Development in Brazilian Amazonia: Background to New Frontiers

Author(s): J.P. Dickenson

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Revista Geográfica, No. 109 (ENERO-JUNIO 1989), pp. 141-155
Published by: Pan American Institute of Geography and History
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40992586 .
Accessed: 24/06/2012 00:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Pan American Institute of Geography and History is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Revista Geográfica.

http://www.jstor.org
 Developmentin BrazilianAmazonia:Background
to NewFrontiers
J.P.Dickenson*

The Frontierhas been a potentthemeinwesternhistoricalgeography, and

iftheconceptualframeassociatedwithF.J.Turner(Turner,1961) hasbeen
rejectedas too simplisticor country-specific, or itsmis-application recog-
nized,(Gulley,1959) interest in'Frontiersof Settlement'(generallyfroma
Eurocentricperspective)persists(see forexample referencesin Baker,
1972).However,thefocusofsuchwork,on frontier experienceswhichwere
'notonlyconcordantin timebutcomparablein type'(Meinig,1962,3) has
been predominantly on NorthAmerica,Russia,Argentina,South AJfrica
and Australia,thatis,on mid-latitude temperatelands.
Approaches to 'The Frontier'in Latin America have been limited;
indeed Hennesseyclaimsthatin Latin Americathereis no Frontier;only
frontiers.(Hennessey,1978,6). Even cursory analysisrevealsthattherehas
been littleconcordanceofspace,timeorforminthefrontier experiencesof
LatinAmerica.RichardMorse'sviewofthefrontier inBrazil,thatitwas not
a singlelineon process,buta muchmorecomplexexperience,is relevantto
otherpartsof the continent(Morse, 1965 30-31). In Latin America the
frontier has been diversebothin space and time;it is also incomplete.In
1931 Isaiah BowmandescribedLatinAmerica as 'a continentof pioneer
fringes'(Bowman, 1931,305) and in 1953 PierreGourou could demons-
trate that Amazonia was largely an unmodifiednatural landscape
(Gourou, 1953,3).
In the past 20 yearsa 'new frontier' in Amazonia has generatedmuch
interestin the Anglo-Americanliterature, muchof it critical(Dickenson
in fact,notsimplebutcomplex- in spatialpattern,
1986). That 'frontier'is,
temporalprocessand in form.It is also incomplete,uncertainand fullof
contradictions. Amazonia mustbulklarge,literally and metaphorically, in
any consideration of the geography of Latin America. It forms the Great
Divide betweenHispanicand Luso-BrazilianAmerica;itis bothcore and
peripheryof continentalSouth America. It is the currentrepositoryof
ancientbutitinerant myths oftheEuropean geographyofimagination, and

♦ University
of Liverpool,Department
of Geography,
Liverpool.
142 J.P. Dickenson Revista Geográfica 109

thecontemporary stageforlongstandingbutstillunresolveddebateson the

relationsofMan and Nature.Over a rangeofspatialand temporalscales its
undevelopment, underdevelopment and developmentdemandconsidera-
tion.Amazoniaprovidesthepresentlocale fora FrontierforNorthAtlantic
manwhichhas been continuously mobilesincetheAge ofDiscovery.The
mobility ofthisfrontierhas been sustainedbya desireforland,theprospect
ofresources,and a wishto acquire territory,forpeople and possession.In
thelatterpartofthetwentieth centurythatfrontieris advancingagainstthe
tropicalrainforest.
Much ofthevastamountofliterature whichhas been generatedbythe
advance of Brazil (and other riparianstates) into Amazonia has been
concernedwiththeenvironmental consequencesoftheprocess,withrela-
tivelylittleattentionbeinggiven itshistoricalbackgroundand political
to
context.It is thesethemeswhichthispaper seeks to explore.

Abstractand Real Frontiers

Thefrontier
ofmyth
In thepast,and perhapseven today,we shouldrecognizetheinfluenceof
mythindrawingon thefrontier, given'therolemyths haveintheshapingof
da
(Viotti Costa, 1985,xiii).Myths
history' and dreamsdrewmenacrossthe
Ocean Sea and intotheNew World;Brazil Rock was one of the mythical
crucialagentsin
landstheysought(Baritz,1961).Ih Brazilthebandeirantes,
opening the land,wentin searchof shiningmountains,golden lakes,rivers
ofdeath,abandoned citiesand Amazons (Morse, Op.cit.,17).

