Springe direkt zu Inhalt

Jun.-Prof. Dr. Renata Motta

Bild Motta

Freie Universität Berlin

ZI Lateinamerika-Institut

Juniorprofessorin

Soziologie Lateinamerikas

Adresse
ZI Lateinamerika-Institut der Freien Universität Berlin
Rüdesheimer Str. 54-56
Raum 228
14197 Berlin

Sprechstunde

Die Sprechstunde von Prof. Motta findet im Wintersemester 20/21 immer freitags von 10-12 Uhr statt. Um einen Termin zu erhalten wenden Sie sich an nicolas.goez@fu-berlin.de und beachten Sie die untenstehenden Hinweise.

Aufgrund der aktuellen Lage mit dem COVID-19 werden alle Termine telefonisch, bzw. über Webex durchgeführt.

Hinweise für Studierende

Anfragen für die Betreuung von B.A.- oder M.A.-Arbeiten, Dissertationsprojekten (auch als Zweitgutachter) sowie die Erstellung von Empfehlungsschreiben für Bewerbungen um ein Stipendium oder Ähnliches können nicht per E-Mail gestellt werden.

Hierfür ist die Vereinbarung eines Sprechstundentermins obligatorisch, ebenso das Einreichen entsprechender Unterlagen an Nicolas Goez (nicolas.goez@fu-berlin.de).

Abschlussarbeiten

Spätestens eine Woche vor dem Besuch der Sprechstunde muss ein Exposé (1-2 Seiten) inkl. aktueller Kontaktdaten eingereicht werden.

Empfehlungsschreiben

Voraussetzung für ein erfolgversprechendes Gutachten ist, dass der/die Bewerber/in aus mindestens einer Lehrveranstaltung bekannt ist. Andernfalls kann leider kein Gutachten verfasst werden.

Außerdem müssen spätestens 4 Wochen vor Ende der Bewerbungsfrist folgende Unterlagen (falls vorhanden) inkl. aktueller Kontaktdaten eingereicht werden:

Transcript of Records, aktueller Lebenslauf, Arbeits- und Praktikumszeugnisse, Bescheinigung von Arbeitstätigkeiten, etc.

Promotion

Spätestens eine Woche vor dem Besuch der Sprechstunde müssen folgende Unterlagen inkl. aktueller Kontaktdaten eingereicht werden:

Lebenslauf, Kopie Abschlusszeugnis, Kopie Abschlussarbeit sowie ein Exposé zum Dissertationsvorhaben.

Academic Positions

  • Since 04/2019: Project Leader BMBF-Junior Research Group Food for Justice: Power, Politics and Food Inequalities in a Bioeconomy

  • Since 07/2018: Assistant Professor of Sociology (Junior Professur in Soziologie Lateinamerikas mit den Schwerpunkten Umwelt-, Ungleichheits- und Genderforschung), Institute for Latin American Studies, Freie Universität Berlin

  • 09/2017- 06/2018: Visiting Associate Professor of Brazilian Studies and Global Studies School of Culture and Society, Aarhus University, Denmark

  • 03/2015-08/2017: Assistant Professor of Sociology (Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin), Institute for Latin American Studies, Freie Universität Berlin

  • 03/2014-02/2015: Research Associate and Lecturer (Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin), Institute for Latin American Studies, Freie Universität Berlin

  • 03/2011-03/2014: Doctoral Researcher at BMBF-funded project desiguALdades.net (International research network on interdependent inequalities in Latin America), Institute for Latin American Studies, Freie Universität Berlin

Visiting Positions

  • 03/2019: Visiting Professor (Erasmus+ Program), Universidade de Brasília, Brazil

Education

  • 2015 Ph.D., Sociology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany Thesis: Contesting GM Crops in Argentina and Brazil (summa cum laude) Funded by: BMBF (desiguALdades.net) and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung

  • 2008 M.A., Social Sciences, Graduate Program of Comparative Latin American Studies, Universidade de Brasília, Brazil

  • 2004 B.A., International Relations Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais, Brazil

Publications

Monographs

  • 2. Motta, R. (2018). Mobilização social, capitalismo global e lutas pela alimentação: um estudo comparado da Argentina e do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, Fiocruz.

  • 1. Motta, R. (2016). Social Mobilization, Global Capitalism and Struggles over Food: A Comparative Study of Social Movements. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Edited Books

  • 1. Jelin, E.,Costa, S. & Motta, R. (2017) (eds.). Global Entangled Inequalities: Concepts and Evidence from Latin America. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.


