Another palm is possible: small-scale palm oil farmers exercising autonomy in northeast Colombia

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates how some small-scale palm oil growers in northeast Colombia have managed to exercise partial autonomy from global markets while still participating in them. By comparing the varied experiences of these farmers, I find that, state-led land access and multiscale organizational support for small-scale farming have enabled these farmers to selectively engage with global markets and carve-out space for autonomous decision-making on their farms. By examining the risks and possibilities associated with farmers’ engagement in global value chains, this study illuminates the potential for agricultural transitions and small-scale farming within the context of global agricultural markets.

KEYWORDS:

• Global value chains
• small-scale farming‌
• class differentiation
• autonomy
• oil palm
• Colombia

Introduction

Palm oil is the world’s most consumed oil, and its production has transformed lives and landscapes around the globe. For instance, for Gerardo, a small-scale oil palm grower in the northeast region of Magdalena Medio, Colombia, owning an oil palm crop has meant going from having a secure unionized job to having a fluctuating income, owing loans and taxes, and hoping to quit farming if anyone dares to buy his pest-damaged cropland. For Cecilia, another small-scale farmer in the same region, planting palm has meant being able to provide for her family and having the prospects to diversify her cash crops, while also caring for the ecological sustainability of her land, which she hopes to be able to pass on to her kids. What shapes these contrasting stories?

Palm oil crops are capital-intensive and known to cause environmental degradation and peasant displacement (see: Altieri and Nichols 2002; Ballvé 2013; Hurtado, Pereira-Villa, and Villa 2017; Nyouma et al. 2019; Ojeda et al. 2015). This has been particularly true in Colombia, where paramilitary violence has facilitated the expansion of the industry, leading to forced displacement and the systematic suppression of labor unions (Grajales 2011; Maher 2015; Serrano 2023). These conditions explain Gerardo’s precarious situation. But what about Cecilia who runs what she defines as a successful farm?

In Colombia, there are around 4,000 small-scale oil palm growers with less than 20 hectares (ha) of this crop (Fedepalma 2011a; 2019a). This number is relatively lower compared to other countries in Latin America such as Honduras, Mexico, and Ecuador, where the proportion of small-scale farmers is higher (Castellanos-Navarrete, de Castro, and Pacheco 2021). Traveling throughout Magdalena Medio, I met many of these farmers with contrasting stories, such as those of Gerardo and Cecilia. While many small-scale farmers have been impoverished due to adverse conditions imposed by the palm oil industry, others have managed to create economically viable farms with diversified agriculture alongside oil palm. Given these divergent experiences, the question arises: How have some small-scale farmers been able to build economically viable and environmentally sustainable farms while growing palm, despite the recognized economic and environmental risks associated with this crop for smallholders?

I argue that some small-scale palm oil growers have been able to exercise autonomy from markets through state-led land access and multiscale organizational support for small-scale farming, allowing them to strategically engage in global markets while reducing costs and diversifying income sources. This argument informs key debates on the viability of small-scale farming for global markets (McMichael 2013; Oya 2012) and the possible paths for agricultural transitions towards economic equity and environmental sustainability of export crops (Friedmann 2016). To contribute to these debates, the study builds upon analyses of the struggles of small-scale farmers to build a sustained cash income while maintaining some degree of autonomy from these markets (Castellanos-Navarrete and Jansen 2018; Henderson 2019). It expands on these analyses by identifying how multiscale organizational support, including state-led land access, for small-scale farming can allow these farmers to selectively participate in global markets and carve out space for partial autonomy from these markets.

To conduct this research, I employed an ethnographically grounded global value chain analysis. During twelve months, between 2018 and 2019, I conducted 62 interviews and participatory observations with different actors in the palm oil industry, particularly small-scale farmers, and farm workers. The study centered on two sites in Magdalena Medio: the area surrounding the township of Puerto Wilches and the lower San Vicente de Chucurí area (San Vicente, for short). Interviews included 11 members of Cecilia’s association, six members of Gerardo’s former association, and seven current or former officials from institutions supporting these associations. Additional interviews involved small-scale farmers from other associations, oil palm company owners and managers, farmworkers, NGO and government officials, and agronomic and biology researchers. I complemented this research with a historical reconstruction of agrarian relations in the palm oil industry in Magdalena Medio, drawing upon secondary sources. This approach allowed me to make an incorporated comparison (McMichael 1990) of Gerardo and Cecilia’s life histories in the context of key transformations in agrarian relations and the palm oil industry in Magdalena Medio.

In the next section, I present key debates on the possibilities and effects of value chain integration for small-scale farmers. I then discuss the key characteristics of the palm oil industry in Colombia and the experiences of Gerardo and Cecilia, contextualizing their experiences within their respective communities. This discussion underscores the specific circumstances that have influenced their life trajectories in relation to the challenges posed by the palm oil industry. The conclusion proposes key nuances between common binaries that reveal possible paths of transition for more equitable and sustainable globalized agriculture.

Class differentiation and interstices for autonomy in global value chains

Global market integration for small-scale farmers: adverse conditions and unequal effects

There is extensive recognition that the integration of small-scale farmers as suppliers of global industries increases marginalization and dependence for these farmers. This integration often occurs through contract farming, an arrangement that involves farmers supplying a firm with a certain commodity under transaction and quality conditions set by firms. These conditions include credit, production practices, and prices (Little and Watts 1994). Today, integrating small-scale farmers into global value chains is especially popular as a developmental strategy by governments, private companies, and international organizations, to purportedly support these farmers to increase productivity and enhance income (McMichael 2013). The participation of small-scale farmers as suppliers of global markets is a key phenomenon shaping agrarian livelihoods today.