Thefrontier ofresources
Linkedto thesemyths were tangibleresources,whichmotivateddiscovery,
exploration, imperialism advance.InteriorSouthAmericahas
and frontier
been held to be a source of wealthand over the past fourcenturieshas
yieldedland,people and resources-wildproductstobe gathered,landtobe
croppedor grazed,waterforpower,and an increasing ofminerals
diversity
iron
-oil,tin, and bauxite-indeedifthelake ofthegolden man has remained
elusive,themuddyhumanant heap oftheSerraPelada has yieldedmuch
gold. Ifelusivemythand tangibleresourceshave drawnmento extendthe
frontier ofsettlement,otherelementshave had moreambiguousroles:

Thefrontieroftheforest
The historyofWesternman has been inimatelyassociatedwithadvances
againsttheforest.The pioneerecologistGeorge PerkinsMarshobserved
thatonce multiplyingman had filledtheopen lands'thedestruction ofthe
woods...was man's firstphysicalconquest,hisfirstviolationoftheharmo-
niesofinanimatenature'(Marsh,1864/1965,119), and theprocessofland
clearencebyOld Worldpeasantsand New Worldsettlershas createdfrom
1989 in BrazilianAmazonia:background...
Development 143

thewilderness'the culturalenvironmentsthatconstitutemostofwhatwe
nowcall Nature(Dubos, 1980,52-3). The processofEuropean settlement
and expansionhas involvedan advance againstnature-againstthewood-
lands of Europe and theforestsand grasslandsofNew World temperate
environments; an advanceagainsttherainforestcan be seen as a continu-
ationofthathistoricalprocess.

Theaesthetic
frontier
The process of environmental modificationhas served to shape man's
landscape taste.Since the NeolithicRevolutionmosthumanbeingshave
lived in transformed environments, and some of the environments we
admiremost-theAegean islands,theMediterraneanshores,theAmerican
Southwest-are productsof environmental degradation(Dubos, op.citA)
Tuan has identified Jheprocessofcivilizationas theriseof the'garden'at
theexpenseofthe'wilderness', and ofthe'city'attheexpenseofthe'garden'
(Tijan, 1971,24-6). Man has been,at best,ambivalentto 'natureas wilder-
ness',and itsmorepositiveconnotations haveemergedonlyas itsperceived
threatshave been diminishedand it could be viewed fromthe safetyof
'oases of civilization'.Most people choose to live in places fromwhich
wildernesshas been eradicated,and onlythenhave become ambivalent
aboutnatural,modifiedand man-madeenvironments. Dubos suggeststhat
muchas we have come to admiredeserts,mountainsand rainforests,and
to be aware of theirecological importance,we recognizethattheyare
essentiallyalien to our biologicalnatureand thatwe can functionwithin
themonlywiththeaccoutrements ofcilivization(op.cit.,131-2).

Theindigenous
frontier
The contactsintheNewWorldbetweenEuropeanandAmerindian prompted
discussionabouttheoriginand natureofthelatter.Earlyreportsmade the
Indianbeautifulinnocentslivingina terrestrial therole
paradise,providing
modelsforthenoble savages of Montaigne,Montesquieuand Rousseau.
However, as Hemminghas noted 'the realitiesof Brazil were rather
differentfromthe philosopher'sideals. The Indians...were morehuman,
less perfect'(Hemming,1978,24). Colonial ambiguity towardsthe Indian
tooktheformofconflicts betweenmissionaries concernedwithsavingtheir
souls and plantationownersseekingto exploit theirbodies, a conflict
resolvedin favourofthelatterin theeighteenth century-andambivalence
towardsthe place of the survivingIndians in the land and societyof
Amazonia persiststo thepresent.

Broaderissues
Such issues are part of a fundamentaland unresolveddebate on the
relationsofNatureand Man, tracedforexampleinGlacken'sclassicwork,
and inhisviewposingquestionsfromwhichhas come 'themodernstudyof
144 J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica109

thegeographyofman' (Glacken,1967,viii).The Man-Naturedebate has a

spatialas wellas a temporaldimension, and Glackenindicatestheprofound
impactdiscovery of the New World had upon it,particularyin termsof
man's role in changingthe environment (ibid, 358ff).It is clear thatthe
debatesconcerning theinfluenceofenvironment on man,and man'sability
to change the environmentfor his own use are highlypertinentto his
activitiesin therainforestenvironment. We can note,withintheAmazon
context,a series of potentiallyconflicting themes relatingto man and
nature:

ParadiseLost: ParadiseRediscovered
The Columbiannotionthattherewas an eartrlly paradiseto thesouthofthe
Orinocowas sustainedbyEdenic interpretation ofAmazonia as a land,if
notofmilkand honey,thenofcocoa, tobacco and spices,and peopled by
innocentnaked inhabitants.This visionhas been compoundedmore re-
of a rich,fragilebut unstudiedenvironment,
centlyby its identification
whose flora,faunaand peoples are threatenedbyDevelopment.

ThefindingofEl Dorado
The area was identified withitsrichforest
as one ofgreatpotentialutility,
and presumedfertilesoils,if onlythe constraintsof climateand disease
couldbe overcome.In 1912JamesBrycesaw itas 'thelargestunusedpiece
of productivesoil thatremainsanywhereon the earth'ssurface'(Bryce,
1912, 562) and if pedologyhas temperedthat perception,geologyand
hydrology have revealedgreatmineraland hydraulicpotential.

