World Development Vol. 36, No. 12, pp.

2874–2887, 2008
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
0305-750X/$ - see front matter
www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev
doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.11.017

Social Movements and the Dynamics of

Rural Territorial Development in Latin America
ANTHONY BEBBINGTON
University of Manchester, UK

RICARDO ABRAMOVAY
Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil

and

MANUEL CHIRIBOGA *
Rimisp-Latin American Center for Rural Development, Ecuador
Summary. — This special section brings together 4 of the 12 studies conducted within a research
program analyzing the relationships among social mobilization, governance, and rural develop-
ment in contemporary Latin America. The introduction gives an overview of the contemporary sig-
nificance of social movements for rural development dynamics in the region, and of the principal
insights of the section papers and the broader research program of which they were a part. This
significance varies as an effect of two distinct and uneven geographies: the geography of social
movements themselves and the geography of the rural political economy. The effects that move-
ments have on the political economy of rural development also depend significantly on internal
characteristics of these movements. The paper identifies several such characteristics. The general
pattern is that movements have had far more effect on widening the political inclusiveness of rural
development than they have on improving its economic inclusiveness and dynamism.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Key words — social movements, territorial rural development, Latin America, environmental
governance, participation

1. SOCIAL MOVEMENT AND NEW ily technocratic and centralized approach to

‘‘RURAL QUESTIONS’’ IN LATIN territorial development, ethnic and grassroots
AMERICA politics have become increasingly important in
debates over rural development, be this as a re-
The last two decades have witnessed signifi-
cant changes in the patterns and processes of
territorially based rural development in Latin * The authors are grateful to Rimisp-Latin American
America. Beyond local differences, certain gen- Center for Rural Development for support in preparing
eric trends seem apparent. First, there has been this supplement, and especially to Julio Berdegué. The
a noticeable return to large-scale public and supplement reports on research supported, via Rimisp,
private investment in programs of infrastruc- by Canada’s International Development Research Cen-
tural and economic development. This is most ter. Anthony Bebbington also acknowledges with thanks
evidently so in investments in hydrocarbons, a UK Economic and Social Science Research Council
minerals, roads, and water management and Professorial Research Fellowship (RES-051-27-0191)
the massive South American Initiative for that supported much of his time in the joint preparation
Integrating Regional Infrastructure (IIRSA). 1 of this chapter and latter stages of the editorial process.
Second, and in sharp contrast to this necessar- Final revision accepted: November 13, 2007.
2874
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2875

sult of armed protest (Mexico), the emergence costs and potential synergies depend on spatial
of national indigenous (Ecuador), and landless arrangements, and that much socio-political ac-
or family farmers (Brazil) movements, the tion is itself motivated and oriented by territo-
movement of indigenous organizations into rially based identities. For policy, Schejtman
government (Bolivia and Ecuador), or the and Berdegué’s approach implies devising terri-
emergence of organizations contesting this torially based (rather than sectoral) interven-
infrastructural expansion (e.g., Peru, Argen- tions that explicitly seek to build and catalyze
tina, and Chile) (Bebbington, 2007; Lucero, virtuous relationships between productive and
2007; Ospina, Larrea, Arboleda, & Santillana, institutional change and that absolutely do
2006; Wolford, 2004). Third, the relative signif- not focus only on the agricultural economy as
icance of agriculture in the rural and peasant a vehicle for addressing rural poverty and
economy continues to diminish, and off-farm exclusion (see Graziano Da Silva, 2002; Rear-
incomes (including transfers from long distance don et al., 2001). A successful RTD policy
migration and government programs) are would, then, be one that built such synergies
becoming ever more important (Reardon, in a way that strengthened inclusive territorial
Berdegué, & Escobar, 2001). Fourth, in the pol- identities, reduced poverty, and created more
icy domain a range of rural and social pro- opportunities for poor people to participate in
grams have emerged that offer levels of formal both the economics and politics of rural devel-
participation that are unprecedented in the re- opment.
gion (Arriagada, 2005; Melo, 2007). Fifth, pro- These new rural questions and the concept of
cesses of decentralization, however uneven and RTD constitute the context for the papers in
incomplete, have given sub-national govern- this supplement. Together they analyze the
ments and local organizations an increased role roles that social movements have played in
in rural development (Chiriboga, 1995; Schejt- the emergence and governance of these new
man & Berdegué, 2007; Tendler, 1997). Sixth, dynamics of territorial change, as well as in
the environmental question has become the promotion of alternative, more inclusive
increasingly visible, debated, and central to dis- forms of rural development.
cussions not only of rural development but also
of national development and regional integra-
tion as suggested by the recent interventions 2. SOCIAL MOVEMENTS,
of the former Ecuadorian Minister for Foreign GOVERNANCE, AND RTD:
Affairs, Maria Fernanda Espinosa (Espinosa, THE PAPERS IN BRIEF
2007).
In the face of such changes, if once it was Much writing on social movements is in-
possible to talk of the ‘‘agrarian question’’ (de flected with a normative commitment that, even
Janvry, 1981) this is no longer the case. One in critical research, is ultimately sympathetic to
now has to talk of the ‘‘rural question,’’ and and hopeful about the potential of social move-
quite conceivably—given the depth of urban– ments in fostering processes of social change
rural articulation—the ‘‘territorial question.’’ that lead toward societies that are more partic-
Given these deepening market and rural–urban ipatory, just and able to deliver human devel-
linkages, the progressive globalization of parts opment effectively. 3 At their inception, the
of the rural economy, the (still limping) steps studies on which these papers are based demon-
toward increased decentralization and partici- strated a similar inflection, for the question that
pation, among others, as well as the more gen- they sought to address was ‘‘to what extent
eral ‘‘spatial turn’’ in economics, Schejtman have social movements contributed to forms
and Berdegué (2007) 2 have argued that rural of territorial governance that foster develop-
dynamics must now be approached—both ana- ment that reduces poverty and social inequali-
lytically and in policy terms—through the lens ties while also conserving the environment?’’
of what they call rural territorial development The program uniting the papers was motivated
(RTD). For the purposes of analysis, this lens by the belief that this was indeed possible, and
implies considering the productive and institu- the purposes of the individual research projects
tional dimensions of rural change together, were to demonstrate this and explore the causal
and taking territories (comprising urban and processes at work that lead to such types of ef-
rural spheres and a variety of sectors, both agri- fects. 4 As we will see, the extent to which the
cultural and non-agricultural) as the unit of studies ultimately demonstrated this relation-
analysis on the grounds that both transaction ship varied greatly, and over time the research
2876 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

