Debates on Jonathan Rigg’s Proposal of Agrarian Transformations in Southeast Asia: a Case Study of Rubber Farms in Huay Kong Basin

Abstract

From Jonathan Rigg’s proposal regarding agrarian transformations in Southeast Asia and from the findings of ‘A Case Study of Rubber Farming in Huay Kong Basin’ in Bueng Kan Province, the researcher disputed Rigg’s study in the following aspects. First, such transformations do not change from farm to non-farm activities, but rather a re-agrarianization of monoculture. Second, land is not the only important factor in production, but re-agrarianization comes with new ‘expertise’, particularly that in the production of rubber which affects the ‘quantity’ of products and ‘opportunities’ in local hire of service. Third, there are hire of service in monoculture and tension in agricultural labour. However, such tension does not exist between extra-agricultural and agricultural activities; rather, among agricultural activities, particularly between ‘rubber’ and ‘rice’ farming. Forth, young farmers return. The younger generations do not transform their identities in de-agrarianization, but the identity transformation is from ‘rice farmers’ to ‘rubber farmers’. Finally, there is a change in livelihood and urban consumption, which derives from the return of family members ‘from urban to rural’ communities, bringing with them urban consumption.