The visionof GreenHell

Despite its attractionsas a naturalenvironment and resourcereservoir
Arrazonia has, conversely, a lingeringimageas a environment inimicalto
men,of hostile,dense, unhealthful jungle,hot rainyclimate,dangerous
beasts and warlikeIndians.

The flurry of attentiongeneratedbyAmazonia since 1970 derivesfrom

thelongstanding broad debates about therelationshipof man and nature,
and from more visionsof Amazonia. Indeed in a sense,
specific,differing
Amazonia has become thelocus forthewiderdebate. The issuescould be
polarized-into thatthisisa regionof
a largelyinternalBrazilianperspective,
richresourcestobe utilizedbyman,and a predominantly externalview,that
thisis an essentiallyfragilenaturalenvironment, to be protected.

Geopoliticalperspectives
oftheAmazon
Ifthereare ambiguitiesrelatingto thenaturalenvironment
thisis also trueofthepoliticalcontext.
frontier,
1989 Developmentin Brazilian Amazonia: background...145

Thepoliticalfrontier
in history
Itmustbe firstremembered thatAmazoniawaslargely excluded from what
wasto becomeBrazil.The majorgeopolitical actofthe1494Tordesillas
delimitation,
dividing theworld,effectively gaveAmazoniato Spain.The
river
wasfirst discovered bySpain,first navigatedbya Spaniardin1541-42,
anditremained inessenceSpanishuntilthemid-seventeenth century.The
cleardefinition ofSpanishandLuso-Brazilian territoryin 1750and 1777
thesuccessful
reflected incursion ofthebandeirantefrontier wellbeyond the
Tordesillasline.It is worthnotingthattheproto-Brazilians werealso
successfulinrepelling theadvancesoftheemerging imperialistnationsof
HollandandFrance,keepingthemoutofAmazoniaandforcing
Britain,
themtoaccepttheinferior prizesoftheGuianas.Theearlyshapingofthe
in 1750wasalsosignificant
frontiers inbeingbasedon theprinciple ofuti
possidetis
defacto(bypossession) and notdejure(bylaw).
Such delimitation tripledthe area of Brazilcomparedwith1494,and
sketched thecountry's basicoutline;theutipossidetis principle also gave
scope forfuture boundary extension,followingtheencroachment offron-
tiersofexploration, religion, and
gathering mining, such that the present
frontiers
political weredrawnat thebeginning ofthepresent century,with
of
acquisition territory from Bolivia
(1903),Ecuador (1904). Venezuela and
Colombia(1905, 1907).Thus,if the currentfrontier of settlement in
Amazoniais a newone,thepolitical frontiersofBrazilhavea longestab-
lisheddynamism. Brazil'sability
tosustaintheterritoryisworth noting;land
wassecuredbythePortuguese intheC17andC18th,andearlyboundaries
weredrawn. The integrity oftheterritorywasmaintained intheperiodof
independence, incontrast totheSpanishAmerican experience, anddespite
theinterestandincursions oftheimperial powers.Inconsequence, ofa total
areaoftheAmazonriver basinofsome6.4million km2, 3.9million km2are
withinBrazil,andthearea delimited byBrazilas AmazoniaLegalcovers
some5 million km2.

Externalgeopolitics:a neglected
heartland
GiventhefluidityoftheLuso-Hispaniccolonialfrontier,
theinterest
ofthe
EuropeanimperialpowersintheC17-19th centuries,and theostensible
protectionaffordedbytheMonroeDoctrine, Amazonia-andindeedBrazil
andLatinAmerica,are largely in
neglected classical
western geopolitical
literature.
Ironically Latin
perhaps, America was thestartingpointofthis
forHalfordMacKinder
analysis, arguedthattheColumbian era,ofEuro-
pean overseas expansion,was maritime
and the
peripheral; post-Colum-
bianagewastobe landbased,dependent on newtechnology, particularly
therailway, and to focuson thepivotarea of Eurasia.In Mackinder's
writingstheAmericaswereconsigned to an 'outeror insularcrescent'
(1904).In 1919,whenhisHeartlandconceptfirstappeared,theAmericas
wereomitted completely;andthoughrestoredin1943they nowformed part
146 J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica109

of thelands of "theGreat Ocean Drainage9-thatis,theywere peripheral.

