This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
There are not fixed conditions that make potential agricultural frontiers attractive to capital: different spaces and strategies are chosen in relation to previous failed experiments, including those strongly contested by social movements. Socio-environmental contestations can also inadvertently result in negative spillovers, or a kind of indirect land use change. I propose a concept of redirected land use and control change for cases with strategic adaptations by promoters of frontiers. I suggest three dimensions of adaptations – across spaces, political-administrative regimes and in forms of land appropriation – to apprehend the multi-scale politics of land grabbing, through the case of Matopiba in Brazil.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniela Calmon (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: