Since 2014

• Home
• About
• Browse
• Search
• Help

Home > Browse > Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies > Record Details

Impact pathways of trade liberalization on rural livelihoods: A case study of smallholder maize farmers in Mexico

Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies

View Archive Info
 

Field	Value
Title	Impact pathways of trade liberalization on rural livelihoods: A case study of smallholder maize farmers in Mexico Sendas de impacto en negocios rurales de la liberalización comercial: Un estudio del caso de pequeños cultivadores de maíz en Mexico
Creator	Hellin, Jon; International Development Economics University of Greenwich. Groenewald, Sytske; Wageningen University Keleman, Alder; School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University
Subject	Mexico, trade liberalization, livelihood strategies, smallholder maize producers, poverty Mexico, liberalización comercial, estrategias de sustento, minifundios de maíz, pobreza
Description	Research assessing the impacts of trade liberalization on poor rural populations can be divided into two categories: more quantitative research, assessing relationships between specific, measurable variables (such as changes in the macroeconomic environment and their impact on farmers’ income levels); and more qualitative research, which takes trade policy as a context and provides broad, descriptive data about dynamic livelihood strategies. In this paper, we outline a framework that could be used to integrate these two approaches by unravelling the macro-micro linkages between national policies and responses at a household level. Using the Mexican maize sector as an illustration, we trace the pathways through which trade liberalization (including the North American Free Trade Agreement) has interacted with changes in government institutions, and thereby impacted on farmers’ livelihood strategies. We identify three pathways through which trade policy affects households and individuals: via enterprises, distribution channels, and government, and we link these to a five-category typology of smallholders’ strategies for escaping rural poverty: intensification, diversification, expansion, increased off-farm income and exit from agriculture. Based on a case-study from Chiapas, Mexico, we report on farmers’ responses to post-liberalization agricultural policies. Data suggest that farmers have intensified maize production, sought more off-farm employment or have exited agriculture altogether. The potential for smallholders to escape poverty by diversifying farms or expanding their land-holdings or herd-size has been largely unrealized. We provide a conceptual framework for linking the impacts of liberalization to farmers’ livelihood strategies and suggest that this framework is useful in the context of agricultural modernisation initiatives that seek to increase agricultural production and productivity. CITE AS: Hellin, J., Groenewald, S., Keleman, A. (2012). Impact pathways of trade liberalization on rural livelihoods: A case study of smallholder maize farmers in Mexico. Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies, 1 (1): 58-82 Las investigaciones que evalúan el impacto de la liberalización comercial en poblaciones rurales pobres puede dividirse en dos categorías: investigaciones más cuantitativas, que analizan relaciones entre variables específicas y medibles (como cambios en el entorno macroeconómico y su impacto en los niveles de renta de los agricultores); e investigaciones más cualitativas, que toman la política comercial como un contexto y proporcionan datos amplios y descriptivos sobre estrategias de sustento dinámicas. En este artículo se dibuja un esquema que podría emplearse para integrar estos dos enfoques desentrañando las relaciones macro-micro entre las políticas nacionales y las respuestas a un nivel de hogar. Analizando el sector de maíz mexicano, dibujamos las sendas a través de las cuales la liberalización comercial (incluyendo el Acuerdo de Libre Comercio de América del Norte) ha interactuado con cambios en instituciones gubernamentales y de esta manera ha impactado en las estrategias de sustento de los agricultores. Identificamos tres sendas que impactan hogares e individuos: empresas, canales de distribución y gobierno; y las relacionamos con cinco estrategias de lucha contra la pobreza rural por parte de