(MacKinder,1904,1919,1943).
Otherwesterngeopoliticalwritersalso paid scantheed to the region.
Isaiah BowmansawAmazoniaas ofsmallimportance-itwas hot,forested,
unhealthful and lacked population(Bowman,1921,656). DerwentWhit-
tleseyreferredtoitas 'onlyan adjuncttoBrazil'( Whittlesey,
1939,445). Saul
Cohen,probablythemostdistinguished post-warEnglishspeakingpolitical
geographer,identifiedLatin America as a 'geopoliticalregion'withinhis
Trade -DependentMartimeWorld,yethe dividedthecontinentintotwo-
Middleand SouthAmerica-alongthelineoftheAmazonwhich'barsSouth
America fromthe Caribbean'. (Cohen, 1966, 128). The basin was an
'effectivebarrier'between the two,providinglittleunityforits riparian
states,and theeffectoftherainforestbarrierwas centrifugal (ibid 268-9).
It is perhapssignificant,however,giventheneglectof Amazonia in these
discussionsthatthearea was seen as a source of resourcesforthefuture.
(Whittlesey op.cit.451-2;Cohen op.cit.268-9).Most interestingly
Bowman
saw Amazonia as havingpotential'when the resourcesof the temperate
zones aretaxedtocapacitybyrapidlygrowing populations'-though theirex-
ploitationwould probablyrequire'more progressivepeoples thanthose
whichrace,historyand climatehave conspiredto develop there';only,in
Bowman'sview,withtheinflux of'theagentsand capitaloftemperatelands
are the tropicalproductsof weak countriesmade available' (Browman,
op.cit.656 and 661).

Internalgeopolitics:an interiorheartland
L.W. Hepple has recently indicatedthelonghistory ofgeopoliticalthought
in LatinAmerica,and itspoliticalinfluenceon boththeinternaldevelop-
mentand externalrelationships ofthecontinent(Hepple, 1986,579). The
pivotal role of Braziliangeopoliticalworkis seen as being of particular
importance.
It is a basic premiseof thispaper thatthe contemporary frontierin
Amazoniacannotbe understoodwithoutreferenceto theroleoftheState,
particularly ifthetwoprimary dutiesoftheStateare to preserveterritorial
integrity and maximise the developmentofresourcesforthebenefitofthe
population(Prescott, 1968, 12).Overthepastdecades Amazoniandevelop-
mentand theBrazilianState have been intimately intertwined.
Thoughthe rootsof overtgovernmental interestsare older,theyhave
been mostclearlyarticulatedand implementedintheperiodsince1964,via
successivemilitary governments and theinfluenceon geopoliticalideas of
the'Sorbonnegroup'and theEscola Superiorda Guerra(Kelly,1984,443;
Hepple, op.cit.).
Amazonia constitutesthe geographicalcore of South America,yet is
formstheperiphery ofitsriparianstates-Brazil,Bolivia,Peru,Ecuador,Co-
lombia,Venezuela and Guyana; forBrazil,possessingthe core of Ama-
zonia,thereis a peripheryofotherstates.The colonialPortugueselargely
1989 in BrazilianAmazonia:background...
Development 147

securedtheterritory of Amazonia; independentBrazil extended,defined

and secureditspoliticalboundaries.Yet theeconomicdevelopmentand
settlementofBrazil has been largelyperipheralitssocio-economic'core'
hasbeen theSoutheast;itsgeographic'core' hasbeen under-populated and
unexploited.Braziliangeopoliticianshave arguedthatthebest solutionto
the vulnerability of these emptyhinterlandsis to populate and develop
them,by'marching westward'(ibid441). Suchobjectiveshavebeen defined
byGeneralsGolberyde Couto e Silvaand Carlos de Meira Mattos.Couto
e Silva identifiedthe integration and valorizationof territorial space and
expansiontowardsthe interioras major themesin Braziliangeopolitics
(Couto e Silva,1975,59). Thereis,inthisapproach,a distinctly geographical
perspectivegeopoliticswas definedas 'the Geographicconscienceof the
State' (Mattos,1975,5) or 'politicsin relationto geographicalconditions'
(Couto e Silva,1967,33). Brazil'sobjectivehas been to secureand occupy
territory,and defineand defendboundaries.In addition,therealizationof
long cherished dreamsof Amazonia as a resourcetreasuryprovidesthe
basis for both regional developmentand national advancement.Such
processesalso clarify Amazonia'srole as theheartlandofSouthAmerica,
a
providing key to the progressof both Brazil and the continentunder
Brazil'sleadership(Kelly,op.cit.,456).
A fascinating elementin thisBraziliangeopoliticalliteratureis a deter-
ministperspective, particularlyinthewritings ofMeiraMattos-'Geography
conditions,makes difficult, inspires,stimulates...presentsa challenge.It
fallsto man's lot to respondto geographicconditions;he respondsand
triumphs, or does notrespondand is destroyed'(Mattos,1977,105-6);'The
harshgeographicterrainoftheAmazonianjungleprovidesa challengefor
the nation;its tamingwillcontributeto the country'sprogress'(Mattos,
1952, 48-9). It was argued that if the Brazilian people could meet the
challengeofferedbythetropicaljungles,thiswouldsustaintheconquestof
the Amazon, create a new civilizationin the tropics,and fosterBrazil's
claimsto greatpowerstatus(Kelly,op.cit.y460).
Thereis an implicitidentification inthisBraziliangeopoliticalwriting of
a manifestdestiny-thatthecountry's geographicposition, and natural and
humanresourcesfititfora particularposition.Sucha destiny, and theState
rolesidentified by Prescott,have sustained the interestof Brazilian govern-
mentsin the Amazon territories, particularly as he suggests,'if any area
territory lies outsidethe authority of the governmentit is not partof the
state'(Prescott,op.cit.,10). The desireto occupyand utilizeterritory is not
a recentor peculiarlyBrazilianinnovation. Brazil's 'Marchapara oeste'Is as
legitimateas America's ManifestDestiny,and Meira Mattos sees his
country'sfrontier advance to the west as similarto those of Russia, the
UnitedStatesand Australiain theC19th(Kelly,op.cit., 457).
In theearly1970sAmazonia was seen as a concernofgovernment and
a
people, problem for them to confront and resolve. It was possessed
physically and politicallybut it had become necessaryto secure it more
148J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica
109