question became instead a hypothesis that was farmers’ movements, AfroBrazilian move-
only partially accepted. ments, agricultural workers’ movements, and
This overarching question/hypothesis was dam-affected peoples’ movements. The first of
also embedded in the conception of RTD the papers by Bebbington and colleagues ex-
already outlined because, at a more abstract plores the effects that environmental justice
level, the notion was that social movements movements and movement organizations have
would induce certain forms of institutional had on paths of territorial development in areas
change that would in turn lead to forms of pro- affected by the current expansion of large-scale
ductive change. While each paper struggles with mining in Latin America. Working from the
the linear conception of causality implied in concept of ‘‘co-production,’’ this paper argues
this general question (with several seeing more that territorially based rural development can
interactive relationships in which, at certain be understood as the product of negotiation,
points, movements can be understood as conse- interaction, and conflicts among a range of so-
quences of productive change rather than vice cial actors each of whom operate with distinct
versa), they all address the relationships be- ideas about the nature of ‘‘development’’ and
tween mobilization, institutional change, and the place of rural areas within national growth
productive change. As will become apparent, and distribution strategies. In the contempo-
this triad of relationships proved to be a partic- rary context of Latin America—one marked
ularly productive lens for understanding the by spectacular growth of investment in extrac-
potential, and limits, of movements’ contribu- tive industries—the co-production of rural
tions to enhance justice and well-being. To territories by social movements, mining invest-
anticipate, the program’s results suggested that ment, and government is of particular signifi-
movements often induced institutional changes cance, as various forms of social movement
in the sphere of governance, but that these have begun to question and challenge elite
institutional changes rarely translated into pro- arguments about the positive role of ‘‘modern’’
ductive changes. mining in fostering rural development. The
Just as they share the same big question, the interactions between these movements and
papers also have in common a basic definition patterns of investment—each of which have
of social movements. This shared conception distinct geographical forms—contribute signifi-
sees social movements as processes of mobiliza- cantly to the forms and trajectories of develop-
tion that involve protest and a demand for ment currently emerging in the rural highlands
some sort of alternative society and develop- of Latin America. The paper explores this
ment (Escobar, 1995; Peet & Watts, 2004). co-production of rural territories through a
The papers also share the notion of social comparison of two locations in the Andean
movements as processes of mobilization that highlands, each with significant mineral depos-
stretch (often discontinuously) across space its but which have been characterized by quite
and time, linking persons, and groups identified distinct development trajectories over the last
with particular claims and values. In this sense, two decades. One of these sites (Cajamarca in
they see movements as much more than just Peru) has been dramatically transformed by
organizations, even if it is certainly the case that mining, while the other (Cotacachi in Ecuador)
formal organizations play vital roles as coordi- continues to be an agrarian economy. Focusing
nators, resource mobilizers, and leaders of in particular on the forms of social mobiliza-
movements (Crossley, 2002). That said, the pa- tion in each site, and the particular interactions
pers differ in the extent to which the movements between movements and government, the com-
they deal with seek radical alternatives as op- parison identifies factors inherent to these
posed to reformist ones, or pursue confronta- movements and their alliances that appear to
tional tactics as opposed to conciliatory ones. determine the ways in which they affect devel-
The papers also differ in the extent to which opment processes in mine-affected areas.
they focus on the roles of particular social A focus on the internal dynamics of move-
movement organizations, or the broader move- ments and movement organizations also char-
ment process. acterizes the second paper, prepared by
The papers in this supplement 5 discuss mate- Abramovay, Magalhães, and Schroder. The
rial from Brazil (two), Ecuador (two), and Peru authors take a critical look at the involvement
(one) 6 and deal with a range of identity and is- of two distinct social movement organizations
sue-based movements: indigenous people’s in processes of territorial development in the
movements, environmental justice movements, south of Brazil. They ask how far these move-
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2877

ment organizations’ have helped foster forms of authors advance is that the entry of the indige-
territorially based development that are more nous movement into elected local government
participatory and economically inclusive—and has led to a significant democratization of
in particular, how far they have been able to municipal and provincial administration, at
catalyze economic innovations that can further least in the two cases they study in depth. This
such inclusion. The paper demonstrates a fun- democratization, however, is of a specific type,
damental difference between the behavior of which they label ‘‘neo-corporatist.’’ It is not a
rural workers’ unions and family farmers’ cred- democratization based on the extension of indi-
it cooperatives. In the union-based movement, vidual citizenship (though this has also become
shared identity and strong ties (Granovetter, stronger) so much as on the elaboration of
1983) are central to the governance and internal participatory institutional frameworks, which
coherence of the movement. However, over serve as channels for the expression of orga-
time and partly because of the emphasis on nized social movement demands. That is, the
these strong ties and the failure to cultivate participation that they promote is less one of
new, weaker ties with actors other than central citizens and rather more one of organizations
government, union capacity to innovate and (and especially organizations with members
contribute to territorially based development that have typically not participated in decision
has become progressively weaker, and unions making about the use of local government
have slowly become trapped within the iron resources). The second question that the article
cage of bureaucratization. The credit coopera- addresses is whether this neo-corporatist
tives provide a contrast because, even though approach is better able to promote territorial
they share many of the same social and political economic development processes than prior
origins as the unions, and likewise cultivate forms of local government. Here results are
strong internal ties, they have also invested in more mixed, and the capacity of these ‘‘move-
the development of a series of weaker ties with ments in government’’ to foster viable income-
actors who are neither part of their membership generating activities for poor rural areas re-
base nor of their immediate social world. In mains limited. Indeed, while the level and qual-
particular, they have developed weak links with ity of participation in Cotacachi (one of the
economic actors, links that facilitate their ac- territories they study) are truly remarkable,
cess to information on the local economy and the area remains among Ecuador’s very poorest
help them identify new opportunities for their counties. Here is the resonance with Abram-
members. The cooperatives also open up their ovay et al.—the tension between participation
internal governance processes to external and innovation seems to continue when move-
assessment. These external relationships (of ments move into government. On balance, the
linkage and accountability) create incentives authors conclude that forms of neo-corporatist
and governance arrangements that lead these government fostered by the indigenous move-
cooperatives to play a stronger leadership role ment can have positive impacts on economic
in local development than do unions. They development, but that they are confronted by
have helped the organizations within the coop- two serious limitations. First, it continues to
erative movement co-produce a brand new (and be difficult to foster a process of territorial eco-
wide reaching) credit market that responds to nomic development that effectively addresses
member needs while also respecting the formal the distinct interests that exist among different
rules governing Brazil’s financial service sector. community organizations. Second, the negative
The study by Ospina, Ortiz, and Arboleda effects of the wider economic context in which
resonates in various interesting ways with that local territories find themselves remain beyond
of Abramovay et al. even though its focus the control of the local government and thus
seems at first sight quite different. The paper of any participatory mechanisms that they
deals with the experiences of indigenous move- may foster.
ment organizations in local government in The final paper takes us back to Brazil and is
Ecuador. It is written from the perspective of written by Vera Schattan and colleagues. It
a research center that has a longstanding takes as its point of departure the explosion
relationship with the highland indigenous of participatory institutions in Brazil’s recent
movement in Ecuador, while having retained history—with the Brazilian state estimating
a critical posture at the same time. This combi- that at the beginning of the decade there
nation of commitment and critique is apparent were 27,000 or so such forums in existence
in their paper. The first main argument that the across Brazil’s 5,507 municipalities. The paper
2878 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

