claude Compagnone

    2019

    Construire des politiques alimentaires urbaines

    Construire des politiques alimentaires urbaines

    Concepts et démarches

    Caroline Brand, Nicolas Bricas, Damien Conaré et al. (dir.)

    2017

    Services écosystémiques et protection des sols

    Services écosystémiques et protection des sols

    Analyses juridiques et éclairages agronomiques

    Carole Hermon (dir.)

    2018

    Manger en ville

    Manger en ville

    Regards socio-anthropologiques d’Afrique, d’Amérique latine et d’Asie

    Nicolas Bricas, Olivier Lepiller, Audrey Soula et al. (dir.)

    2020

    La santé globale au prisme de l'analyse des politiques publiques

    La santé globale au prisme de l'analyse des politiques publiques

    Sébastien Gardon, Amandine Gautier et Gwenola Le Naour

    2020

    Agroforesterie et services écosystémiques en zone tropicale

    Agroforesterie et services écosystémiques en zone tropicale

    Recherche de compromis entre services d’approvisionnement et autres services écosystémiques

    Josiane Seghieri et Jean-Michel Harmand (dir.)

    2019

    Méthodes d'investigation de l'alimentation et des mangeurs

    Méthodes d'investigation de l'alimentation et des mangeurs

    MIAM

    Olivier Lepiller, Tristan Fournier, Nicolas Bricas et al. (dir.)

    2021

    Télédétection et modélisation spatiale

    Télédétection et modélisation spatiale

    Applications à la surveillance et au contrôle des maladies liées aux moustiques

    Annelise Tran, Eric Daudé et Thibault Catry (dir.)

    2022

    Voir plus de livres
    1 / 12
    Paroles de chercheurs

    Paroles de chercheurs

    Environnement et interdisciplinarité

    Évelyne Brun, Jean-François Ponge et Jean-Claude Lefeuvre

    2017

    La question des échelles en sciences humaines et sociales

    La question des échelles en sciences humaines et sociales

    Sébastien Boulay et Sylvie Fanchette (dir.)

    2019

    Systèmes agraires et changement climatique au Sud

    Systèmes agraires et changement climatique au Sud

    Les chemins de l'adaptation

    Hubert Cochet, Olivier Ducourtieux et Nadège Garambois (dir.)

    2019

    Les terres agricoles face à l’urbanisation

    Les terres agricoles face à l’urbanisation

    De la donnée à l’action, quels rôles pour l’information ?

    Roel Plant, Pierre Maurel, Éric Barbe et al. (dir.)

    2018

    Sociologie des changements de pratiques en agriculture

    Sociologie des changements de pratiques en agriculture

    L’apport de l’étude des réseaux de dialogues entre pairs

    Claude Compagnone

    2019

    Construire des politiques alimentaires urbaines

    Construire des politiques alimentaires urbaines

    Concepts et démarches

    Caroline Brand, Nicolas Bricas, Damien Conaré et al. (dir.)

    2017

    Services écosystémiques et protection des sols

    Services écosystémiques et protection des sols

    Analyses juridiques et éclairages agronomiques

    Carole Hermon (dir.)

    2018

    Manger en ville

    Manger en ville

    Regards socio-anthropologiques d’Afrique, d’Amérique latine et d’Asie

    Nicolas Bricas, Olivier Lepiller, Audrey Soula et al. (dir.)

    2020

    La santé globale au prisme de l'analyse des politiques publiques

    La santé globale au prisme de l'analyse des politiques publiques

    Sébastien Gardon, Amandine Gautier et Gwenola Le Naour

    2020

    Agroforesterie et services écosystémiques en zone tropicale

    Agroforesterie et services écosystémiques en zone tropicale

    Recherche de compromis entre services d’approvisionnement et autres services écosystémiques

    Josiane Seghieri et Jean-Michel Harmand (dir.)

    2019

    Méthodes d'investigation de l'alimentation et des mangeurs

    Méthodes d'investigation de l'alimentation et des mangeurs

    MIAM

    Olivier Lepiller, Tristan Fournier, Nicolas Bricas et al. (dir.)

    2021

    Télédétection et modélisation spatiale

    Télédétection et modélisation spatiale

    Applications à la surveillance et au contrôle des maladies liées aux moustiques

    Annelise Tran, Eric Daudé et Thibault Catry (dir.)