to transform
formally, itfroma geographical fantasyintoa reality
which
wouldcontribute 'totransform
toBrazil'sgreatness- itfroma purestateof
naturetoa spacedominated bymen1(FerreiraReis,1972,11).
The frontier
in practice
Formostofthepost-Cabralian periodtheFrontier inAmazonian Brazilhas
beensimple,emphemeral andsmallscale.Through thecolonialperiodit
wascharacterized bythesubsistencesociety oftheIndian,thealdeiasofthe
thelandandriverexploration
missionaries, ofthebandeiras,thecollecting
forfishand drogasde sertão,together
activities withsomecultivation of
cocoa,coffee,sugar,cotton,andtabacco.By1800theregional population
waslessthan25,000;inthenineteenth century itexperienced considerable
expansion,as didtheregional in
pconomy, response tothe rubberboom.In
1872population was332,000andby19201.3million (FerreiraReis,1974,
39) Profound changewaslimited: therubber economy sustained
scarcely a
frontier
significant ofsettlement.
Thecollapseoftherubberboomprompted thefirstinvolvementofthe
StateinAmazonia,seekingto sustainthattraditional, extractive
activity.
Howeversignificant interésis usuallydatedfroma speechby Getúlio
VargasinManausin1940,couchedinspecific terms ofconqueringtheland,
dominating the water andsubjugating the forest.

Thestate-sponsored
frontier
ThenatureofStateactivity fostering settlementinAmazoniaoverthepast
half-centuryprovides a fascinating seriesofchanging development strate-
gies,creatinga os
variety spatial such
patterns, that there hasbeen not one
butmany.
frontier, The1946Constitution ofBrazilcommitted 3 percentof
federaltaxrevenuetodeveloping Amazonia, buthiswasnotputtousetill
thecreation oftheregional development agencySPVEA in1953.SPVEA
setthetoneforsubsequent strategies-aiming to secureoccupation ofthe
region,createan economically stablesociety,and fosterdevelopment
paralleltothatofthenation(CastroSoares,1963,187).Italsorecognized
theproblem offormulating a development strategy defined
fora territory
as almost60 percentofa nationofsub-continental proportions, byidenti-
fying nodesof economic, or
demographic strategic significancefocifor
as
investment.
SPVEA'simpact waslimited andafter the1964Revolution thegeopoliti-
cal ideasoutlinedaboveformed thebasisofgovernment articu-
strategy,
latedbySUDAM. Investment wasininfrastructure (47 percentof1967-71
investment),agriculture (16percent), manufacturing (13percent), housing,
healthandeducation(12 percent)(Mahar,1978,27),andwastofocuson
regional development polessuchas Boa Vista,Cuiabá,ManausandPòrto
Velho.In a particular effort to stimulatedevelopment ofWestern Ama-
zonia Manauswas createda Free Trade Zone in 1967.Howeverthe
1989 in BrazilianAmazonia:background...
Development 149