analyzes the cases of two such institutions in well beyond the mere (and very common) crea-
the rural São Paulo region: one intended to fos- tion of round tables. This finding resonates
ter participation in discussion of regional water with Bebbington et al. who conclude that round
resource management (including dam building) tables in mining conflicts have done little to
and the other seeking ways of combining envi- change the dynamics of development or rela-
ronmental conservation and economic growth tionships of power.
in areas of pressure on Atlantic rainforests.
The authors ask how far social movements
and movement organizations are, in practice, 3. MOVEMENT DYNAMICS AND
able to take advantage of the existence of such TERRITORIAL DYNAMICS:
institutions, and through them influence the CONTRADICTIONS IN SEARCH
dynamics of territorially based development. OF A SYNTHESIS
In particular, they ask how far the potential
of movements to influence RTD through such These papers, and the research program of
forums is influenced by institutional design which they are a part (Bengoa, 2007), share
and management, with a special focus on the two principal conclusions. First, social move-
mechanisms for selecting councilors, and the ments have sought change and innovation in
use of facilitative techniques during forum governance arrangements far more than they
meetings to aid the participation of historically have in economic processes. They have strug-
excluded and relatively voiceless groups. They gled for increased levels of inclusion and partic-
also assess the hypothesis that the more evenly ipation in decision making, local planning, and
distributed the seats among different interest policy formation, and have more generally
groups in the forum, the more likely it is that sought greater transparency and accountability
the forum will deliver proposals deemed viable in the governance of territorially based
by all. development processes. They have done this
The conclusions of this final paper make in various ways—through pushing for and then
sobering reading while also illuminating several participating in round tables, commissions,
important analytical issues. The authors con- budget management committees, and oversight
clude quite forcefully that design and manage- councils (Bebbington et al.; Schattan et al.);
ment really do matter in determining how far and sometimes through seeking direct partici-
forums are genuinely participatory, and how pation in local government through the elec-
far movements can use them to leverage greater toral process (Ospina et al.). Indeed, they
influence. Yet even though these forums were have enjoyed significant success in opening up
conceived in order to expand participation, in and democratizing this governance.
actual fact design criteria have in both cases The second and related conclusion is, how-
led to the exclusion of both the poorest and ever, that ‘‘in spite of [social movements’]
the economically most powerful actors. This is significant achievements and victories . . . These
because these criteria state that only organized institutional changes have neither given rise to
groups can participate (akin to Ospina et al.’s nor stimulated transformative processes that
neo-corporatist model), and these two groups modify in any significant sense the opportuni-
are not formally organized. Likewise, the cases ties of rural people and particularly of the
make clear that the quality of facilitation mat- poorest and most socially excluded’’ (Abram-
ters greatly in determining how far movement ovay et al., 2007, p. 24). 7 Explaining this
knowledge gains credence and visibility in these pattern implies comparative analysis of the in-
forums, or how far it is crowded out by techni- ner workings of the movements themselves.
cal knowledge. Finally, and of most concern— This analysis suggests several characteristics
but also analytical interest—is the conclusion of these movements that are a source of politi-
that participation in these forums does not lead cal strength, but that simultaneously weaken
actors to change their views of development, their capacity to foster pro-poor economic
nor their sympathies and alliances. Instead the transformations. 8 In this section, we elaborate
internal dynamics of these forums replay on these characteristics.
already existing political alliances in the re- Movements gain strength and cohesion
gion—alliances structured in large measure by from a strong identity in which members
party politics. The implication is that the types are aware of sharing a number of cultural
of institutional transformation required for and socio-political commitments and attri-
more inclusive and pro-poor RTD need to go butes. This very strength of shared iden-
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2879

