Content deleted Content added
m Removed erroneous space and general fixes (task 1) |
m Open access bot: doi updated in citation with #oabot. |
||
Line 68:
# '''Stable Environment''': Latin American rural communities did not face much in the way of threats against the sustainability of their lifestyles. Hardly any boundaries—administrative, legal, judicial, fiscal, or otherwise—obstructed the ability to maintain natural rural areas and the lives of the residents settled in them.
Mobilized peasants of the 1960s and 1970 attracted scholars to perform more in-depth studies on Latin American rural life.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kay |first=Cristobal |date=2008 |title=Reflections on Latin American Rural Studies in the Neoliberal Globalization Period: A New Rurality? |journal=Development and Change |volume=39 |issue=6 |pages=915–943 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-7660.2008.00518.x |via=EBSCO|doi-access=free }}</ref> Conflict struck between the Marxist lean of social science and neoclassical domination of economics. Rural class structure, agrarian reform, and capitalist modes of production were all topics of discussion as the peasantry navigated their revolutionary status. The turn of the 21st century introduced the concept of “new rurality”. The shaping of Latin America’s rural economy had finally become entrenched in the newfound neoliberalism and globalization of the 1980s and 90s. Researchers claim that this has been expressed through embracing non-farm activities, feminization of rural work, growing rural-urban relations, and migration and remittances. Though some argue that no change has occurred because social ills (e.g., poverty, social injustice) prevail.
=== Asia ===
| |||