While frequently advertised as a win-win relationship, contract farming for global markets tends to benefit firms and unequally affect different small-scale farmers. For firms, it is an opportunity to project a socially responsible image and subsidize production through government or international development transfers (Oya 2012). For farmers, it increases entry costs, debt burdens, and vulnerability to risks such as drought, pests, floods, and unfavorable exchange rates, due to the reliance on corporate contracts and monoculture farming. When these risks materialize, many farmers are forced out, creating opportunities seized by a select few with capital accumulation, leading to class differentiation. This process leads to class differentiation, transforming some into capitalist producers and expanding their landholdings, while the majority become proletarians (Araghi 1995; Bernstein 2006; 2010; Paré 1991; Shanin 1971). Contract farming in global value chains has intensified marginalization through dispossession and debt, paired with a lack of employment opportunities outside. Contract farming in global value chains intensifies marginalization, causing dispossession, debt, and limited employment options. Global market integration exposes small-scale farmers to the impacts of policies commodifying land and resulting in local displacement (Giraldo 2018; Li 2011; McMichael 2008; 2013; Ploeg 2008). While some farmers may be hailed as success stories, the overall effect has been detrimental to small-scale farmers worldwide, hindering their livelihoods and opportunities.

These effects are especially pronounced for farmers supplying oil palm fruit. While proponents argue that integrating these farmers into the value chain creates employment opportunities and prevents land sales, critical agrarian scholars present a contrasting reality. The shift from diversified agriculture to oil palm has diminished livelihood options and failed to prevent land sales (Hervas 2019). Employment opportunities are characterized by low rates and precarious contracts, offering uncertain and low wages (Castellanos-Navarrete, Tobar-Tomás, and López-Monzón 2019). The incorporation of smallholders into the global palm oil commodity chain has produced unequal outcomes influenced by factors such as state projects, power dynamics, contractual conditions with other firms, and land quality (McCarthy 2010). Overall, palm oil crops have failed to improve life and work possibilities for small-scale farmers.

In Colombia, the implementation of the value chain strategy has occurred within a backdrop of longstanding land conflicts. The country exhibits extreme land inequality, with 1% of landowners holding 81% of private lands (Bauluz, Govind, and Novokmet 2020; Guereña and Burgos 2017). Additionally, the State has imposed significant restrictions for small-scale farmers to access formal land titles (Bejarano 1983; Fals Borda 1982). Previous agrarian reform attempts in the 1930s and 1960s were limited and ultimately favored landholding elites, pushing small-scale farmers to marginal lands (Martin Peré 2016; Zamosc 1986). Furthermore, violent displacement by elites has facilitated their land accumulation, while collective peasant efforts to reclaim land have been met with State and para-State violence (Ballvé 2013; Osorio 2015; Velasquez 1989). In this context, palm oil crops have served as a mechanism to materialize displacement of farming communities, with State support (Grajales 2011; Ojeda et al. 2015). In Colombia, small-scale farmers have experienced particularly adverse conditions in terms of violence and land access, which the oil palm industry has intensified.

Interstices for small-scale farming: gaining autonomy through agroecology, strategic integration, and political mobilization

The differential experiences of small-scale farmers in relation to value-chain integration highlight the need for research that examines specific interstices in global market relations, offering opportunities for these farmers (Friedmann 2016). Extensive research on this subject has revealed that these farmers can strive for autonomy even while engaging in global markets through the implementation of agroecological practices, strategic market participation, access to land and state support, and political mobilization (Altieri and Toledo 2011; Gonzalez de Molina 2013; Holt-Giménez, Shattuck, and Van Lammeren 2021; Walsh-Dilley 2013). Autonomy, in this context, refers to farmers’ degree of control over decision-making in terms of their life and work (Henderson 2019). Research on the topic has acknowledged the agency of smallholders in shaping their integration into these markets and transcends environmentally deterministic conclusions about how specific crops shape farmers’ life trajectories.

Agroecological production, characterized by diversified farming and local knowledge, is a key strategy for economically viable and environmentally sustainable small-scale agriculture. By reducing dependence on synthetic inputs and partially orienting production towards subsistence, farmers gain autonomy from market relations (Altieri and Toledo 2011; Nicholls and Altieri 2004; Ploeg 2008; Watkins 2011). While there are different conceptualizations of agroecology, my analysis follows an action-oriented approach that aims to transform agrofood systems based on peasant farming knowledge (Méndez, Bacon, and Cohen 2013; Sevilla Guzmán and Woodgate 2013). So, agroecology is not only about fulfilling specific practices but also about taking incremental steps towards them (Nicholls and Altieri 2018). By relying on the ecological resource base of agricultural ecosystems, agroecology can provide small-scale farmers with some autonomy from commodity markets.

Small-scale farmers strive for autonomy not only away from commodity markets but also strategically combining market and non-market factors. For instance, in southern Mexico, small-scale coffee producers have selectively integrated into different subsidized, certified, and premium-quality chains to seek autonomy not only from commodity markets but also from labor markets, by striving to make a viable living from their land (Henderson 2019). In other parts of Latin America, farmers have tapped into non-market relations to address risks and limitations of market integration. Bolivian quinoa farmers have relied on cooperative exchange labor, while Guatemalan farmers have practiced diversified and sustenance-oriented milpa production to mitigate risks in parallel market activities (Isakson 2009; Walsh-Dilley 2013). The strategic interplay of market and non-market mechanisms has allowed small-scale farmers to confront key risks of market integration, within the limitations imposed by their broader political and economic circumstances.

Small-scale farmers’ quest for relative autonomy depends on broader institutional support, particularly from the State. It encompasses not only economic autonomy but also building political unity at local, regional, national and transnational scales, as defined by food sovereignty (Vergara-Camus and Jansen 2022). Food sovereignty encompasses the struggle of agricultural workers, including small-scale farmers, to control their food provision and agricultural systems at various levels, from the crop to the transnational context (Gonzalez de Molina 2013; Nyéléni International Forum on Food Sovereignty 2020; Patel 2007). Consequently, implementing agroecology alone, as a means of diversification and substituting chemical inputs, falls short in achieving autonomy. This is primarily because of complex structural barriers, such as insufficient state investment and the strict rejection of conventional inputs and market-oriented production, which in some situations can remain important for the economic viability of farms. Different strategies employed by the State, NGOs, and peasant organizations in Guatemala towards agroecology highlight the need for a political stance that strives towards food sovereignty (Copeland 2019). Challenging conventional wisdom, small-scale farmers in Chiapas, Mexico, have found success in cultivating oil palm through proactive efforts by farmers’ organizations and state support (Castellanos-Navarrete and Jansen 2018). The viability of small-scale farmers depends on prioritizing food sovereignty and acknowledging the structural barriers they face.