tity—and the sense that it is critical in defin- idea here is that representative organizations
ing the boundaries and allies of movements— show very little evidence of being able to foster
can, however, get in the way of building links or deliver economic innovations precisely be-
to other actors, many of whom movements cause their focus is on politics more than on
would need to engage with in order to con- markets, and their need to represent a broad
tribute to a rethinking and reworking of terri- constituency makes it much harder to find
torial economic dynamics. This very strength innovations that respond to such a broad base
of identity not infrequently has the adverse with differing economic capacities (see also
effect of fostering within movements (implicit Bebbington, 1996). This is a particular problem
or explicit) discourses that revolve around because the extreme inequality of much of
the notions of allies and enemies, or the Latin America leads to processes of rural inno-
trusted and untrustable. Such languages can vation that often further the concentration
frustrate the building of wider ties. If we were wealth—implying that the democratization of
to speak of this in terms of social capital innovation processes is an urgent task (World
(Abramovay et al., 2007), the very same Bank, 2003). That said, exceptions do exist,
bonding social capital that gives movements and in their paper Abramovay et al. discuss
such strong identity can make it much more one farmer movement in Brazil that has suc-
difficult to build bridging and linking forms ceeded in building a system of savings and
of social capital (cf. Woolcock & Narayan, loans cooperatives that now boasts some
2006). Indeed, the papers provide various 75,000 members in almost 300 municipalities
cases of this. For instance, the extreme polit- in south of Brazil. Understanding how and
icization of movements concerned with the why such exceptions occur is particularly
adverse effects of mining makes it extremely important for any exploration of the conditions
difficult for them to reach out to mining com- under which movements might foster other
panies and engage in dialog on alternative pro-poor and inclusive economic innovations.
regional economies—indeed, those who try Fourth, social movements’ normative
to reach out can become branded as ‘‘pro- positions and discourses can create immense
mine.’’ Likewise, the very strong ethnic resistance to anything that appears to have any-
identity underlying the discourse of Ecuador’s thing all to do with markets. Ospina et al.
national indigenous movement has made it (2006) note a publication of an indigenous
much harder for local organizations within movement organization in Ecuador that
this movement to build bridges with impor- comments: ‘‘the communities’ conception of
tant business actors in Cotacachi and Cotop- life bears absolutely no relation to the individ-
axi. ualist commitment that underlies neoliberal
This same ‘‘inward lookingness’’ of move- discourse.’’ Once again, there is a clear tension
ments can also mean they often lack the ties here. Discourses such as these play an impor-
and linkages that they need if they are to break tant part in the constitution and identity base
into those decision making and discursive of a movement. However, in strengthening the
spheres in which the economic dynamics of movement’s capacity to mobilize, the demon-
territories are determined. Zegarra, Oré, and ization of market relationships can simulta-
Glave (2007), for instance, analyzed the move- neously weaken any capacity the movement
ments contesting the construction of large-scale might have to negotiate new types of market
water diversion and irrigation projects in arrangement. Of course, it is not the case that
Northern Peru, and demonstrate how these movement organizations never have anything
movements have no presence on those commit- to do with the economy. Some have become in-
tees at which questions of design are discussed volved in trying to create certain new markets,
and defined. These committees are, instead, albeit ones that are typically niche-based,
dominated by irrigation engineers. One of the solidarity, or organic markets. The problem
reasons for this absence appears to be the fact here is that even if the organizations have the
that these movements have only very weak ties internal technical, administrative, and entrepre-
to the people and organizations that serve as neurial capacity to build such markets, they
gatekeepers in determining access to forums in remain relatively small. Meanwhile, movements
which policies are discussed, and priorities set. have little or no effect on the functioning of the
A third obstacle internal to movements main labor and product markets, in which their
derives from the contradiction between repre- bases are involved and which continue to work
sentation and innovation already noted. The to their disadvantage.
2880 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

Finally, when movements lobby government, nant economies, weak institutions, and deep so-
their priorities tend not to include demands for cial divisions.
institutions that will promote economic innova- While categories such as these are ideal types
tion. Put bluntly, their demands hinge much the boundaries between which remain unclear,
more around power and redistribution than they do help map out four macro-tendencies
they do around growth, and much more among the territories of Latin America and re-
around regulation of the economy than around mind us that the actual and potential relation-
innovation in the economy. A common example ships between social movements and RTD
in this regard is the demand for participatory will vary according to the uneven geography
planning arrangements so that the rural popu- of territorial conditions—as well, of course, as
lation might be more involved in decisions the uneven geographies of social movements
about how to allocate and use public budgets themselves. Thus, say, some Type 2 territories
(see for instance the paper by Ospina et al.). may be spaces in which strong peasant or envi-
Another example would be the demand for ronmental movements exist, others may have
bodies to monitor and regulate the environ- strong, and urbanized worker movements,
mental effects of businesses (see Bebbington and some may have no significant presence of
et al.). What social movements demand far less movements at all. Such variation across space
frequently are institutions that would allow immediately raises the questions as to why
them, their bases, and dynamic local entrepre- these spatial differences exist in the first place,
neurs to come together to discuss economic and what implications they hold for future
possibilities. 9 geographies of rural development.
To pursue such questions would demand a
geographic characterization of the territories
4. GEOGRAPHIES OF TERRITORY of Latin America according to Schejtman and
AND MOVEMENT: MAPPING THE Berdegué’s typology—a form of mapping of
CO-PRODUCTION OF RTD the geographical political economies of the re-
gion. 11, 12 A limit of the two-by-two typology
(a) Geographies of territory as a filter for such an exercise is that—beyond
its relative bluntness—it could treat territories
Schejtman and Berdegué (2007, pp. 72–74) as isolated and uni-dimensional spaces. A map-
propose a two-by-two matrix for thinking ping of Latin America’s geographical political
about contemporary territorial dynamics in economies would therefore also need to convey
Latin America. They suggest that—a groso a sense of the linkages among regions as well as
modo—four types of territory can be identified between them and other scales of analysis. The
in the region. papers make clear why this is so. Bebbington
Type 1 territories are those that have enjoyed et al., for instance note that the transformations
productive transformation (read modernization in Cajamarca must be understood in relation to
and market integration) coupled with institu- transformations in other regions in which the
tional changes, which allow ‘‘reasonable’’ levels owners of the gold mine are operating, because
of participatory governance 10 and social and the fantastic profits delivered by the Yanacocha
economic inclusion, while at the same time mine have enabled those owners to operate
reducing transaction costs in the productive elsewhere in ways and at scales that might
sphere. otherwise not have been possible. Likewise,
Type 2 territories also enjoy important levels the same paper makes clear that these territo-
of productive transformation and economic ries are not only horizontally networked (one
growth, but of a form that has contributed little to another) but also vertically networked, to
to local development and has created few company headquarters, financial markets, high
economic opportunities for the poor. risk stock exchanges, and the like located in
Type 3 territories enjoy strong institutions Denver, Toronto, Washington and, increas-
and regional and cultural identities, but their ingly for the extractive industry sector, in Bei-
economies are relatively stagnant and offer little jing, Shanghai, Buenos Aires, and São Paulo.
prospect of sustained, poverty reducing A characterization and mapping of these terri-
economic growth. torial political economies would therefore need
Type 4 territories are those territories that are to convey senses of scale and network, as much
in processes of social disarticulation with stag- as of location (cf. Bebbington, 2003).
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2881