Articles in Peer-Reviewed Journals

  • 16. Teixeira, Marco and Motta, Renata. (accepted). “Intersectionality and alliance building in the Brazilian World March of Women: The Daisies March”. Social Movement Studies.

  • 15. Motta, R. (accepted). “Feminist solidarities and coalitional identity: the popular feminism of Marcha das Margaridas”. Latin American Perspectives.

  • 14. Arancibia, Florencia, Renata Motta, and Peter Clausing. 2019 (online first). “The neglected burden of agricultural intensification: a contribution to the debate on land-use change”. Journal of Land Use Science, 0 (0): 1–17.

  • 13. Arancibia, Florencia, and Renata Motta. 2019. “Undone Science and Counter-Expertise: Fighting for Justice in an Argentine Community Contaminated by Pesticides”. Science as Culture, 28 (3): 277–302.

  • 12. Medeiros, Débora and Motta, Renata (2019). “Ein Blick aus der Bewegungsforschung auf den Rechtsruck in Brasilien”. Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen FJSB, 32 (4): 621–633.

  • 11. Ruffato, Luiz; Motta, Renata; Zilla, Claudia & Kristina Dietz (2019). “Brasilien: Der neue Faschismus?” Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, Heft 6/2019.

  • 10. Motta, R.  (2016) Capitalismo Global y Estado Nacional en las Luchas acerca de los Cultivos Transgénicos en Brasil. Estudios Críticos del Desarrollo, 6 (11): 65-80.

  • 9. Motta, R. (2016). Global Capitalism and the National State in the Struggles over GM Crops in Brazil. Journal of Agrarian Change, 16 (4): 720-27.

  • 8. Castro, F. de, & Motta, R. (2015). Environmental Politics under Dilma: Changing Relations between the Civil Society and the State. LASA Forum, XLVI(3): 25-27.

  • 7. Motta, R. (2015). Transnational Discursive Opportunities and Social Movement Risk Frames Opposing GMOs. Social Movement Studies, 14 (5): 576–595.

  • 6. Motta, R. (2014). Risco e modernidade uma nova teoria social? Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 29 (86): 15–27.

  • 5. Motta, R. (2014). Social Disputes over GMOs: An Overview. Sociology Compass, 8 (12): 1360–1376.

  • 4. Motta, R., & Alasino, N. (2013). Medios y política en la Argentina: las disputas interpretativas sobre la soja transgénica y el glifosato. Question, 1 (38): 323–335.

  • 3. Motta, R. (2009). Sociologia de risco: globalizando a modernidade reflexiva. Sociologias, 22: 384–396.

  • 2. Motta, R. (2009). Ciências Sociais na América Latina: Privilégio Epistémológico, Estilo Original. Revista Debates, 3 (1): 9–26.

  • 1. Motta, R. (2008). Biopolítica e neoliberalismo: a vigilância sanitária no limite da utilidade para o comércio internacional. Revista de Direito Sanitário, 9 (2): 9–30

Book Chapters

  • 13. Motta, R. and Teixeira, Marco (forthcoming). Allowing rural difference to make a difference: the Brazilian Marcha das Margaridas. Submitted to Book: Transnational objects, activist solidarities, feminist analytics. Brown University, Ontario, Canada.

  • 12. Lapegna, Pablo; Motta, Renata; Maritza Paredes (forthcoming). Dynamics of Demobilization in South America”. In: Rossi, Federico (Ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Latin American Social Movements. Oxford University Press.

  • 11. Costa, Sérgio and Motta, Renata (2019). Social classes and the far right in Brazil. In: In spite of you: Bolsonaro and the new Brazilian resistance. Edited by Conor Foley.

  • 10. Rauchecker, Markus and Motta, Renata (2019). Grüne Technik. Beitrag für Glosar: ABC der Land- und Rohstoffkonflikte. edited by Sarah Kirst, Jan Brünner, Louise Prause). Transcript Verlag.

  • 9. Motta, R. (2018). A criação de uma controvérsia sobre os transgênicos no Brasil. In A. Mueller & F. Soares. Modernidade sem Fronteiras: Desenvolvimento e Desigualdades Entrelaçadas. Ijuí, Rio Grande do Sul: Editora Unijuí, pp. 205-230.