State support for land access plays a crucial role in building autonomy for farmers and through agroecology. Farms located on high-quality lands in Guatemala have shown greater resilience to the effects of Hurricane Mitch, highlighting the importance of land access for effective agroecological practices (Holt-Giménez, Shattuck, and Van Lammeren 2021). The importance of land access extends even to small-scale monocrops, as evidenced by the case of small-scale palm oil production in Chiapas, where access to communal lands proved crucial for small-scale farmers to benefit from this capital-intensive crop (Castellanos-Navarrete and Jansen 2018b). These cases underscore the necessity of land redistribution to landless peasants and farmers with insufficient or inadequate land.

Given the significance of mobilizing state support, social movements play a crucial role. La Via Campesina and other social movements bring together local peasant communities to organize at national and transnational scales, which are key realms where challenges for farmers are created. However, in Colombia, peasant movements have encountered severe obstacles. Throughout the twentieth century, many were violently suppressed due to systemic violence by State and non-State actors. Additionally, Colombian peasant movements have struggled to articulate diverse local interests (Martin Peré, 2016; Zamosc 1986). While political mobilization is essential for advancing small-scale farmers’ interests, it has been exceptionally challenging in Colombia.

To understand small-scale farmers’ possibilities for increasing autonomy, it is important to explore their diverse experiences within broader transformation contexts (Friedmann 2016). This approach acknowledges the dynamic nature of small-scale farmers’ participation in global markets and goes beyond environmental determinism, recognizing the multiple ways farmers adopt and adapt crops. An important place to investigate these possibilities is where broad and deep transformations to lives and landscapes are taking place, as the Colombian palm oil industry.

Conditions and experiences of small-scale palm oil farming in Colombia

Key factors shaping the participation of small-scale farmers in palm oil value chains

The conditions for small-scale farmers to participate in the palm oil industry are influenced by three key factors: land tenure structure, industry participation schemes, and transnational oversight. These factors have created contrasting conditions for small-scale farmers in Puerto Wilches and San Vicente, two municipalities in Magdalena Medio.

The history of peasant mobilization, and its relationship with variated geographical conditions, shaped the pathways of integration into the oil palm industry for small-scale farmers. Puerto Wilches, located on the flat mechanizable lands of the Magdalena western riverbank, experienced the displacement of peasant communities by landed elites benefiting from political violence in the 1950s (Alonso Espinal, 1994; Martin Peré, 2016). In contrast, in San Vicente, situated in hilly terrain away from the river, peasant mobilization and the availability of cheaper land, drove land distribution by the Colombian institute for agrarian reform (INCORA) (Levy Carrillo 1996; Martin Peré, 2016). In Puerto Wilches there are more than 40,000 ha of palm crops, organized in 580 farms, and four major companies own more than half of this area (Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural 2018). In San Vicente, there are about 7,000 ha of oil palm crops, organized in 350 farms, and there is no major company (Fedepalma 2011b; La República 2014; Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural 2018; Monterrey n.d.; Vanguardia Liberal 2014; Wilches n.d.). Palm oil cultivation is heavily concentrated in Puerto Wilches, where large-scale oil palm companies dominate, whereas in San Vicente small-scale oil palm crops are more prevalent.

In Magdalena Medio, small-scale farmers have integrated into the palm oil industry through two common approaches: Productive Alliances and Peasant Palm projects. Productive Alliances are contract farming arrangements led by large-scale oil palm companies, primarily found in areas like Puerto Wilches. The company designs and manages the project, providing support for farmers to access credit, subsidies, and long-term contracts to supply palm oil fruit. Farmers bear the costs and obligations associated with acquiring and cultivating land. Peasant Palm projects, on the other hand, are initiated by a regional NGO, called Plan de Desarrollo y Paz del Magdalena Medio (PDP), initially formed by the catholic church and a regional labor union. PDP encourages small-scale farmers who own land in a specific region to form associations, secure loans and subsidies, and identify mills to purchase their fruit. Farmers in these projects maintain higher control over the production process and are not subject to strict agronomic guidelines. Table 1 summarizes the most common characteristics of each arrangement:

Table 1. Characteristics of productive alliances and peasant palm projects.

Dimension	Productive Alliances	Peasant Palm
Organization designing the project	Palm oil corporation	Regional NGO
Land access	Land bought from a palm oil corporation or third party	Own land, often obtained through agrarian reform
Mode of agricultural production	Palm monocrops	Palm monocrops alongside diversified crops
Source of financial support	Bank loan processed by a palm oil corporation in favor of an association or individual	Bank loan processed by a regional NGO in favor of an association
Actor handling relationships with banks and suppliers	Farmers’ association when operating, individual farmers for dissolved associations	Farmers’ association
Previous relation with other members of the farmers’ association	Various. E.g. former colleagues at palm oil plantations, neighbors, or no previous relation	Neighbors
Contract with fruit buyer	25-year contract requiring farmers to sell oil palm fruit to the oil palm corporation	No fixed contract
Median land size per farmer*	50 hectares	10 hectares
Median oil palm crop size*	10 hectares	10 hectares

Source: prepared by the author based on interviews.

*Figures on land and crop size are based on the interviews conducted for this project and should be seen as references to specific cases rather than representative of the entire population of palm oil growers involved in each type of project.