diffusionof developmentfrompre-existing nodes of developmentwas

limited, and of projected investment by 1975 87 percentwas in the3 states
ofPará, Mato Grosso and Amazonas (ibid,125).
The best known(and mostcontroversial)frontieradvance into Ama-
zonia was promptedpartlyby externalfactors,the 1970 droughtin the
Northeast.This promptedthe Programade IntegraçãoNacional (PIN)
whichsoughtto solvethetwinproblemsof an underpopulatedAmazonia
and an overpopulatedNortheast, byconstructing theTransamazônica(and
other)highways to link the two regions and settlesome 500,000nordestino
small-farm colonistsalongtheseroads.For a varietyofreasons(see Smith,
1982),theschemedidnotmeetitsobjectivesand itcouldbe arguedthatthis
experiencenegatesthe notionof organizedcolonisationas the means to
securethefrontier ofsettlement acrossAmazonia.Itwas also inthisperiod
thata pastoralfrontier, oflargescale extensivecattleranchingwas devel-
oped, encouragedbySUDAM, (whichfavouredunitsin excessof 25,000h
as the minimumsize of economic viability).This was responsible for
substantial clearingofforesttractson largeholdings, someoftheminexcess
of300,000h.
Howeverthenodal structure ofSPVEA and thelinearstrategy ofagro-
the
pastoraldevelopmentalong highways replaced was in 1974 a
by growth
pole strategy Polamazônica.Thisclearlyidentified Amazoniaas a resource
frontier, seekingtomaximiseutilization ofknownresourcesofland,timber,
mineralsand energyin a complexof 15 growthpoles.
The impactoftheseState-sponsored policieshasbeen considerable.The
population of theNorth region rose from 2.56millionin1960to 5.88 million
in 1980.The impactofchangeinagriculture, and byimplication, on therain
forestenvironment, is clearlyevidentin (Table 1). It is clearlypossibleto
arguefora frontier or frontiers advancingintoAmazonia,aroundthepre-
of
existingpoints development,along the highways,and most recently
aroundthe'growthpoles'.
It mustbe notedhoweverthatregionalpopulationdensitywas only1.66
per km2in 1980; onlyin Pará and Rondôniawas densityabove 2 per km2
-inTurneriantermstheAmazon frontier remainswideopen. It shouldalso
be notedthatin1980onlysome 12percentoftheNorth'sarea was recorded
as beingin farms,and withconsiderablevariationbetweenpoliticalunits
(Table 2).
In 1985 a new governmentinitiativesoughtto combine a frontierof
settlementwithdefinitionof the politicalboundary,in its 'Calha Norte'
project.Thisaimedtooccupyand settlethenorthern marginsofAmazonia,
whichconstituted 14percentofthenationalteritoy (Sternberg, 198729-30).
Prioritywas to be given to a 150 km wide strip-the Faixa de Fronteiras-to
be securedagainstperceivedthreatsfromVenezuela and Guyana.
150J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica109

Numberofholdings 1970 1975 1980 % change1970-80

NorthRegion 261145 337515 409787 56.9
Rondônia 7082 25 532 49517 599.2
Acre 23102 25 006 27 385 18.5
Amazonas 85 251 92801 100750 18.2
Roraima 1953 3 035 3 743 91.7
Pará 141442 187132 224085 58.4
Amapá 2 315 4 009 4307 86.0

Farmarea
Northregion 23182145 29767966 42546027 83.5
Rondônia 1631640 3091750 5688269 248.6
Acre 4122085 3716537 5851104 41.9
Amazonas 4475940 4499615 7220520 61.3
Roraima 1594397 1632639 2478767 55.5
Pará 10754828 16088265 20571881 91.3
Amapá 603254 739160 735483 21.9

Areaincrops
Northregion 617131 1016646 1763513 185.8
Rondônia 44 636 192894 366907 722.0
Acre 35 307 34 726 76084 115.5
Amazonas 154703 188718 341029 120.4
Roraima 5174 20331 36824 611.7
Pará 366958 558086 927904 151.1
Amapá 10353 21893 19872 91.9

Workforce
Northregion 934024 1445224 1769757 89.5
Rondônia 20 563 106704 176936 760.4
Acre 62 081 81087 95159 53.2
Amazonas 283326 418384 455584 60.7
Roraima 8 277 19075 17020 105.6
Pará 549313 800842 1010560 83.9
Amapá 10464 19132 14498 38.5

Cattle
Northregion 1706177 2097329 3948406 131.4
Rondônia 23 125 51404 248558 907.5
Acre 72166 118456 291991 304.6
Amazonas 263487 196834 350371 32.9
Roraima 238761 241059 313309 31.2
Pará 1043648 1427697 2698108 158.5
Amapá 64 990 61879 46 069 -29.2

TableI Amazonia:agriculture
IBGE 1977and1982
1989 Development 151
in BrazilianAmazonia:background...

North 11.9
Rondônia 23.4
Acre 38.3
Amazonas 4.6
Roraima 10.7
Pará 16.5
Amapá 7.0

oftotalstatearea 1980
as percentage
Table2 Amazonia:areainfarms
(IBGE 1982a)