(b) Geographies of movement the now mayor of Cotacachi was a potential

presidential candidate of the National Confed-
Social movement writing pays scant attention eration of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador
to the geographically uneven presence and ab- (CONAIE).
sence of movements. 13 Yet this unevenness In addition to within-country relations of
means that case study findings from an area scale, movement geographies are also embed-
in which there is a significant presence of social ded in and partly produced by international
movements might be completely irrelevant to relationships with solidarity groups, activists
areas with no such presence. This ‘‘geography in other countries, funders, likeminded move-
of social movements’’ also raises analytical ments, and organizations elsewhere in Latin
questions of its own—questions as to why these America (Keck & Sikkink, 1998; Tsing, 2004).
movements are so strongly present in some The differential ability of territorially based
areas and not in other areas. Explanations of groups to develop these linkages is part of their
this geography would shed light on the emer- strength, orientation, and at times survival.
gence and evolution of movements and of our This ability in turn is affected by the predispo-
understanding of them as social phenomena. sition (for diverse reasons) of national and
Along with the challenge of mapping the terri- international groups to privilege work in, and
tories of the region, there is therefore also a support to, some territories and not others.
challenge of mapping its social movements. Just as the papers give pointers as to the
On the one hand this mapping—as in the case types of horizontal and vertical relationships
of territories—would have to deal with the dif- to which a mapping of social movements would
ficulties of mapping the horizontal and vertical be attentive, they also suggest some of the key
networks that link these movements to each characteristics of social movements that would
other and to other actors. Likewise, and again also have to be mapped. On the basis of the
as in the case of territories, any such exercise papers in this supplement and the broader re-
would have to explore movement characteris- search program, we suggest that following
tics and their variation across space. Schejtman and Berdegué’s two-by-two matrix
Several of the papers demonstrate these for mapping territories, one could imagine a
issues of unevenness and linkage. The presence similar two-by-two matrix for mapping move-
of Ecuador’s indigenous movement and move- ments. 14 One axis of this matrix would relate
ment organizations is not as significant in other to the identity of the movements, distinguishing
parts of Ecuador as it is in Cotopaxi and Cotac- between those with more communitarian iden-
achi (Ospina et al., 2006), and this demands tities and those with identities that emphasize
explanation as to why. The Zapatista move- the relationship between individuals and society
ment in Mexico has its clear geographies (broadly, more traditionalist movements and
(Reygadas, Ramos, & Montoya, 2007), and more modernist ones). This axis builds on the
the geography of the environmental justice/ sense conveyed by the papers that those move-
mining movement in Peru and Ecuador is not ments that have more communitarian and
only related to the uneven geographies of traditionalist identities are less likely to influ-
mining itself, but also to internal and local ence the political economy of rural develop-
territorial dynamics that lead the movement ment through practices of negotiation because
to be stronger in some mining areas and weaker of their ideological aversion to markets and
in other areas (Bebbington, 2007). their greater tendency toward self-reference
Relationships of scale are also central to the and inward-orientation. 15 They are, however,
social movement geographies suggested by the more likely to seek to influence RTD processes
papers. Returning to Ecuador, the strength of through relationships of conflict and practices
the indigenous movement in Cotopaxi and of direct action.
Cotacachi can only be understood in terms of The second axis would relate to the extent
the national indigenous movement and its com- to which movements are committed to more
ponent organizations. On the one hand, these open or more closed forms of self-governance.
local processes have to be understood as part Abramovay et al.’s paper suggests the impor-
of a far wider process stitched together by the tance of this criterion, showing that move-
national movement and its party political ments with more open governance structures
platform. At the same, these local processes are more likely to build the bridges, ties,
were facilitated by the national movement in and alliances that are necessary for influencing
various ways. It should not be forgotten that RTD. A similar message comes from Bebbing-
2882 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

ton et al.’s comparison of Cotacachi and 2 (Bebbington et al.-Cajamarca, Schattan

Cajamarca, where the greater openness of et al.), and Type 3 regions (Ospina et al.; Bebb-
movements and movement organizations in ington et al.-Cotacachi) and as such suggest
Cotacachi facilitated the building of bridges be- how the contributions of social movements to
tween urban and rural populations and between RTD vary across different territorial types as
the movement and local government institu- well as providing pointers as to why movements
tions in ways that did not occur in Cajamarca. have become present in these types of territory.
This matrix would then give us four broad Likewise, the papers address all distinct types
clusters of movement characteristics that could of movements, with Abramovay et al. discuss-
be mapped as four simply described movement ing Type A and B movements, Ospina et al. dis-
types: cussing Type C movements, Bebbington et al.
Type A movements are those with individual– discussing Types C and B, and Schattan et al.
societal identities and open governance struc- Types A and C. While Type D movements
tures. Movements with these characteristics are not represented in the papers there are hints
are more likely to engage with other actors in of such movement characteristics in the papers
relationships of collaborative negotiation on is- from Ecuador and Peru.
sues of RTD and more likely to contribute to While we have already noted that the gover-
processes of economic innovation. nance gains of movements far exceed their con-
Type B movements are those with individual– tributions to productive transformation,
societal identities but more closed governance disaggregating our cases by territorial type
structures. These movements tend to shift be- and reading them comparatively suggests nuan-
tween efforts at negotiation and relationships ces to this general observation. Among these
of conflict. While they may open up certain cases, the greatest governance gains of move-
spaces for change their closed governance ments have been in Type 3 territories (Cotac-
structures reduce their capacity to build the alli- achi and Cotopaxi), and rather less in other
ances necessary to sustain these spaces. territorial types. This is not only an artifact of
Type C movements are those that exhibit the strength of Ecuador’s indigenous move-
communitarian identities but more open gover- ment, because the papers on Cotacachi show
nance structures. These movements (akin to that its environmental movement has also con-
some of the more modernizing currents within tributed to institutional transformation there in
the indigenous movement in Ecuador perhaps) many significant ways. One hypothesis—for
also shift between negotiation and conflict, but more research—would be that the pattern re-
are more likely to succeed in negotiating forms flects the degree to which strong and dynamic
of RTD that respect local identities and in economic elites are consolidated in different ter-
building alliances that can help sustain these ritories. The more the territory’s economy
(as, for instance, in Cotacachi). engenders the emergence of such elites (as it
Type D movements are those with communi- does in Type 1 and 2 territories), the less move-
tarian identities and closed governance struc- ments are able to make governance gains—sim-
tures. These movements often have strongly ply because they are dealing with more
stated identities and ideological positions, and powerful actors than is the case in Type 3 terri-
find it difficult to seek negotiated settlements tories which are, by contrast, characterized by
to RTD conflicts. They are, however, more weaker economic elites, often in a process of
likely to have the capacity to mobilize in ways decline. A second and related hypothesis, how-
that affect RTD through direct action. ever, would be that the relative openness of the
ties cultivated by movements and reflected in
(c) Co-producing rural development geographies their governance structures is also critical in
determining outcomes and can serve as a coun-
It is at the interface between these different terweight to the strength of elites. Such ties and
geographies of movements and of territories the forms of cooperation that they facilitate can
that forms of RTD are produced. By exploring change local power relations and as a result
this interface we can say more about the ways open up possibilities for social movement orga-
in which movements affect RTD, as well as nizations to become significant actors in the lo-
the ways in which economic dynamics them- cal economy, as suggested in the paper by
selves may affect the emergence of and forms Abramovay et al.
taken by movements. The papers here come A further nuance hinges around the observa-
from cases of Type 1 (Abramovay et al.), Type tion that the movement that had made the great-
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2883