This table highlights that small-scale oil growers with contract farming arrangements, like Productive Alliances, are more restricted to company’s determinations. In a context of significant transnational oversight, the Colombian National Federation of Oil Palm Growers (Fedepalma), representing large-scale companies, promotes both types of projects as part of their social responsibility strategies. The palm oil industry has come under scrutiny due to the severe deforestation in Southeast Asia. In response, transnational NGOs have initiated projects and campaigns to promote sustainable practices in the industry. These efforts, along with research on the social and environmental impacts of palm oil crops, have influenced policies such as the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive, which prohibits biofuels linked to deforestation (European Commission 2018; Pye 2010). To address concerns about their reputation, Colombian palm oil companies and the National Federation of Oil Palm Growers, have become increasingly focused on transnational oversight and the conditions of small-scale oil palm growers. The national federation launched a campaign showcasing small-scale oil palm cultivation, attempting to counter accounts of death threats and massacres committed by paramilitaries and their role in facilitating the expansion of oil palm crops (CNMH 2018; Fedepalma 2018; Rey Sabogal 2008; Salinas Abdala 2008). The federation’s campaign and lobbying efforts in the European Union, with support from the Colombian government, focus on communicating their claimed minimal effects on deforestation and life improvement for small-scale farmers (Fedepalma 2019b). While the palm oil industry has had negative consequences for many small-scale farmers in Colombia, the National Federation of Oil Palm Growers relies on their integration into the industry to enhance its image.

Experiences of small-scale oil palm farmers

Participation in the palm oil industry has diverse effects on small-scale farmers, as illustrated by the life histories of Gerardo and Cecilia mentioned in the introduction. They have experienced severe impacts from bud rot, a disease that significantly damages oil palm crops (Corley and Tinker 2016). While their cases represent extreme examples, they provide valuable insights into the tools small-scale farmers employ to confront such risks and the factors that shape these tools. Despite the most affected farmers no longer being active in farming, the trajectories of Gerardo and Cecilia, who are still operating, shed light on the mechanisms through which the industry generates risks and how farmers navigate these risks. Interviews reveal that bud rot has affected all farmers in Gerardo and Cecilia’s communities and that their experiences are telling about those of other members of their respective associations. The section focuses on examining their access to land, integration into the industry, and relations with organizations at various levels, highlighting how these factors influence their ability to confront the economic and environmental risks posed by the palm oil industry.

Productive alliance projects

By 2000, Gerardo had worked for 22 years for one of the three largest palm oil companies in Puerto Wilches. Now in his 60s, he has two kids and lives in the township of Puerto Wilches, a few kilometers away from his 10-ha farm. In 2000, he had a formal job with the company, which included benefits and union membership. Seeing the initial success of a group of 57 former coworkers who participated in a Productive Alliance project, Gerardo decided to join the next round of the program. In 2002, the United States Agency for International Development partly subsidized that round, and the company selected a group of its highest paid plantation workers to take part. Gerardo was chosen to participate.

Gerardo explains the company’s interest in the program in terms of reducing labor costs: ‘what the company wanted was to get rid of piecework workers, lower the benefits payload. They put it in those words’¹ (Interview, Puerto Wilches, June 2019). The company sold 270 ha of land to a newly formed association of 27 workers, including Gerardo, who invested their severance pay to buy part of the land. The association used the subsidies obtained from the government and foreign aid and a loan of 620 million pesos (USD $258,550 at the time) to pay for the land, eradicate the old and unproductive oil palm crop planted there, and establish a new one. Although the company handled the paperwork and land sale, it did not provide direct financial support for the project.

For the first four years, before the first harvest, association members relied on minimal payments financed by the loan for their income. In Gerardo’s words, this was a difficult time: ‘making a living those four years … . Imagine! We learned to eat only stew’ (Interview, Puerto Wilches, July 2018). Gerardo struggled to make ends meet due to his low income during this time. The initial investment per hectare was approximately 20 million pesos (USD $8,343 at the time) This investment covered the removal of the old oil palm crop, soil preparation, drainage construction, and the purchase of seedlings, pesticides, and fertilizers. The project also included a commitment from the company to purchase the yield for 25 years. According to the company’s projections, Gerardo’s association would pay off the debt and start reaping profits after 10 years. Despite the challenges faced during the first four years, the prospect of owning a productive crop motivated Gerardo and his partners.

After the first harvest, Gerardo’s income increased. However, soon after, the bud-rot disease hit the crop with long-term consequences for Gerardo. He explains, ‘in 2008, some people got four million pesos (USD $2,080 at the time). When we started producing, paying the loan, when we started to breathe in 2008, was when the bud-rot arrived and then came a harsh rainy season’ (Interview, Puerto Wilches, July 2018). The crop flooded, and the disease spread rapidly. About 50% of Gerardo’s crop was affected, but his losses went beyond that. Gerardo’s crop had a dramatic fall in productivity with negative feedback loops. Each harvest gave him barely enough to pay for his family's expenses, but not the crop's expenses. In Gerardo’s words,

The palm barely gave us enough to subsist, pay for the kids’ schooling, the food, house bills. And if you don’t contribute to the palm, it punishes you. It punishes you by not producing the same amount of fruit. It doesn’t have robust bushes anymore, but smaller ones. That’s because it’s undernourished. That’s understandable (Interview, Puerto Wilches, June 2019).

As a monocrop genetically selected from a narrow genetic pool, palm is highly vulnerable to pests (Altieri and Rosset 2017; Nyouma et al. 2019). A momentary income drop that limits farmers’ ability to buy the inputs that palm requires has long-term consequences in terms of productivity. Caring for his family’s expenses at a time of income decline meant a sharp permanent decrease, a punishment, in Gerardo’s crop production over the whole lifetime of the crop. At this point, Gerardo’s palm was producing about one fourth of what he initially expected. He not only struggled to make ends meet, but for the first time was also unable to continue contributing to his pension fund: ‘in 2013, I couldn’t keep up with payments, I wasn’t making enough for that. So, I got stuck back in time’ (Interview, Puerto Wilches, June 2019). In order to claim a pension, among other requirements, the Colombian legislation requires workers to make payments for a minimum amount of weeks (at least 1,150) (Ministerio de Trabajo 2017). The income drop that Gerardo faced, and his consequent inability to make pension payments, meant that, in terms of pension savings, he couldn’t make any progress after 2013. Most of his crop partners were going through similar difficulties and paying association fees was the last priority. So, they decided to dissolve the association.