  • 8. Motta, R. (2017) Socio-Environmental Inequalities and GM crops: Class, Gender and Knowledge. Co-edition of book with Elizabeth Jelin and Sérgio Costa. Global Entangled Inequalities: Concepts and Evidence from Latin America. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

  • 7. Motta, R. (2017). La movilización de mujeres en las luchas contra los cultivos transgénicos en Argentina y Brasil. In M. Braig, M. Zapatha & M. Rauchecker. Género y Sustentabilidad.

  • 6. Motta, R. (2016). Peasant movements in Argentina and Brazil. In K. Dietz & B. Engels (Eds.) Contested extractivism, society and the state: Struggles over mining and land. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • 5. Motta, R., & Arancibia, F. (2016). Health experts challenging the safety of pesticides in Argentina and Brazil. In M. Chamberlain (Ed.), Medicine, Discourse and Power. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 179-206.

  • 4. Góngora-Mera, M., & Motta, R. C. (2014). El derecho internacional y la mercantilización biohegemónica de la naturaleza: la diseminación normativa de la propiedad intelectual sobre semillas en Colombia y Argentina. In B. Göbel, M. Góngora-Mera, & A. Ulloa (Eds.), Desigualdades socioambientales en América Latina. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colómbia, pp. 395–433.

  • 3. Motta, R. (2013). Risky Politics:  A Sociological Analysis of the WTO Panel on Biotechnological Products. In M. B. A. van Asselt, E. Versluis, & E. Vos (Eds.), Balancing between Trade and Risk: Integrating legal and social science perspectives. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 59–80.

  • 2. Motta, R. (2013). Ganancias, abortos y cáncer: riesgos y desigualdades en torno a la soja transgénica en Argentina. In L. Vecslir (Ed.), Entre la incertidumbre y el riesgo. Reflexiones sobre la modernidad radicalizada en la América Latina (ebook). Bahia Blanca: EdiUNS.

  • 1. Motta, R., & Sobral, F. (2009). O risco dos OGMs: um conflito entre os campos político, científico e econômico. In A. M. Fernandes & S. Raninscheski (Eds.), Américas Compartilhadas. São Paulo: Francis, pp. 197–219.


Book reviews

  • 5. Motta, Renata. (2019). “Book Reviews: Beyond Civil Society: Activism, Participation, and Protest in Latin America”. Latin American Politics and Society, 61 (1): 160–163.

  • 4. Motta, R. (2019). “The Poor’s Struggle for Political Incorporation: The Piquetero Movement in Argentina”. Contemporary Sociology, 48 (5): 571–73.

  • 3. Motta, R. (2019). “Estado e movimentos sociais: uma pesquisa no Incra“. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 34 (100).

  • 2. Motta, R. (2018). Review of Soybeans and Power: Genetically Modified Crops, Environmental Politics, and Social Movements in Argentina, by Pablo Lapegna. Oxford University Press, 2016. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies (ERLACS), 105: Rev. 10.

  • 1. Motta, R. (2017). Brazil’s Emerging role in Global Governance: Health, Food Security and Bioenergy, by Markus Fraundorfer. Palgrave & Macmillan, 2016. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies (ERLACS), 104.


Published Working Papers and Research Reports

  • 5. Motta, R. Violent matters: feminist solidarities through the politics of the body and food. In preparation to submission to Special Issue Women in Movement and Feminisms: critical materialisms, and environmentalisms. Journal of Studies in Social Justice. (Final submission due September 2021).

  • 3. Motta, R. Conceptualizing Food Inequalities. In preparation to submission to Special Issue “Food and Social Change”. The Sociological Review. (Final submission due January 2021).4. We are fed up: political-ecological collaborations for food. Drafted paper to be submitted to a journal to be selected.

  • 2. Motta, R., Poth, C. and Rauchecker, M. (2016). The Construction and (De)legitimation of Knowledge: The Biotechnological Agrarian Model in Argentina. desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series 96. Berlin: desiguALdades.net International Research Network on Interdependent Inequalities in Latin America.

  • 1. Motta, R. (2013). The public debate about agrobiotechnology in Latin American countries: a comparative study of Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. ECLAC Production Development Series 193. Santiago de Chile: ECLAC. Work in progress


Articles in Newspapers, Magazines and Blogs

  • 4. Motta, R. and Teixeira, Marco (2019). Women from every corner occupy Brasília: the Marcha das Margaridas. Open Movements. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/marcha-das-margaridas

  • 3. Motta, R. and Teixeira, Marco. Radar da Participação #3: Mulheres do campo, das florestas, das águas e das cidades ocupam Brasília: a Marcha das Margaridas 2019. In: Democracia e Participação. Available at: https://www.democraciaeparticipacao.com.br/index.php/destaque/262-radar-da-participacao-3-mulheres-do-campo-das-florestas-das-aguas-e-das-cidades-ocupam-brasilia-a-marcha-das-margaridas-2019

  • 2. Motta, R. (2016). Gleiches Übel, unterschiedliche Wege: Wie gentechnisch veränderte Soja in Argentinien und Brasilien Fuß fasste. Zeitschrift der Informationsstelle Lateinamerika (ila), 398, 4-6.

