Revisiting Agrarian Reform in Brazil, 1985–2016
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines Brazil’s experience in agrarian reform from 1985 to 2016. After more than three decades of agrarian reform, Brazil remains a country with highly skewed landownership. Peasant-led agrarian reform efforts have had limited impact in changing this situation. Agrarian reform remains an unfulfilled political promise, and this situation continues to create tensions and conflicts in the countryside. The main reason for the persistence of skewed land concentration is the State’s support of agribusiness. Successive post-1985 democratic governments have encouraged the opening of new agricultural frontiers by providing generous economic incentives. Land redistribution has been offset by further land possession; that is, the expansion of small-scale agricultural farming has been counterbalanced by the expansion of large-scale, capital intensive agriculture. Agribusiness has not only undermined agrarian reform efforts but has also generated a growing dependency on a socially and environmentally destructive monoculture agricultural economy. Moreover, Brazil’s current political and economic crisis has further undermined the struggle for agrarian reform.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it