These small-scale farmers faced numerous other difficulties. While the government offered a relief program that benefited them, ‘they didn’t tell us,’ said Gerardo (Interview, Puerto Wilches, June 2019). He only found out when calling the bank to notify them about the death of one his former partners. The lack of effective communication by the government meant that Gerardo and others had limited time to make the payments and prepare the paperwork needed to take advantage of the relief program. Gerardo had to hastily sell one hectare of land to a cattle farmer through an informal deal. Many of the former members of his association faced a similar situation. While many of them wanted to divide up the land to sell their portion, they haven’t been able to do so due to outstanding tax and mortgage debts. Gerardo is working to find a way to divide land and debts or to find a buyer for the entire plot.

Farmers in Gerardo’s association, as well as other similar Productive Alliance projects in the area, have experienced different outcomes, with the majority facing similar hardships that have led to the permanent abandonment of their palm cultivation activities. The association of 57 of Gerardo’s coworkers, initially successful when he joined the Productive Alliance project, eventually dissolved due to financial problems, and none of them continued growing oil palm. Out of the original 27 members of Gerardo’s association, only about six are recognized by their colleagues for running successful farms (Interviews, Puerto Wilches, June-August 2019). A common factor among successful farms is their use of initial earnings from palm cultivation to diversify investments and establish profitable enterprises. However, interviewees highlighted significant variation in their outcomes: ‘There are some who have done poorly, quite poorly. But there are others who have sustained themselves through other means,’ explains Ramón, a Productive Alliance participant (Interview, Puerto Wilches, August 2019). One of Gerardo’s partners in the association bought a billiard hall, which became successful, with the first earnings from palm and was able to keep investing in the crop as the production declined due to the pest. Others have taken additional jobs, working double shifts to care for the crop and at times investing part of their wages in it. In contrast, those who fully invested their time and initial earnings in palm have now lost all, or a significant portion, of their crop. Many have abandoned their land and migrated, or informally sold a portion of land to get the cash flow to keep it running.

While interviewees offered diverse explanations for the variation among palm oil growers, they emphasized the significance of diversified farming and investments, as well as outside employment, in explaining success. However, even among those with diversified incomes, experiences varied, with different individuals attributing these variations to a range of factors, including previous experience with businesses and higher education (Interviews, Puerto Wilches, June-August 2019). These responses indicate that diversified income sources play a vital role in the outcomes of palm oil growers. However, they also underscore the inherent variability of these enterprises, influenced by factors beyond farming alone. Some individuals are able to accumulate capital or secure formal employment opportunities, while the majority, including those without external prospects, experience impoverishment (Interviews, Puerto Wilches, June-August 2019). Gerardo is the most affected currently operating farmer in his community, but a significant portion of the farmers who participated in Productive Alliance projects are no longer there. Gerardo’s experience reflects some of the challenges of participating in these projects. For most participants, integrating into the palm oil industry meant shifting from a unionized job to an economically risky enterprise that turned a few into businesspeople and most into struggling, or dispossessed, farmers.

Peasant palm projects

Cecilia has had a different experience. In 2003, she planted palm and now runs what she defines as a successful farm. Cecilia, in her 70s, has three children and has been farming for 35 years in San Vicente, where she arrived in the late 1980s. Her family secured 50 ha of land as part of a peasant movement that pressured the Colombian National Institute for Agrarian Reform, INCORA, to grant land to landless peasants. Her late husband, Emilio, had previously worked at a large-scale palm oil company, like Gerardo, but was fired for attempting to form a labor union. Emilio and other farmworkers organized an occupation of one of the company’s plots, demanding land to work. At the time, several national and regional movements led occupations around the country, including many that were successful in securing land for landless peasants (Martin Peré 2016; Zamosc 1986). Emilio and his coworkers eventually shifted to occupying the regional INCORA offices in the nearby city of Bucaramanga. One day, Emilio brought home the news that INCORA officials would arrange the details of land allocation for him and his family, as well as for fellow occupiers (Interviews, San Vicente, June-October 2019).

In 1986, Cecilia’s family was assigned 50 hectares of land in San Vicente through a deal arranged by INCORA. The institute bought and divided large plots of land, selling smaller portions to landless peasants at or near market prices, with more flexible payment conditions. On their new farm, Cecilia’s family initially built a small open floor home and cultivated cassava, corn, plantain, various citrus fruits, and guava, and also raised cattle and chickens, for both consumption and sale. Cecilia recalls, ‘I made curds for our meals, and sometimes sold them. That’s how we made money for other groceries. Because when you live in a farm you can have a good life, even if you don’t make that much money’ (Interview, San Vicente, October 2019). Cecilia’s family engaged in diversified production primarily for subsistence purposes and some complementary sales, enabling them to purchase basic goods such as salt and sugar. Although they did not explicitly label it as such, their farming approach aligned with the general principles of agroecology. Cecilia recognized agricultural diversification as a means to support her family’s needs while also generating some income. This approach provided for a decent living according to Cecilia, but life soon became difficult due to the presence of illegal armed groups. She recalls, ‘we were honestly frightened. When planting a cassava plant, we didn’t know if we would be able to eat it’ (Interview, San Vicente, October 2019). While Cecilia was eventually granted land, the fruits of farmwork quickly became uncertain due to the threat of guerilla groups, first, and paramilitary groups, later, forcing her to fear the possibility of having to flee.

In 2003, Cecilia’s son learned about a project led by the PDP NGO to support palm oil cultivation. However, a guerrilla group with peasant origins, which fought for agrarian reform (Reyes Posada 1987), opposed it and threatened to displace or kill anyone who planted palm. Around the same time, paramilitary groups emerged in this area, in alliance with landed elites, seeking territorial control over the guerrillas (Romero 2003). These paramilitary groups arrived in the lower San Vicente region, displacing the guerrilla group. Paramilitaries ‘did want us to grow palm,’ explains Cecilia (Interview, San Vicente, October 2019). According to Cecilia and many of her neighbors, the PDP people returned after the paramilitary groups made way for palm projects and established the first round of the Peasant Palm project in San Vicente.