  • 1. Motta, R. (2012). “GM soy producers and crop sprayer face criminal charges”, GM Watch, August 20. Available at: http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2012/14133-verdict-expected-on-gm-soy-producers-charged-over-pesticide-spraying.

Sommersemester 2020

33604 Kolloquium Forschungskolloquium Soziologie Lateinamerikas (mit Stefan Schmalz)

33864 Hauptsemina Theorizing and Researching Food Inequalities

33870 Vorlesung Lateinamerika als Labor der Moderne (mit Bert Hoffmann und Barbara Fritz)

Wintersemester 2019/20

33603 Kolloquium Forschungskolloquium Soziologie Lateinamerikas (mit Sergio Costa)

33820 Seminar Women in Movement in Latin America: Critical materialism, environmentalism and technofeminism (mit Marcela Suárez)

33951 Studienprojekt Monitorando a democracia e os direitos humanos no Brasil (mit Sergio Costa)

Sommersemester 2019

15353 Seminar Global and Regional Transformations: Contexts, Concepts, Interdependencies (mit Philipp Lepenies)

33870 Vorlesung Lateinamerika als Labor der Moderne (mit Bert Hoffmann)

Wintersemester 2018/19

33231 Seminar Global Sociologies: Decentring Sociological Theory (mit Sergio Costa)

33603 Kolloquium Forschungscolloquium Soziologie Lateinamerikas (mit Sergio Costa)

33813 Seminar Solidarität und Allianzbildung in Gendertheorien und feministischen Bewegungen

Sommersemester 2017

30214 Hauptseminar Machtwechsel und Umverteilungskonflikte in Brasilien (mit Sergio Costa)

33603 Kolloquium Forschungskolloquium Soziologie

33862 Hauptseminar Del ecofeminismo hacia las políticas del cuerpo: debates teóricos y estudios de caso (mit Martha Zapata Galindo)

Wintersemester 2016/17                                 

30208 Hauptseminar Global Sociologies Environment, Gender and Southern Theory

33950 E-Learning Wissenschaftspraxis I (mit Barbara Fritz, Robert Lüdtke, Antonio Carbone)

Wintersemester 2015/16 und Sommersemester 2016

On maternity leave

Sommersemester 2015

Wintersemester 2014/2015

Soziale Ungleichheiten und die Weltregionen: Theorien und Diagnosen ( mit Sergio Costa/Barbara Fritz)

Entwicklungsmodel und Umwelt: neue soziale Konflikten

Sommersemester 2013

Neue Perspektiven auf soziale Bewegungen in Lateinamerika (mit Marius Haberland)

Research Interests

Political Sociology, Political Economy, Environmental Sociology, Rural Sociology, Social Inequalities, Social Theory, Social Movements, Latin American Studies, Brazilian Studies, Gender Studies, Comparative Sociology, Food and Commodity Studies.

Current Projects

Food for Justice: Power, Politics, and Food Inequalities in a Bioeconomy (2019 - 2024)

The junior research group Food for Justice examines normative questions of inequalities and justice, rights and democracy that arise in disputes surrounding the question “how are we going to feed the world?” There is a growing politicisation of the production, distribution and consumption of food, because food relations are structured by economic, social, political, cultural and environmental inequalities. Increasingly, citizens perceive the global food system as part of the historical causes of the ecological crisis and the persisting hunger in the world. Although reasons for that are long known (the use of food for profit, the gap between production and consumption, conflicts over land and water, exploitative labour relations, the energy matrix and waste generation), research on food security and bioeconomy tend to rely on the same, searching for technological fixes to a profit-oriented model exploiting living matter.

What is needed to deepen the debate is more knowledge about which food system citizens desire, which solutions are already there that address social concerns and how to redirect public policies towards a fair and sustainable food system. Combining theoretical perspectives on global inequalities with social movement research on food justice, Food for Justice will look at challenges and solutions both in Europe (with focus on Germany) and in Latin America (focusing on Brazil). On the one hand, major normative challenges will be identified in case studies of social mobilisation and critical consumption over food. On the other hand, the research will map and analyse social and political innovations such as agroecology and alternative food networks, as devised by civil society groups and public policies to achieve food security. In short, Food for Justice is about achieving global food security in a fair and ecological way. It looks into social mobilization targeted at injustices in the food system and into social and political innovations that address inequalities undermining food security such as class, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality.