est contributions to productive transformation as Bromley, Rondinelli, and Johnson shared

and economic inclusion was in a Type 1 territory many of the same concerns even if their concep-
(as discussed by Abramovay et al.). The hypoth- tual languages were less elaborate, depended
esis would be that in territories with dynamic more on central place theory than on theories
and already relatively inclusive economies it is of transaction costs, clusters, and industrial dis-
easier for movements to craft institutions for trict, and tended to equate the rural economy
economic inclusion. It may also be that the with agriculture rather than a range of eco-
movements that emerge in such environments nomic activities. Still the return to approaches
are also more likely to have more open gover- that consciously seek to understand and
nance structures and identities that imply less enhance the relationships between the geogra-
ex ante aversion to engaging the market. phies of local government and those of local
The papers in this supplement illustrate, then, economies, and that place the institutional
just a few of the points of contact between the question at the center of their analysis, opens
geographies of territory and those of social up programmatic and analytical possibilities
movements. The papers cannot, however, give that more technocratic approaches to inte-
a sense of these larger geographies of territorial grated rural development and agricultural
dynamics and movement presence. For this we modernization (reconversión in Latin America)
need more comprehensive territorial and move- did not.
ment mapping at both national and regional However, a focus on ‘‘territory,’’ ‘‘institu-
scales. This work is yet to be done. Such a pro- tions’’ and market integration brings certain
gram would constitute part of a broader agen- risks that the very existence of social move-
da that several commentators have laid out ments helps make explicit. First, while a focus
for development studies on the basis of an on territorially-based dynamics is very wel-
engagement with Cowen and Shenton’s (1998, come, it must come together with a sensitivity
1996) distinction between two notions of devel- to relationships of scale. Territories cannot be
opment: development as the immanent process understood independently of the scaled
of societal change (as in the ‘‘development of economic, political, and social relations in
capitalism’’); and development understood as which they are embedded and which, indeed,
an intended, goal-oriented intervention (as in have a significant influence on the very social
development projects). One of us has suggested processes through which a particular territory
elsewhere that one task for development studies is constituted. Social movements—themselves
might be to analyze how the geographies of often embedded in a range of national and
these two types of development have unfolded international relationships—help make this
over time, and in the process influenced each clear. Second, while the focus on institutional
other and transformed livelihoods and land- transformation is also welcome, it is important
scapes (Bebbington, 2000, 2004; see also Hart, to avoid using a language of institutions as a
2001). In as far as social movements can be way of eliding attention to politics and relation-
conceptualized as interventions in development ships of power. The existence of social move-
processes, the project we outline here of jointly ments highlight just how contested rural
mapping, and then understanding the articula- development is, and how far power relation-
tions between these geographies of mobilization ships influence the models of development that
and of territorial economies would constitute ultimately rise to ascendancy. Third, it is criti-
part of this broader agenda. cal not to speak of development in the singular
and to overstate the place of market deepening
within a development process. Social move-
5. IMPLICATIONS FOR RTD ments in their role as contestors of dominant
conceptions of development, and frequently of
The IADB, World Bank, IFAD, and many particular forms of market deepening, make
other agencies now use the language of RTD evident the sense in which—within a terri-
as they speak of and conceptualize their rural tory—competing models and concepts of
interventions (Sumpsi, 2007; World Bank, (market) development coexist in relations of
2007). 16 It is important not to overstate the both conflict and synergy.
newness of such discourses, however—the Thus, one aspect of the significance of social
‘‘urban functions in rural development’’ and movements for RTD is that they highlight po-
decentralized development approaches of the tential lacunae in the approach. This is related
1970s associated with USAID and authors such to a second contribution of social movements
2884 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

to RTD—they politicize discussions of rural any efforts to promote local coordination,

development. Their existence, their arguments, development planning, or the like—this is
their mobilizations, and occasional direct ac- because they are sufficiently powerful to seek
tions all demand that rural development be the protection and endorsement of central
seen as political and not technical. Movements government should they require it. Indeed,
make clear that making rural development notwithstanding apparent commitments to
choices is not a technocratic exercise, but a decentralization, it remains the case that central
political process in which actors with different authorities are still of the mind that at the
visions about what rural development is and margin local territorial concerns have to be sub-
should be, struggle over the ideas, with some servient to national macroeconomic exigencies
winning out and others losing. By making visi- and preferences. Second, as Schattan et al.
ble subaltern ideas and concerns that are often show, in those cases where significant economic
hidden, and certainly less powerful, they ques- actors do participate in round tables and local
tion dominant visions of development, and development councils, the relations of power
force consideration of alternatives. These alter- within these councils reflect those that exist be-
natives do not always—perhaps not even of- yond and prior to them. Economic actors have
ten—win out, but by forcing debates and more power than social movement organiza-
choices, movements make both the trade-offs tions and leaderships, steer and dominate dis-
in development and the relationship between cussions within the councils, and end up
development and power, more explicit in soci- molding any proposals for change that emanate
ety. This is clear from each of the papers in this from such councils. Third—and relatedly—
supplement, and is a conclusion that finds prec- many of the economic processes affecting given
edent in the ways in which authors such as Eve- territories operate on far larger canvases than
lina Dagnino (Dagnino, 2007; Dagnino, the territory in question, with many of the most
Olvera, & Panfichi, 2006) and Escobar (1995) important actors being located at great national
have conceptualized social movements. Indeed, and international distance from the localities in
perhaps the greatest impact of several of the which they have effects. Except in cases where
movements discussed in these papers (e.g., the movements are able to build transnational
mining movement in Peru, the indigenous alliances, these actors lie beyond movements’
movement in Ecuador, and the quilombola action space—and even then it is often difficult
movement in SE Brazil) lies not in any material for movements to see beyond markets (e.g.,
effects that they have had, but rather in the financial and investment markets) and identify
ways in which they have changed how people those actors that help constitute those markets.
think about development in those countries— And fourth—for Type 3 and 4 territories—
perhaps for ever, and certainly for the mid- movements are operating in environments
term. whose products and services are neither great
This brings us to the third and final domain in quantity nor competitive, and are generally
in which movements are important for rural not highly valued by other stakeholders (be
development—the material. These papers con- these consumers, investors, or policy makers).
clude—in ways that resonate with certain ear- This is not to slip into environmental determin-
lier interventions (e.g., Bebbington, 2000)— ism, but there can be no doubt that possibilities
that movements have had important effects on for promoting economic dynamism have very
governance arrangements in particular territo- uneven geographies and movements operating
ries, making them more participatory and in certain environments face far greater chal-
inclusive. However, these changes have very lenges in fostering economic inclusion than do
rarely translated into greater economic inclu- others. Among our papers, the most palpable
sion and opportunity, nor changed the prac- case of this must be Cotacachi in Ecuador,
tices of dominant economic actors (except where one finds particularly dynamic local
perhaps to induce them to invest somewhat movements themselves well linked to dynamic
more in social responsibility programs and national (indigenous) and international (envi-
security services). Several of the reasons for this ronmental justice) movements, and operating
derive from inherent characteristics of move- in synergy with local government. Yet Cotac-
ments, characteristics which we have already achi continues to exhibit some of the very worst
noted. Others relate to the broader political economic and social indicators in the country.
economy of development. First, strong local Social movements are, then, no magic bullet
economic actors can operate independently of (cf. Edwards & Hulme, 1995 on NGOs). Rather
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2885