With support from the PDP, Emilio and Cecilia planted 10 hectares of palm. Their association now includes 98 producers, including two of Cecilia’s children. While maintaining an agroecological approach for their other crops, Cecilia and her family grow palm as a monocrop. They continue to cultivate cassava, guava, plantain, lime, and raise chickens for household consumption, as well as have some cattle and lime for sale. The income generated from palm, cattle, and lime contributes to the expenses of their commercial crops, cattle inputs, and household needs. The production of subsistence crops and chickens follows the agroecological principles they practiced before palm cultivation. Cecilia considers palm ‘a blessing’, ‘it was a blessing, after a year and a half [and another year in the nursery] the plants bore fruits’ (Interview, San Vicente, October 2019). Income from palm allowed Cecilia to build a house with multiple rooms and provide an income for her and two of her kids, who returned to the farm after years working outside.

Other members of Cecilia’s association share similar stories of improved quality of life, a narrative often highlighted by the oil palm industry. Fidel, Cecilia’s neighbor, says before planting palm ‘we were always penniless … with 15 cows you can’t make a living, right? When that [palm] crop came it gave us enough to get by’ (Interview, San Vicente, July 2018). He has since become one of the region’s most productive palm oil growers and has been showcased as a success story by the National Federation of Oil Palm Growers in various national and international events. Farmers like Fidel and Cecilia enjoy more autonomy from the palm oil industry compared to Gerardo and his neighbors. However, they are not seen as a threat by the industry as they serve the industry’s communication goals and operate in more marginal lands that are not targeted by large-scale companies for direct expansion.

Despite the three-year waiting period for the oil palms to bear fruit, Cecilia, Fidel, and other members of the association have enjoyed a stable income since planting palm. Some have even pursued additional opportunities alongside their crops, such as Laura, who continued working as a teacher, and Carlos, who ventured into fish farming. However, others like Jonathan and Miguel have focused solely on their crops. Despite these different approaches, they all share a common sentiment: they consider their farming endeavors successful, and they live on their farms (Interviews, San Vicente, July 2018-October 2019).

In comparison to Productive Alliance projects, Peasant Palm projects exhibit lower levels of variation among participants. This can be attributed to several key aspects of the Peasant Palm projects. Firstly, participants’ access to land was primarily facilitated through a State-led agrarian reform, rather than being directly linked to palm projects. In Cecilia’s area, most agrarian reform recipients received between 30 and 50 hectares (Interviews, San Vicente, July 2018-November 2019). Additionally, the costs of crops for Peasant Palm participants have been lower, as association members supported each other through communal work sessions for establishing the nursery and preparing the land for planting. These farmers already had strong ties as neighboring farmers, which facilitated collaboration and engagement in additional projects like a community grocery store. The association collectively purchases inputs in bulk, with farmers paying by credit every two weeks. In times of hardship, such as price or production downturns, the association negotiates payment plans with suppliers. The PDP leadership has also renegotiated loans for farmers or associations facing extraordinary difficulties (Interviews, Bogotá and Bucaramanga, May 2019). State-led land access, the leveraging of existing social connections, and the support of intermediary organizations have played crucial roles in mitigating the risks associated with small-scale oil palm cultivation.

However, all members of Cecilia’s association have been affected by the same bud-rot disease that impacted Gerardo. Cecilia and her family experienced a significant loss, with approximately 30% of their oil palm crop affected. Nevertheless, Cecilia, along with other association members, managed to sustain their palm cultivation by purchasing the necessary pesticides and fertilizers, thus averting the negative feedback cycle described by Gerardo. Upon closer examination of Cecilia’s case, two reasons for her relative resilience can be identified. First, her family has maintained various crops and animals for household consumption, allowing them to utilize most of the income from palm cultivation for reinvesting in the oil palm crop when needed. Second, their association has assisted in financing inputs during periods when individual farmers are unable to afford them. As a result, Cecilia’s remaining 70% of the crop is productive, and she intends to maintain it.

When asked about her farm’s future, Cecilia reveals her plans to plant other crops on the three hectares of land where palm had to be eradicated. She sees no purpose in replanting palm in that area because, ‘what’s the point of replanting palm there? So that it gets infected again?’ (Interview, San Vicente, October 2019). Cecilia aims to reduce the risks associated with disease in oil palm monoculture and continues to embrace a partially-agroecological approach, emphasizing income diversification.

Most members of Cecilia’s association live on their farms and express high satisfaction with both their land and crops. Farmers in the region follow a similar approach to crop diversification as Cecilia. The income generated from palm cultivation has allowed them to construct sturdy houses and support the higher education of their children or grandchildren, even during challenging periods like 2019, characterized by low yields and palm fruit prices, as well as high input costs. During that year, the association negotiated extended payment terms with suppliers, while farmers relied on subsistence farming and other cash crops until early 2020 when palm oil yields and prices improved. Retaining their oil palm crops has been a widespread practice among the original members of Cecilia’s association, with only around 3% of farmers reported to have sold their farms (Interviews, San Vicente, April-November 2019, by phone, April 2020). The farmers in this area do not have profitable external businesses, although some engage in additional employment. Nevertheless, they have established stable sources of sustenance and income, as well as solidarity networks to rely on during challenging times.

Building autonomy in risky markets

In this paper I’ve asked, how have some small-scale farmers built more economically viable and environmentally sustainable farms while growing oil palm? By comparing the life histories of Gerardo and Cecilia, two small-scale palm oil growers in Colombia, within the broader context of their farming communities, I find that those small-scale palm oil growers who have built more economically viable and environmentally sustainable farming have done so by carving out space for autonomy from markets. This space is enabled by state-led land access and multiscale organizational support for small-scale farming. These factors have enabled small-scale farmers in Cecilia’s association to maintain a partial agroecological approach, reducing costs and diversifying income sources within their own farms. By mitigating the inherent risks of global market-oriented agriculture, they have been able to tap into market participation to carve out autonomy for low-input diversified farming.

