(iPoster) Land Titling and the Erosion of Grassroots Mobilization in the Brazilian Amazon

• In Event: Poster Sessions: Comparative Politics of Developing Countries & Occupation, Memory, and National Identity
  In Poster Session: Poster Session: Comparative Politics of Developing Countries

Abstract

Can the formalization of land rights weaken the political organization of marginalized rural groups? Land titling is often portrayed as a pathway to political and economic empowerment for the rural poor living under insecure property rights. The underlying assumption is that formalization enhances tenure security, encourages investment, and deepens people’s attachment to the land. However, in many rural frontier regions, where state presence is limited and land markets are rapidly expanding, these conditions often do not hold. In such settings, I argue, titling may instead act as a force of fragmentation, weakening the collective channels through which
rural populations organize and mobilize.

This paper develops a theory of the demobilizing consequences of land rights policies in agricultural and resource frontier regions, where formal titles often fail to provide meaningful tenure security or improve basic subsistence conditions. In such contexts, titling may increase the coordination costs associated with collective action. I identify two reinforcing mechanisms through which this occurs. First, by facilitating land sales, titling creates incentives for long-standing residents to exit and opens space for the entry of outsiders, a dynamic I refer to as outer fragmentation. Second, it introduces new lines of symbolic and material differentiation among those who remain, producing internal asymmetries between titled landholders and their untitled or formerly landless neighbors (inner fragmentation). In both cases, titling erodes a shared sense of identity and undermines the associational infrastructure that enables collective action. In communities where residents depend on place-based organizations to navigate state absence and external threats, these disruptions carry far-reaching consequences for how rural populations access public goods, engage with the state, and sustain their livelihoods.

I investigate these dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon, where state-led land reform created thousands of rural settlements. These communities are inhabited by former squatters and traditional populations who have benefited from land reform policies implemented since Brazil’s democratization. Today, 3,079 settlements are spread across the region, occupying approximately 10% of its territory. Given the historically contentious and often violent nature of land occupation in these areas, the formal recognition of land rights has become a central focus of the political agenda for these communities.

My study relies on multiple empirical strategies and data sources. First, I assemble a community–election–year panel (2006–2024) and implement a staggered difference- in-differences design to estimate the effects of titling on electoral indicators of community mobilization. Second, I draw on an original household survey of 1,970 respondents in 195 communities across Pará (fielded 2024–2025) to provide individual-level evidence of collective disengagement and test the plausibility of my mechanisms. I complement my analysis with qualitative evidence from in-depth interviews with community leaders, settlers, movement organizers, and bureaucrats.

Results indicate that titling has a consistent demobilizing effect. Communities that received titles registered declines in electoral support for the Workers’ Party, the main institutional ally of Brazil’s land rights movements, as well as reduced capacity to coordinate bloc voting in legislative contests. Interviews with settlers, union leaders, and activists corroborate these patterns. Future versions of this paper will incorporate household survey data to provide additional micro-level evidence on these dynamics.

Importantly, my findings do not imply that settlers would be better off living indefinitely under provisional legal status or that property rights should not be formalized. Instead, they underscore the need to define the conditions under which titling achieves its intended goals. Existing scholarship often treats titling as the natural endpoint of land reform and an unquestioned route to reducing conflict and promoting political and economic incorporation of the rural poor. Yet in contexts where state capacity is weak and collective organization is vital for survival, titling may weaken the very foundation on which communities rely to defend their territory and secure public goods.

This study seeks to contribute to several strands of scholarship. First, it revisits classic debates on the political consequences of property rights and the design of land reform policies in developing countries, shedding light on their implications in agricultural frontier regions. By illuminating the dual nature of titling, it offers new insights into how seemingly inclusive policies can entail contradictory outcomes. Empirically, the paper offers new evidence on a region and population that are not only central to contemporary land politics but also play a critical role in broader efforts to mitigate climate change.

Author

• Debora Duque, Brown University