Former Projects

Bridging Environments: United by Food?

Support by: Margherita-von-Brentano-Zentrum, FU Berlin

http://www.mvbz.fu-berlin.de/en/forschung/gefoerderte-projekte/campos-motta/index.html

Under which conditions does ‘bridging’ occur between the countryside and the urban centers in conflicts over socio-environmental inequalities related to food production relations? What prevents it from happening? There is a significant gap in the literature in political sociology on processes of ‘bridging’ and ‘brokerage’ across sites where problems arise and are addressed, from the local to global scales. When these processes are addressed in the literature, an intersectional analysis is missing. Often, women are attributed a leading role in grassroots mobilization whereas global agents and brokers are mostly associated with dominant masculinities. I address three aspects of the research problem. The first is the different categories of actors along lines of social class, gender and ethnicity who participate in interconnected struggles. The second is the multiple scales in which linkages between rural and urban sites take place, in the context of global food chains, ranging from processes at the local level, to those that reach the national political agenda and cross national borders. The third is the influence of different themes that make bridging either possible or unlikely to happen, including how the different materialities of nature intersect with social mobilizations.

Following from the theoretical understanding that bridging conflicts depends on concrete actions from social actors while being challenged by disconnections that exclude places and actors from global chains, I will conduct extended case studies of successful wide coalition-builiding, namely, Wir haben es satt (Germany) and Marcha das Margaridas (Brazil).

PhD Thesis

Brazil and Argentina are the second and the third largest producers respectively of genetically modified (GM) crops. The ten-year lag between the conversion of the majority of soy fields to GM soy in Argentina (1999) and Brazil (2009) relates to differences in social mobilization. By examining explanations for these different paths, the research addresses the conditions in which challengers from social movements changed the official pro-GMO policy and the conditions that prevented it happening. This situates the research in a wider problematic of the conditions for social participation in the trajectory of agrarian change. The research enquires not only into the role of national political contexts but also contextualizes these in relation to global agrarian capitalism. The theoretical framework establishes a dialogue between political economy and political sociology, mediated by a focus on social movements’ theory. It includes structural and actor-centred explanations, material and cultural dimensions, and a dialogue between social movement research and peasant studies. The analytical factors were placed in relation to one another in order to explain paths of social disputes over GMOs, classified in two ideal types of outcomes: a situation of hegemony or of controversy.

The study draws on methods of macro-analytical qualitative comparisons, adopting a research design of “most similar, different outcomes” while adding a time dimension to explain changes in the trajectories. The main data consists of 28 in-depth interviews with key activists during the years 2012 and 2013. The core of the empirical work is the reconstruction of almost two decades of social mobilization over GM crops. Based on that, the research provides key explanations for each outcome by identifying three main analytical factors: organizational bases and networks, contentious meanings, and structure of political opportunities. These are articulated in an explanatory model: early social mobilization – with mobilizing structures and contentious meanings – is a necessary condition to participate in the shaping of policy; but it is not sufficient as it depends on a third condition, namely, a favourable structure of political opportunities. The latter is influenced, in turn, by the national political economy and the structural location of these countries in global commodity chains (GCCs). Activists in producer nodes face harder challenges as commodities are important sources of private and state revenues. The agrarian poor bear the global socio-environmental burden of GCCs, resulting in their social mobilization if mobilizing structures and meanings are given. Finally, the perception that the locus of decision-making lies in national politics facilitates mobilization, while the perception that politics is manly determined by global market dynamics is demobilizing.

The thesis argues that the transformation of Argentina and Brazil into top world producers of GM crops cannot be explained by biotechnology performance but by political struggles, in which social movements and the rural poor were silenced, ignored, or demobilized by a network of actors in favour of GMOs. The argument highlights the relevance of studying political struggles over GMOs at least for two reasons, one empirical and one theoretical. Firstly, unravelling the complex history of the domination of GMOs in two countries that are propagated as breadbaskets of the world is informative to the wider global debate on agrarian futures and food security. Secondly, the issue of GMOs is also illustrative of contemporary challenges of how social mobilization and rights claims can counter systemic imperatives of global capitalism and political interests.