Paraguay RURAL SOCIETY
Workers picking strawberries near Paraguarí
Courtesy Inter-American Development Bank
A family with a property deed issued by the Rural Welfare
Institute
Courtesy Inter-American Development Bank
Rural life, like much else in Paraguay, was defined by a series
of dichotomies: commercial versus subsistence agriculture, large
landholdings as opposed to small farms, and landowners in contrast
to squatters. Land ownership was highly concentrated, and large-
scale enterprises dominated the production of lucrative commercial
crops
(see Agriculture
, ch. 3). Most farms were smaller than ten
hectares. In the densely settled central region (comprising the
departments of Paraguarí, Cordillera, Guairá, and Caazapá), these
small landholdings constituted as much as 80 percent of all
landholdings.
Although inequality underlay the system as a whole, the
extensive land reserves and low population density that
characterized Paraguay until the 1950s softened the impact of the
disparities recorded in agricultural surveys and censuses. The
largest holdings were vast ranches in the Chaco or along the
country's eastern border, regions of low population density. Large
estates were typically worked extensively, but custom permitted
squatters to occupy the fringes with little interference. The
landowner would be either unaware of their presence or undisturbed
by it. Even where there were terms of rent for land, they might be
as minimal as occasional labor for the landlord or gifts of produce
at harvest or on the landlord's birthday. Although surveys showed
that few Paraguayans owned land, fewer still paid much for the
privilege of using it. Historically, squatters were useful to a
landowner in a variety of informal ways. They were a pool of
reserve labor, semi-obligated to work for below-average wages
during labor shortages. The presence of squatters also was
insurance against more serious incursions on one's lands in an
environment where clear land titles were not easy to come by.
Patterns of land use were deeply ingrained in any event, and they
often limited a landowner's options in dealing with tenants.
The relationship between the landowner and squatters was usually
transitory, but in some instances it persisted for generations as
a patrón-peón arrangement. The patrón served as an
advocate for his peones; they were to him the elements of a
loyal following. In essence, the connection was that of client to
powerful protector. It implied unquestioning loyalty and respect on
the part of the peón.
The patrón-peón relationship served as a metaphor
and model for proper social relations for rural society; indeed,
the terms effectively delineated social boundaries. Peasants used
patrón as a general term of respectful address in speaking
to any urban person of obviously higher status. Townspeople
generalized peón to refer to any lower-class person--
although not in direct address, because to call a person
peón to his face would be a breach of etiquette. The
relationship also colored economic relations between patrón
and peón; anthropologists Elman and Helen Service described
contracting wage labor between the two: ". . . a patrón
hires a person as though he were asking a personal favor, and the
peón responds as though he were obliged to grant it."
Economic relations as a whole were ideally enmeshed in social ties
like that of patrón to peón. Storekeepers each had
their loyal followings, and it was considered disloyal to shop at
another shop merely to take advantage of better prices. In return,
customers expected preferential treatment, small favors, and some
credit when they needed it.
Peasant farming was characterized by "agricultural nomadism";
the search for a better plot or improved circumstances was
perennial. Cultivation was slash-and-burn followed by a fallow
period of several years. Farmers preferred land on the fringe of
primary or dense secondary strands of tropical forests.
Agricultural income among small farmers was not particularly tied
to land tenure. A successful peasant might own, rent, or simply use
the lands he farmed.
Population growth eventually increased pressure on farmland and
forest reserves. The pressure was most acute in the arc stretching
roughly 100 kilometers north and east of Asunción, where
approximately half the farms and half the squatters in the country
were found. By the late 1950s, squatters and landowners faced
increasingly bitter confrontations over communal grazing rights and
land boundaries. Large landholders called for programs to
"decongest" the central area and move the squatters to less
populated regions along the northern and eastern borders.
These calls led to the formation in 1963 of an agrarian reform
agency--the Rural Welfare Institute (Instituto de Bienestar Rural--
IBR)--charged with the task of resettling peasants in the eastern
border region, especially the departments of Alto Paraná,
Canendiyú, Amambay, and Caaguazú. Although the program resettled
many families in the 1960s and 1970s, critics noted that efforts to
improve the farmers' standard of living were hampered by a lack of
credit, technical assistance, and infrastructure
(see Land Reform and Land Policy
, ch. 3).
The eastern region enjoyed an economic boom during the building
of the Itaipú hydroelectric power plant
(see Electricity
, ch. 3).
As construction was completed, however, thousands of laborers were
lost their jobs. In the meantime, the land tenure situation in the
region had changed dramatically. Many large landowners sold their
properties to Brazilian and other foreign agribusinesses. These new
owners, more committed than their predecessors to modern farming
techniques, strongly objected to the presence of peasants on their
properties. In addition, thousands of Brazilian farmers entered the
area to claim properties significantly cheaper than comparable
lands in their own country
(see Immigrants
, this ch.). As a result,
the erstwhile Itaipú laborers were unable to resume the practice of
occupying plots as squatters. Clashes occurred between squatters
and authorities throughout the mid-1980s. During the same period,
the demand for farm laborers declined as the large-scale timber and
soybean enterprises in the area became more mechanized.
Despite these dramatic changes in land tenure, many other
aspects of rural society remained unchanged into the late 1980s.
Most farming was subsistence-oriented. Given a holding of some ten
hectares, a family might keep four to six hectares under actual
cultivation at any given time. The traditional tool kit and
technological repertoire reflected the limited economic
opportunities the countryside afforded most farmers.
The family was the chief source of farm labor. Men usually
cleared the land and prepared the soil; women and children planted,
weeded, and harvested the crops. Men were frequently absent in
search of wage labor and women were accustomed to manage the farm
in their absence. Farms permanently headed by women were rare,
however; a woman widowed or deserted by her spouse typically moved
to a nearby town.
Neighbors frequently exchanged labor for various agricultural
tasks; recipients were obliged to return the assistance when the
neighbor needed help, although this arrangement was not formalized.
The rate of labor exchange was greater when, as was often the case,
neighbors were also relatives. Most crops had a lengthy planting
and harvesting season, which spread out the periods of peak labor
demand and facilitated the exchange of labor among households.
Wage labor was important to the family's subsistence. In some
regions men supplemented agricultural production by gathering the
yerba maté bush--the leaves of which produced a bitter tea consumed
by Paraguayans--or by hunting game. If the homestead was along a
major road, women sold handicrafts. Raising livestock often was a
subsidiary source of income.
The numerous small towns dotting the eastern half of the country
every ten to twenty kilometers were the loci of commercial
relations and all effective political and religious authority. A
town's inhabitants normally included a few large commercial
ranchers, wholesalers and retailers of all kinds and degrees of
prosperity, small manufacturers, government officials, and a few
professionals such as teachers and pharmacists. There were numerous
poor people who eked out a living as servants or laborers. The
occupational specialists common to rural Paraguay -- barbers,
curers, and craftsmen--were typically town dwellers. Most
households headed by females were urban; the women earned their
livelihood as storekeepers, servants, seamstresses, laundresses,
curers, midwives, or cigar-makers.
Peasants attended town functions primarily as observers. Rural
families might visit a nearby town during its saint's fiesta, but
church would be too far away for regular attendance. The lay
functionaries who attended to many church affairs in the community
were urban and prosperous. Civic events and fiestas themselves
reflected enduring social distinctions based on wealth and
breeding: that between la gente (the common people) and
la sociedad (society, those with wealth and the required
social graces). Fiestas traditionally included separate dances for
the two groups that might be held on different nights or in
different locations. There was little doubt about who should attend
which function. The only role for la gente at the formal
dance for the upper crust was as observers.
Data as of December 1988
|