While participating in these markets increases dependency and marginalization for small-scale farmers (Giraldo 2018; McMichael 2013), these farmers often face it as their only option for ensuring the necessary cash income to run their farm and support their family’s expenses. In this way, agroecological farming and partially integrating into global value chains are two ways in which small-scale farmers simultaneously struggle for autonomy from and within markets (Henderson 2019). The strategic use of these approaches is made possible through state-led access to land and support from organizations at multiple scales (Copeland 2019; Gonzalez de Molina 2013; Holt-Giménez, Shattuck, and Van Lammeren 2021). This situation challenges the assumption that the participation of small-scale farmers in global value chains necessarily leads to dependency for these farmers and identifies key factors that enable these farmers to avoid such a scenario. Indeed, the palm oil industry, even in alliance with paramilitary groups, created the conditions of marginalization that made Cecilia and Gerardo face unequal opportunities and then led them to recognize oil palm as the only viable option for accessing land for farming or making their farm economically viable (Ballvé 2013; Ojeda et al. 2015). At the same time, these unequal and constrained options limited their decision-making power. Nevertheless, Gerardo and Cecilia’s experiences illustrate that it is not only small-scale farmers’ incorporation into global markets what shapes their decision-making power, but how they are incorporated (McCarthy 2010). While Gerardo faced adverse incorporation under an unfavorable contract farming agreement, Cecilia and her neighbors maintained relative autonomy to decide what to plant. The contrasting experiences of Cecilia’s association members as opposed to Gerardo’s illustrate that under specific conditions, characterized by state-access to land and multi-scale support for small-scale farming, integration into global markets can provide farmers with the opportunity to preserve a certain level of autonomy from market forces.

This research reveals that key conditions to achieve this autonomy include political projects at multiple scales that support key aspects of food sovereignty. The possibilities of small-scale farming depend on conditions that go beyond individual farms (McMichael 2008). This is particularly true for approaches that go beyond individual transformations to lower costs and diversify farm income, such as agroecology and communal labor, in the context of broader struggles to enable small-scale farmers to gain greater control of agricultural systems (Gonzalez de Molina 2013; Holt-Giménez, Shattuck, and Van Lammeren 2021; Walsh-Dilley 2013). At the local level, Cecilia and her neighbors engaged in communal labor and adopted practices aligned with agroecological approaches (Méndez, Bacon, and Cohen 2013; Sevilla Guzmán and Woodgate 2013). These practices enabled them to diversify their incomes, reduce costs, and establish natural barriers at the landscape level. These practices likely lowered the incidence of palm oil diseases at their individual farms and allowed them to withstand the volatility of palm oil and input prices. By contrast, Gerardo and his partners had to pay market costs to establish their crop and were required to plant monocrops that created an ideal environment for the spread of an oil palm disease (Nicholls and Altieri 2004). These differences were shaped by broader struggles, such as those of peasant movements for land, that facilitated their access to land and the support each group received from different organizations at regional and transnational levels. While it is true that Cecilia and her neighbors are not currently involved in peasant movements, their past participation in an agrarian movement that provided them with access to land played a crucial role in shaping their ability to pursue food sovereignty and exert control over their land and crops in the present.

At the regional level, Gerardo faced an inflexible and unfavorable contract farming arrangement. In contrast, Cecilia benefited from more adaptable contracts that granted her the autonomy to choose what crops to grow and benefitted from representation in dealings with banks and from some protection against fluctuations in input prices. This autonomy was made possible through the combination of social movement efforts and state support in securing access to land (Martín Peré 2016; Reyes Posada and Bejarano 1988). At the transnational level, NGO oversight of the palm oil industry has made companies attentive to their image in international markets, allowing some degree of protection to small-scale farmers from the arbitrary conditions that mills could impose given their relative market power. Support for small-scale farming at these different scales allowed farmers in Cecilia’s association to reduce vulnerability to environmental and economic risks, contributing to a decreased likelihood of class differentiation (Bernstein 2006; 2010; Paré 1991). Multiscale support, from local to transnational levels, is crucial for enabling farmers to overcome key barriers like market dependency, input costs, and policy constraints.

These findings also underscore the significance of land access as a fundamental requirement for small-scale farmers to have the autonomy to make decisions regarding their market engagement. Access to land enabled Cecilia and her neighbors to allocate different portions of their land for various types of production. Moreover, it reduced their debts as they did not have to acquire land and made them less reliant on corporate determinations for accessing land, in contrast to Gerardo and his former associates. These findings highlight the crucial role of land access in overcoming structural barriers to farming and agrarian class differentiation, complementing previous research on its importance in facilitating agroecological production, the persistence of peasant farming, and market participation within peasant agriculture (Bernstein 2010; Copeland 2019; Holt-Giménez, Shattuck, and Van Lammeren 2021; Isakson, 2009). Land access grants farmers the opportunity to make more autonomous choices regarding their engagement with global value chains and fosters the creation of spaces for alternative forms of production and exchange that align with their own values and needs. By confronting the challenges associated with land access, farmers can exercise greater agency in navigating global markets and shaping their farming practices accordingly.

Considering the limited agency that small-scale farmers have for shaping their participation in these markets challenges both economic and environmental determinism. In terms of economic determinism, even though small-scale farmers have no market power to set prices or exchange conditions, some are able to carve space for agroecology through participation in global value chains. The cases of Cecilia and Gerardo highlight that, while global markets today produce significant economic risks for small-scale farmers, this is not a deterministic outcome (Friedmann 2016). In San Vicente, Cecilia and her neighbors have been able to exercise partial autonomy to decide the shape of their food system, including engaging in global value chains to some degree. At the same time, agroecological farming, alongside palm, has enabled them to confront some of the risks associated with the price fluctuations of global markets. Certainly, engaging in global value chains alone does not render autonomy for farmers. It does not prevent land sales or offer paths for social change as the case of Gerardo and his neighbors demonstrates (Castellanos-Navarrete, Tobar-Tomás, and López-Monzón 2019; Hervas 2019). However, engaging to some extent in global markets in parallel to other forms of farming is part of the decision-making possibilities that small-scale farmers face. These cases also challenge the environmental determinism of equating certain crops with environmental destruction (Castellanos-Navarrete 2021). Arguably, the physical arrangement of crops matters: the use of agroecological farming has been a key factor in allowing Cecilia and her neighbors to make a living while navigating the fluctuations of palm oil markets. Nevertheless, the crop itself, or the scale of its market, are not the only aspects that shape economic and environmental conditions for farmers. In the case of Cecilia and her neighbors, planting small-scale palm oil monocrops within a landscape of agroecological farming provides natural barriers and greater ecological diversity compared to large-scale palm oil monocrops.

