Embedded Peasantry

Dados Bibliográficos

ID17827461
AutoresRahardhika Utama (Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, autor correspondente)
Ano2026
Volume12
Fascículo3
Páginas1-31
Data de publicação2026-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoSociology of Development (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2374-538X • E-ISSN: 2374-538X
EditoraUniversity of California Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1525/sod.2026.2879802
OpenAlexW7154941218
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas20

Why have postcolonial states pursued such different approaches to incorporating peasants into agricultural development? This paper addresses that question by introducing the concept of peasantry embeddedness and examining how it took shape in post-independence Indonesia and Malaysia, two major economies in the Asian rubber belt. Peasantry embeddedness refers to the depth and structure of rural producers’ institutional and political incorporation in state-led development. It captures a spectrum of state–peasant relationships, ranging from inclusion and partnership to marginalization and repression. On one end of the spectrum, peasants are regarded as development partners, with access to land, resources, and political representation. On the other, they are excluded from policy processes and subjected to coercion and repression. These configurations were not automatic outcomes of colonial institutions or class structures. Instead, they were shaped by critical political events that redefined the state’s orientation toward the peasantry during formative periods of postcolonial state-building. Drawing on archival research and applying the framework of critical event analysis, the paper examines how specific episodes—such as the Malayan land reforms of the 1950s (late colonial period) and the Indonesian peasant massacres of 1965–1967 (post-independence period)—produced contrasting modes of agrarian incorporation. These events, shaped by Cold War geopolitics and domestic unrest, conditioned whether peasants were viewed as legitimate actors in development or as political threats to be contained. By tracing how postcolonial governments responded to peasant mobilization, the paper provides a historically grounded explanation of development divergence in Southeast Asia. The analysis contributes to critical agrarian studies, to the sociology of development, and to the broader goals of problem-solving sociology. It shows that enduring patterns of rural exclusion are rooted in historically contingent political decisions rather than inevitable institutional failure. Understanding peasantry embeddedness helps explain why some states have been able to support inclusive development, while others have perpetuated forms of exclusion that contribute to the persistence of global poverty

Agrarian society · Class formation · Coercion (linguistics) · Colonialism · Embeddedness · Geopolitics · Peasant · Political subjectivity · Politics · Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Land Rights and Reforms