their struggles and complaints remind us— inequalities. In making this explicit, they likely
forcefully—that RTD is not a magic bullet increase (rather than reduce) the shelf-life of the
either, and certainly not a technocratic solution concept, discouraging over-enthusiasm, and
to deeply grained political and economic instilling humility in its use.

NOTES

1. IIRSA is sponsored by the governments of the Responsible Soy in which social movements, businesses,
region, the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), class-based organizations, and consumer group repre-
Andean Development Corporation (CAF), and the sentatives come together to elaborate plans that are then
Financing Fund for the Development of the River Plata taken up in business strategies with significant impacts
Basin (FONPLATA) (IIRSA, n.d.). on rural territorial dynamics.

2. This paper was only formally published in 2006. 10. The term in Spanish is ‘‘concertación,’’ not readily
However, it has circulated widely in electronic form translatable to English.
since early 2003 initially as a briefing paper for the IADB
and the International Fund for Agricultural Develop- 11. The principle behind such an enterprise would not
ment (IFAD). The term in Spanish is Desarrollo be that novel—there is a long history of efforts to map
Territorial Rural or DTR. urban–rural systems, regional systems, and the like, and
to think geographically about the economy (as for
3. See for instance, Escobar (1995), Escobar and Alvarez instance in the catchily titled ‘‘Geographies of Econo-
(1992), Alvarez, Dagnino, and Escobar (1998), and mies’’ by Lee and Wills (1997)).
Biekart (2005). (Forsyth, 2002, 2007) makes similar
observations. 12. The risk, of course, would be that such an exercise
might be viewed as an instrument for identifying
4. This program was entitled ‘‘Social Movements, ‘‘viable’’ and ‘‘non-viable’’ regions as a pre-cursor to
Environmental Governance and Rural Territorial Devel- writing the latter off as lost causes unworthy of
opment in Latin America,’’ and was financed by the significant public investment. Such a concern is not
International Development Research Center, Canada. It without substance, for one senses that agency officials
was coordinated by Rimisp: Latin American Center for often operate (implicitly at least) on the basis of just such
Rural Development, and involved seven major studies, a mental map.
five minor studies, literature reviews, and events aimed
toward conceptual development and dissemination (e.g., 13. Just as the study of NGOs pays little attention to
Bengoa, 2007). The program was initially coordinated by their geography (Bebbington, 2004).
Manuel Chiriboga and subsequently by Jose Bengoa,
with interim coordination roles played by Julio Berdegué
14. The criteria we suggest here are those that seem of
and Claudia Ranaboldo. The program partners were, in
particular relevance for considering the relationship
addition to Rimisp, CEPES (Peru), DIIS (Denmark),
between movements and RTD.
GRADE (Peru), PIEB (Bolivia), and the The Faculty of
Economics of the University of São Paulo (Brazil).
15. Castells differentiates social movements based on
‘‘strong identities,’’ apparently based on historic tradi-
5. The program as a whole also included papers from
tion from those based on individual identities, self-
Mexico, Bolivia, Peru, and Nicaragua.
references, and linked to personal projects (1997, 2003).

6. Bebbington et al. compared movements in Peru and

16. While more general intellectual thinking on clus-
Ecuador.
ters, urban–rural linkages, the new economic geography,
and local development have each influenced this shift,
7. The original is in Spanish. Schejtman and Berdegué’s argument—first circulated in
2003—has also been an important catalyst in this
8. This section follows the argument of Abramovay process. It is also the source of the notion that rural
et al. (2007). development strategies need to seek synergies between
productive transformation and institutional transforma-
9. An example of the sort of initiative we have in mind tion and take territories rather than sectors as their
here might be the recently formed Round Table on object of intervention.
2886 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