    2022

    Voir plus de chapitres

    Chapter 11 - Food sovereignty and security policy in Paraguay: a study from the standpoint of policy, politics and polity

    Silvia Aparecida Zimmermann, Diana Jazmin Britez Cohene et Noelia Riquelme

    Voir plus de chapitres

    Chapter 11 - Food sovereignty and security policy in Paraguay: a study from the standpoint of policy, politics and polity

    Silvia Aparecida Zimmermann, Diana Jazmin Britez Cohene et Noelia Riquelme

    Accès ouvert

    Accès ouvert

    ePub

    PDF

    PDF du chapitre

    Acheter

    Édition imprimée

    Éditions Quæ
    • amazon.fr
    • decitre.fr
    • mollat.com
    • leslibraires.fr
    • placedeslibraires.fr

    135 We are grateful to the interviewees for their time and the support of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) as part of the public call MCTI/CNPq nº 01/2016 and the support of the Federal University for Latin American Integration through the calls PRPPG/UNILA no. 110/2018, PRPPG/UNILA no. 137/2018 and PRPPG/ no. 80/2019.

    136 The information only includes data from the national population and household census of indigenous peoples, with a total of 113,254 indigenous people living in urban and rural areas (DGEEC, 2015).

    137 Dollar amounts are converted based on the February 16, 2021 quotation table on the Banco Central del Paraguay website. Available at: https://www.bcp.gov.py/webapps/web/cotizacion/monedas

    Public policies and food systems in Latin America

    X Facebook Email

    Public policies and food systems in Latin America

    Vous pouvez vous connecter à votre bibliothèque à l’adresse suivante : https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque

    Si vous avez des questions, vous pouvez nous écrire à access[at]openedition.org

    Public policies and food systems in Latin America

    Vérifiez si votre bibliothèque a déjà acquis ce livre : authentifiez-vous à OpenEdition Freemium for Books.

    Vous pouvez suggérer à votre bibliothèque d’acquérir un ou plusieurs livres publiés sur OpenEdition Books. N’hésitez pas à lui indiquer nos coordonnées : access[at]openedition.org

    Vous pouvez également nous indiquer, à l’aide du formulaire suivant, les coordonnées de votre bibliothèque afin que nous la contactions pour lui suggérer l’achat de ce livre. Les champs suivis de (*) sont obligatoires.

    Veuillez, s’il vous plaît, remplir tous les champs.

    La syntaxe de l’email est incorrecte.

    Référence numérique du chapitre

    Format

    Zimmermann, S., Britez Cohene, D., & Riquelme, N. (2022). Chapter 19 - Soy on one side, livestock on the other: the food issue with regard to indigenous people and public policies in Paraguay. In J.-F. Le Coq, C. Grisa, S. Guéneau, & P. Niederle (éds.), Public policies and food systems in Latin America. Versailles: Éditions Quæ. Consulté à l’adresse https://books.openedition.org/quae/43320
    Zimmermann, Silvia Aparecida, Diana Jazmin Britez Cohene, et Noelia Riquelme. « Chapter 19 - Soy on One Side, Livestock on the Other: The Food Issue With Regard to Indigenous People and Public Policies in Paraguay ». In Public Policies and Food Systems in Latin America, édité par Jean-François Le Coq, Catia Grisa, Stéphane Guéneau, et Paulo Niederle. Versailles: Éditions Quæ, 2022. https://books.openedition.org/quae/43320.
    Zimmermann, Silvia Aparecida, et al. « Chapter 19 - Soy on One Side, Livestock on the Other: The Food Issue With Regard to Indigenous People and Public Policies in Paraguay ». Public Policies and Food Systems in Latin America, édité par Jean-François Le Coq et al., Éditions Quæ, 2022, https://books.openedition.org/quae/43320.

    Référence numérique du livre

    Format

    Le Coq, J.-F., Grisa, C., Guéneau, S., & Niederle, P. (éds.). (2022). Public policies and food systems in Latin America. Versailles: Éditions Quæ. Consulté à l’adresse https://books.openedition.org/quae/42980
    Le Coq, Jean-François, Catia Grisa, Stéphane Guéneau, et Paulo Niederle, éd. Public Policies and Food Systems in Latin America. Versailles: Éditions Quæ, 2022. https://books.openedition.org/quae/42980.
    Le Coq, Jean-François, et al., éditeurs. Public Policies and Food Systems in Latin America. Éditions Quæ, 2022, https://books.openedition.org/quae/42980.
    Compatible avec Zotero Zotero

    1 / 3

    Éditions Quæ

    Éditions Quæ

    • Plan du site
    • Se connecter

    Suivez-nous

    • Flux RSS

    URL : https://www.quae.com

    Email : serviceclients@quae.fr

    Adresse :

    RD 10

    78026

    Versailles

    France

    OpenEdition
    • Candidater à OpenEdition Books
    • Connaître le programme OpenEdition Freemium
    • Commander des livres
    • S’abonner à la lettre d’OpenEdition
    • CGU d’OpenEdition Books
    • Accessibilité : partiellement conforme
    • Données personnelles
    • Gestion des cookies
    • Système de signalement