It is important to note that this analysis does not imply that planting monocrops for global markets allows small-scale farmers to build economically viable and environmentally sustainable farms. Rather, it highlights that, when farmers have limited options that lead them to participate in global markets, their farms are more viable when they can selectively participate in those markets. That is, when they can maintain autonomy about how to plant export crops and what to plant alongside those crops. Additionally, economic viability and environmental sustainability for small-scale farmers requires support for small-scale farming from organizations at regional, national, and transnational scales, including State-led access to land.

Another palm is possible beyond traditional dichotomies

Through the examination of how small-scale farmers can create autonomy by selectively engaging in global markets, this paper reveals nuanced complexities that challenge common binary perspectives in agrarian studies. First, it situates the analysis at the intersection of social structures and individual agency, as well as social and environmental processes, emphasizing the role of meso-level relations. The study highlights the significance of state-led land access and support from organizations at different scales in enabling small-scale farmers to exercise agency and address the risks inherent in palm oil markets. Both the physical characteristics of crops and the social relations contribute to the possibilities for farmers like Cecilia and Gerardo to sustain their livelihoods. Understanding these nuanced dynamics is crucial for comprehending the potential of small-scale farmers within expanding global agricultural production.

Second, this paper challenges the conventional binary that equates small-scale agroecological farming with local production and large-scale industrialized agriculture with global markets. While various academics have underscored the need for different organizations to support agroecology (Giraldo and Rosset 2018; Gonzalez de Molina 2013), this research goes further to suggest that agroecology is unavoidably and concurrently linked to the interconnections between regional, national, and transnational political organizations. The efforts of PDP, palm oil companies, Colombian governments, and transnational NGOs have determined the degree to which farmers like Cecilia and Gerardo can carve space to make more autonomous decisions about what to grow and how to grow it. Small-scale farmers require support to navigate the challenges posed by the interconnections of local and global processes.

Third, this research goes beyond the common binary of either wiping out or relentlessly expanding palm oil production, to highlight that another type of palm oil production is possible. Eradicating palm would not necessarily solve the problems of marginalized rural communities or the environmental degradation this crop has caused. Additionally, it would negatively affect the income of the farmers and farmworkers that depend on this crop and could shift edible oil supply to the more land-extensive soy or canola crops. Expanding oil palm, on its part, would extend and intensify the adverse conditions for peasant farming created by this crop. Instead, this research looks to the agricultural practices of small-scale palm oil growers in Magdalena Medio to point the way towards forms of economically viable and environmentally sustainable farming. This option is distinct from the alternatives championed by the palm oil industry of marginally improving the environmental sustainability of existing oil palm crops, as it does not rely on reforms led by palm oil companies but on transitioning towards a different kind of palm oil production led by small-scale farmers. Arguably, such a transition would take a long time and would require a significant enhancement of political support for small-scale farming. Nonetheless, this alternative sets a goal that can direct political attention towards more equitable and sustainable palm oil production. This paper seeks to do just that.

Acknowledgements

Many people contributed to the research and writing of this paper, and I am deeply grateful for their support. I want to express my appreciation to the participants in my interviews, and especially the farmers who shared their life histories with me. The assistance provided by Julián Barajas, Rafael Nieto, and Jonathan Hurtado was instrumental in conducting this research. Jane Collins, Ike Leslie, Diana Ojeda, and Daniela de Fex Wolf read previous versions of this paper and gave me detailed feedback. Michael Bell, Nan Enstad, Elizabeth Hennessy, Diana Gómez, and Omar Giraldo provided key comments to frame and improve the paper. Participants in the Journal of Peasant Studies 2020 Writeshop helped me enhance the paper; I am especially thankful for the comments provided by Schluwa Sama, Shapan Adnan, Cyriaque Hakizimana, and Adrian Laguna. Additionally, I am grateful for the guidance and encouragement received from Antonio Castellanos-Navarrete and Case Watkins. Finally, three anonymous reviewers offered valuable feedback that enhanced the paper's clarity and scope. I am humbled by the amount of support I have received throughout this research process and am thankful to everyone who has been part of it.

Finally, I acknowledge the use of ChatGPT-3.5 for copy-editing this paper. The most common prompts I used were ‘copy-edit this paragraph maintaining its meaning’ and ‘edit this fragment in under [number] words.’

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Fondo de Apoyo a Profesores Asistentes at Universidad de los Andes; the Rural Sociological Society Dissertation Research Award; and the following centers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: the Center for Culture, History and the Environment, the Department of Community and Environmental Sociology (Evelyn T. Crowe Dissertation Award), the Institute for Regional and International Studies (Scott Kloeck-Jenson Pre-Dissertation Travel Fellowship), the Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems; and the Holtz Center for Science and Technology Studies.

Notes on contributors

Angela Serrano

Angela Serrano is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Universidad de los Andes, in Colombia. Her research examines how global economic relations build local socioenvironmental inequalities and how local working communities confront these inequalities. This work builds on ethnographic case studies and participatory approaches. She earned a Ph.D. in Sociology (University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2021) an M.A. in Geography (King's College London, 2015), a B.A. in Political Science, and a B.S. in Economics (Universidad de los Andes, 2012).

Notes

1 All interview quotes are my translation.