REFERENCES

Abramovay, R., Bengoa, J., Berdegué, J., Escobal, J., and displacement of meanings. In A. Bebbington,
Ranaboldo, C., Ravnborg, H. M., et al. (2007). D. Mitlin, & S. Hickey (Eds.), Can NGOs make a
Movimientos sociales, gobernanza ambiental y difference? The challenge of development alternatives.
desarrollo territorial. In J. Bengoa (Ed.), Territorios London: Zed.
rurales: movimientos sociales y desarrollo territorial Dagnino, E., Olvera, A., & Panfichi, A. (2006). Para
rural en América Latina (pp. 19–41). Santiago: Uma Outra Leitura Da Disputa Pela Construção
Catalonia/Rimisp. Democrática Na América Latina. In E. Dagnino, A.
Alvarez, S., Dagnino, E., & Escobar, A. (Eds.) (1998). Olvera, & A. Panfichi (orgs.), A Disputa Pela
Cultures of politics, politics of cultures. Re-visioning Construção Democrática Na América Latina. São
Latin American social movements. Boulder: West- Paulo: Paz e Terra.
view. de Janvry, A. (1981). The agrarian question and reform-
Arriagada, I. (Ed.) (2005). Aprender de la experiencia: el ism in Latin America. Baltimore: John Hopkins
capital social en la superación de la pobreza. Santiago: University Press.
ECLAC, United Nations Commission on Latin Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (Eds.) (1995). NGOs:
America. Performance and accountability: Beyond the magic
Bebbington, A. J. (1996). Organizations and intensifica- bullet. London: Earthscan.
tions: Small farmer federations, rural livelihoods and Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development. The
agricultural technology in the Andes and Amazonia. making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton:
World Development, 24(7), 1161–1178. Princeton University Press.
Bebbington, A. J. (Ed.) (2007). Minerı́a, movimientos Escobar, A., & Alvarez, S. (Eds.) (1992). The making of
sociales y respuestas campesinas: una ecologı´a polı́tica social movements in Latin America: Identity, strategy
de transformaciones territoriales. Lima: Instituto de and democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Estudios Peruanos/Centro Peruano de Estudios Espinosa, G. M. F. (2007). Ecuador y Latinoamérica
Sociales. recuperan sus historias en busca de un camino
Bebbington, A. J. (2000). Re-encountering development: común. Discurso de la Ministra de Relaciones
Livelihood transitions and place transformations in Exteriores, Comercio e Integración, São Paulo, 11
the Andes. Annals of the Association of American de septiembre del 2007, reproduced in Resumen de
Geographers, 90(3), 495–520. Petroleo AL, Vol. 67, Envı´o 4.
Bebbington, A. J. (2003). Global networks and local Forsyth, T. (2002). Environmental social movements in
developments. Agendas for Development Geogra- Thailand: A critical assessment. Asian Review, 2002,
phy. Tijdschrift voor Economische et Sociale Geogra- 104–124.
fie, 94(3), 297–309. Forsyth, T. (2007). Are environmental social movements
Bebbington, A. J. (2004). NGOs and uneven develop- socially exclusive? An historical study from Thailand.
ment: Geographies of development intervention. World Development, 35(12), 2110–2130.
Progress in Human Geography, 28(6), 725–745. Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A
Bengoa, J. (Ed.) (2007). Territorios rurales: movimientos network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1,
sociales y desarrollo territorial rural en América 201–233.
Latina. Santiago: Catalonia/Rimisp. Graziano Da Silva, J. (2002). Local sustainable
Biekart, K. (2005). Seven thesis on Latin American development, globalization and agricultural restruc-
social movements and political change. European turing in underdeveloped countries. International
Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 79, Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 10(1),
85–94. 33–39.
Castells, M. (1997). The power of identity. Blackwell Hart, G. (2001). Development critiques in the 1990s: culs
Publishers. de sac and promising paths. Progress in Human
Castells, M. (2003). Panorama e la Era de la Informa- Geography, 25, 649–658.
ción en América Latina. In F. Calderón (Ed.). Es IIRSA, n.d. <www.iirsa.org>.
Sostenible la Globalización en América Latina? (Vol. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond
II). Santiago de Chile: PNUD – FCE. borders. Advocacy networks in international politics.
Chiriboga, M. (1995). Descentralización, Municipaliza- Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
ción y Desarrollo Rural: la experiencia de América Lee, R., & Wills, J. (Eds.) (1997). Geographies of
Latina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Santafé de economies. London: Arnold.
Bogotá. Lucero, J. A. (2007). Indigenous political voice and the
Cowen, M., & Shenton, R. (1998). Agrarian doctrines of struggle for recognition in Ecuador and Bolivia. In
development: Part 1. Journal of Peasant Studies, 25, A. Bebbington, A. Dani, A. de Haan, & M. Walton
49–76. (Eds.), Institutional pathways to equity: Addressing
Cowen, M., & Shenton, R. (1996). Doctrines of devel- inequality traps. Washington: World Bank.
opment. London: Routledge. Melo, M. (2007). Political competition can be positive:
Crossley, N. (2002). Making sense of social movements. Embedding cash transfer programs in Brazil. In A.
Buckingham: Open University Press. Bebbington, & W. McCourt (Eds.), Development
Dagnino, E. (2007). Challenges to participation, success: Statecraft in the South (pp. 31–51). London:
citizenship and democracy: Perverse confluence Palgrave Macmillan.
 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE DYNAMICS OF RURAL TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT 2887

Ospina, P., Larrea, C., Arboleda, M., & Santillana, A. América Latina (pp. 84–101). Santiago: Catalonia/
(2006). En Las Fisuras del Poder. Movimiento Rimisp.
Indı´gena, Cambio Social y Gobiernos Locales. Quito: Tendler, J. (1997). Good government in the Tropics.
Instituto de Estudios Ecuatorianos. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Peet, R., & Watts, M. (Eds.) (2004). Liberation ecologies: Tsing, A. (2004). Friction. An ethnography of global
Environment, development, social movements (2nd connections. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
ed.). London: Routledge. Wolford, W. (2004). This land is ours now: A new
Reardon, T., Berdegué, J., & Escobar, G. (2001). Rural perspective on social movement formation. Annals of
nonfarm employment and incomes in Latin America: the Association of American Geographiers, 94(2),
Overview and policy implications. World Develop- 409–424.
ment, 29(3), 395–410. Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2006). Social capital:
Reygadas, L., Ramos, T., & Montoya, G. (2007). Los Implications for development. Theory, practice, and
dilemas del desarrollo en la selva Lacandona. policy revisited. In A. Bebbington, M. Woolcock, S.
Movimientos sociales, medio ambiente y territorio Guggenheim, & E. Olson (Eds.), The search for
en dos comunidades de Chiapas. In J. Bengoa (Ed.), empowerment. Social capital as idea and practice at
Territorios rurales: movimientos sociales y desarrollo the World Bank (pp. 29–62). West Hartford: Kumar-
territorial rural en América Latina (pp. 200–236). ian.
Santiago: Catalonia/Rimisp. World Bank (2003). Reaching the rural poor. Strategy
Schejtman, A., & Berdegué, J. A. (2007). Desarrollo and business plan. Washington, DC: World Bank.
territorial rural. In J. Bengoa (Ed.), Territorios World Bank (2007). World Development Report 2008.
rurales: movimientos sociales y desarrollo territorial Agriculture for development. Washington, DC:
rural en América Latina (pp. 45–83). Santiago: World Bank.
Catalonia/Rimisp. Zegarra, E., Oré, T., & Glave, M. (2007). El Proyecto
Sumpsi, J. M. (2007). Desarrollo territorial rural. Olmos en un territorio árido de la costa norte peruana.
Relaciones entre las transformaciones institucionales In J. Bengoa (Ed.), Territorios rurales: movimientos
y productivas. In J. Bengoa (Ed.), Territorios rurales: sociales y desarrollo territorial rural en América Latina
movimientos sociales y desarrollo territorial rural en (pp. 514–550). Santiago: Catalonia/Rimisp.

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com