Theecologicalcounter-frontier
The advanceoftheBrazilianfrontier intoAmazoniasince1970hasprompted
muchinterestand concernfromoutsideobservers,particularly thosecon-
cerned withperceivedenvironmental consequences fromdevelopment.
Downs (1972) identifieda numberof reasonswhyenvironmental issues
generateinterest:
1) environmental problemsare morevisibleand threatening thanother
social problems;
2) theyhave limitedpoliticaldivisiveness,because theythreatenalmost
everyone;
3) blame forsuchproblemscan be attributed to identifiable'villains';
4) the ambiguity of environmental issues allows almostanyoneto pro-
claima concernabout them.
The experienceof Brazil's Amazonian programmefitseasilyintothis
mould-thethreatswerevisible,theywere less politicallycontentiousthan
thoseofregional,socialorethnicpoverty, and mostpeople couldsubscribe
toconcernoverthreatsto natureand primitive man.MoreovertheVillains'
were clearlyidentifiable and singularly
unfashionable- theproposalswere
the work of a rightwingmilitaryregime-forming a triplealliance of
repressivestate,foreignmulti-national capitaland thebourgeoisie.There
was rapid,substantialand sustainedhostility to the threatsposed by this
unholyallianceto therainforest,theAmerindianand theglobal environ-
ment.There has been a major outpouringof literatureand othermedia
materialon theregion.In 1975Goodland and Irwincould notethelimited
literatureavailable on the region's flora,fauna, indigenesand history
(Goodland and Irwin,1975, 79, 101, 119, 121); since 1975 at least 30
substantialvolumeshavebeenpublishedon theregioninEnglish(Dickenson,
Most
op.cit.). ofthisliteratureiswritten
froma conservationist perspective,
hostileinvaryingdegreesto theactual and envisagedprocessof develop-
mentand itsconsequences,realorpresumed.Ittendstosharethefollowing
characteristics:
152 J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica109

a) a general disregardfor the Brazilian contextof the development

process, with littleeffortto understandthe rationale of Brazil's
initiatives
in theregion;
b) an essentiallyexternalperspective.Thereare fewBraziliancontribu-
tionsto thisliterature,
and littlereferencetoworkbyBrazilians,even
thatwhichalso questionstheenvironmental consequencesofchange.
c) essentiallynegativeconclusions.There is general unanimity in the
criticismsofthedevelopmentprocessand itslikelyconsequences,but
littleattemptto offeralternativestrategiesat a local, national or
globalscale;
d) a degreeofvestedself-interest.
Thisisparticularly
trueofwriting from
thephysicalsciences,whichtendsto argueforpreservation oftherain
forest'forfurther research'.

Thefrontier ofknowledge
Thishostilityto frontier
developmentinAmazoniatendstoarguefora halt
to furtheradvance, and ignoresthe aspirationsof the BrazilianState. A
recurrentcomplaintof thisliterature, and partof itsrationale,is lack of
knowledge ofthe Amazon environment. Itfailstorecognizethatwithoutthe
spurof governmentactivity, such knowledgewould remainlimited.The
directand indirectconsequencesofgovernment has been a growing
activity
recordofthenatureoftheAmazon environment, notonlyofits potential
butofitslimitations.In addition,despiteitscommitment todesenvolvimen-
tismotheStatehas been awareoftheconcernfortheregion'senvironment
and native peoples, and has designatedconsiderableareas as national
parks,forestreservesand Indianreserves(Table 3).

ha
Rondônia 1*032,000
Amazonas 4*472,000
Pará r000,000
Amapá r014,000

Table3 Amazonia:areainnationalandstateparksandbiological
reservesl980
(IBGE, 1982b,48)

Theinformal frontier
Concernin theliteratureand in thispaper withtheactionsof theState in
seekingto fostertheadvance ofthefrontier of settlementintoAmazonia
overlooksthedefactoadvance ofsucha frontier, bycolonistsseekingland,
part of a process virtuallycontinuoussince colonial times.Since 1970
pressuresinthemoredevelopedNortheast, SoutheastandSouth,improved
access betweenthose regionsand Amazonia, and broad publicityabout
changeintheregion,has fosteredand facilitated spontaneousadvanceofa
1989 in BrazilianAmazonia:background...
Development 153

(Table 1) reflectsthe scale of such changes.Over 80

settlementfrontier.
percentoftheholdingswerebelow 100h.and itissignificant that29 percent
ofthefarmhectarageis recordedas 'occupied' ratherthanowned,rented
or sharecropped(Table 4).

North 103.8ha

Rondônia 114.9
Acre 213.7
Amazonas 71.7
Roraima 662.2
Pará 91.8
Amapá 170.8

BRAZIL 71.5

.Table4 Amazonia:Averagesizeofholding1980
(IBGE 1982d)

This is almostcertainlyan underestimate butreflectsthescale of small

scale spontaneousmigrationintoAmazonia. The potentialconsequences
ofthisencroachment forthenaturalenvironment and nativepeoples ofthe
area are enormous;whateverpossibilitiesexist for modifying frontier
strategies defined bythe State,the likelihoodof this
restraining spontane-
ous frontier is tenuousindeed.

