To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In the late nineteenth century, two crises disturbed the Brazilian sugar economy. A serious market crisis arose when European beet sugar usurped traditional cane sugar markets. A serious social crisis arose within Brazil when the Imperial government moved to abolish slavery. This study examines the sugar planters’ means of dealing with these crises, why they failed in comparison with Cuban sugar planters, and how they nevertheless succeeded in preserving their social position. It also speculates on how the market crisis might have been overcome and how the social crisis might have been handled differently.
The Brazilian planters attempted capital improvements and reorganization of production to cope with the market crisis, but they failed. The only real solution would have been integration into a northernhemisphere market via recolonization, but that would have entailed heavy political costs. The planters coped better with the social crisis. They succeeded in transferring the losses suffered in export markets to the plantation work force in the form of depressed wages and poor working conditions. Their efforts, aided with government subsidies, perpetuated their dominance in Brazil's sugar areas. Thus ‘modernization’, understood as technological advance and the abolition of forced labour, failed to produce general changes.
The economic crisis
The market crisis affected all cane sugar producers, who had lost about one-half of the world market by the end of the century (Table 51). The shift away from cane sugar consumption did not reflect changing tastes, for cane sugar and beet sugar were good substitutes. In fact, the volume of world cane sugar production increased fivefold during the latter part of the nineteenth century.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.