Conclusions
1) It is clear thatdespite350 yearsofLuso-Brazilianinterestin Amazonia
and threedecades ofState policiesfortheregionthatthefrontier is far
fromcomplete.Much ofthearea remainsundevelopedor underdevel-
oped.
2) The strategiesthathave been applied to the regionvaryin formand
spatialimpact.Combinedwiththelegacies of earlieradvances and the
contemporary spontaneousfrontier, thereare in factmanyfrontiersin
Amazonia, not one. There is no
certainly singleadvancing frontierof
settlementnorsequentialprocess.
3) In ordertocomprehendthenatureoftheprocessoffrontier advanceinto
Amazonia since 1970 itis essentialto take note ofboththegeopolitical
backgroundand thepracticalstrategiespursuedbytheState.Whatever
the concernsabout the environmental consequencesof contemporary
frontier advancesintotheregion,cognizancemustalso be takenof the
objectivesof both the State and the people involvedin the frontier
processes.
154 J.P.Dickenson RevistaGeográfica109

References
Baker,A.R.H., (ed) 1972Progressin humangeography,NewtonAbbott.
Baritz,L. 1961 "The idea oftheWestern. Hist.Rev.v 66, 618-40
Bowman,I., 1921 Vie New World,Yonkers-on-Hudson.
Bowman,L, 1931 Vie pioneerfringe,New York.
Bryce,J.,1912SouthAmerica:observationand impressions, London.
CastroSoares,L. de,1963Amazonia,Rio de Janeiro.
Cohen,S., 1964Geography ma divided
andpolitics London.
world,
Couto e Silva,G. do, 1967 Geopolíticado Brasil,Rio de Janeiro.
Couto e Silva,G. do, 1975 citedin Meira Mattos,C de, op, cit.
Dickenson,J.P.,1968 "Too manytrees:notenoughwood"/. Lat. Am. St.,
vl8, 409-23.
Downs,A., 1972"Up and downwithecology-theissue-attention cycle",The
PublicInterest,v28, 38-50.
Dubos, R., 1980 Vie wooingofEarth,London.
FerreiraReis, A.C., 1972 O impactoAmazónica na civilizaçãoBrasileira,
Rio de Janeiro.
FerreiraReis, A.C., 1974 "Economic history oftheBrazilianAmazon", in
C. Wagley(ed.) Man in theAmazon,Gainesville,33-44.
Glacken,C, 1967 Traceson theRhodianshore,Berkeley.
Goodland, R.J.A. and Irwin,H.S., 1975Amazonjungle:greenhell to red
desert?Amsterdam.
Gourou,P., 1953 Vie tropicalworld,London.
Gulley,J.L.M.,1965 "The Turnerianfrontier: a studyon themigrationof
ideas", Vjd. Econ. Soc. Geog.v50,65-72,81-91.
Hemming,J.,1978Red gold,London.
Hennessey,A., 1978 Vie frontier in LatinAmericanhistory, London.
Hepple, L.W., 1986 Geopolitics,generals and the statein Brazil Political
Geography Quarterly,
Supplement to vol. 5, 579-590.
IBGE, 1978BrasilSinopsePreliminar do CensoAgropecuario 1975,vl4, Rio
de Janeiro.
IBGE, 1982a SinopsePreliminar do CensoAgropecuario1980, v2,ti,no.l,
Rio de Janeiro.
IBGE, 1982bAnuárioEstatísticodo Brasil1981,Rio de Janeiro.
Kelly,P.L., 1984 Geopoliticalthemesin thewritingof General Carlos de
Meira MattosofBrazil,/.Lat. Am. St.vl6, 439-61.
Mackinder,H., 1904"The geographicalpivotofhistoryGeog.Journ., v23,
415-37.
Mackinder,H., 1919Democraticidealsand reality, London.
Mackinder,H., 1943 "The roundworldand thewinningof peace" Foreign
Affate, v21,595-605.
economico
Mahar,D J.,1979Desenvolvimento daAmazonia,Riode Janeiro.
Marsh,G.P., 1864/1965Man andNature,
Cambridge.
, bol
do nossoterritorio
Mattos,C. de M., 1952"Aspectosgeopoliticos
Geog.48-9.
1989 in BrazilianAmazonia:background...
Development 155

Mattos,G de M., 1975Brasil:geopolíticae destino,Rio de Janeiro.

Mattos,C. de M. 1977,^1geopolíticae asprojeçõesdopoder,Río de Janeiro.
Meinig,D., 1962 On themarginsofthegood earth,Chicago.
Morse,R., 1965 Vie bandeirantes,New York.
Prescott,J.R.V.,1968 Thegeography ofStatepolices,London.
Smith,N.J.H.,1982Rainforest corridors, Berkeley.
Sternberg,H. O'R., 1978" 'ManifestDestiny'and theBrazilianAmazon: a
backdropto contemporary security and developmentissues"in Works,
M.A. (ed.) C.LA.G. Yearbook,vol.13,25-35.
Tuan,Y-F., 1971 "Man and nature"AAG Commissionon CollegeGeogra-
phyResourcePaper10.
Turner,F.J.,1961Frontier and section:selectedessays,EnglewoodCliffs.
Viottida Costa,E., 1985TheBrazilianEmpire:myths and histories,
Chicago.
Whittlesey,D., 1939/72TheEarthand theState,New York.