los pequeños campesinos: intensificación, diversificación, expansión, mayores ingresos fuera de la agricultura, y abandono de la agricultura. En base a un estudio de caso en Chiapas (Mexico), analizamos las respuestas de los agricultores a las políticas de post-liberalización agrícola. Los datos sugieren que los agricultores han intensificado la producción de maíz, han buscado más empleos fuera de las explotaciones o han abandonado la agricultura. El potencial de los pequeños campesinos para escapar de la pobreza diversificando cultivos o expandiendo sus tierras o el tamaño de sus rebaños no se ha materializado. Proporcionamos un esquema conceptual para relacionar el impacto de la liberalización con las estrategias de sustento rural y sugerimos que este esquema es útil en un contexto de iniciativas de modernización agrícolas que buscan incrementar la producción y productividad agrícolas. CITAR COMO: Hellin, J., Groenewald, S., Keleman, A. (2012). Impact pathways of trade liberalization on rural livelihoods: A case study of smallholder maize farmers in Mexico. Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies, 1 (1): 58-82
Publisher	Universidad de Zaragoza
Contributor	— —
Date	2012-03-02
Type	— —
Format	application/x-pdf
Identifier	http://ried.unizar.es/index.php/revista/article/view/38 10.26754/ojs_ried/ijds.38
Source	Revista iberoamericana de estudios de desarrollo = Iberoamerican journal of development studies; Vol 1, Issue 1 (2012): January - June 2012; 58-82 Revista iberoamericana de estudios de desarrollo = Iberoamerican journal of development studies; Vol 1, Issue 1 (2012): January - June 2012; 58-82
Language	en
Relation	/*ref*/APPENDINI K (2001). De la milpa a los tortibonos: la reestructuración de la política alimentaria en México. El Colegio de Mexico and The United Nations Institute for Social Development, Mexico City /*ref*/ÁVALOS-SARTORIO B (2006). What Can We Learn from Past Price Stabilization Policies and Market Reform in Mexico? Food Policy 31:313-327 /*ref*/BARKIN D (2002). The Reconstruction of a Modern Mexican Peasantry. The Journal of PEASANT Studies 30(1):73-90 /*ref*/BEBBINGTON A (1999). Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analysing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development 27(12):2012-2044 /*ref*/BELLON MR, HELLIN J (2011). Planting hybrids, keeping landraces: agricultural modernization and tradition among small-scale maize farmers in Chiapas, Mexico. World Development. Doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.12.010. /*ref*/BELLON MR, ADATO M, BECERRIL J, MINDEK D (2007). Improved Maize Germplasm, Creolization, and Poverty: The Case of Tuxpeño-Derived Material in Mexico. In: Adato M, Meinzen-Dick R (eds). Agricultural Research, Livelihoods and Poverty: Studies of Economic and Social Impacts in Six Countries. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore /*ref*/BELLON MR (2004). Conceptualizing Interventions to Support On-Farm Genetic Resource Conservation. World Development 32, No. 1:159-172. /*ref*/BELLON MR, HODSON D, HELLIN J (2011). Assessing the Vulnerability of Traditional Maize Seed Systems in Mexico to Climate Change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (33):13432-13437 /*ref*/BLAIKIE P (1989). Explanation and policy in land degradation and rehabilitation for developing countries. Land Degradation and Rehabilitation 1:23-37 /*ref*/BRUSH SB (2000). The issues of in-situ conservation of crop genetic resources. In: Brush SB (ed). Genes in the field: on-farm conservation of crop diversity. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy, pp 3-26 /*ref*/BRUSH SB, CHAUVET, M (2004). Assessment of social and cultural effects associated with transgenic maize production. Chapter VI. In Maize and Biodiversity: The Effects of Transgenic Maize in Mexico. North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Montreal. http://www.cec.org/pubs_docs/documents/index.cfm?varlan=english&ID=1430 /*ref*/CHAMBERS R (1997). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. Intermediate Tech-nology Publications, London /*ref*/CHAMBERS R, CONWAY GR (1992). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st Century. IDS Discussion Paper No. 296, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton /*ref*/CORD L, WODON Q (2001). Do Agricultural Programs in Mexico Alleviate Poverty? Evidence from the Ejido Sector. Cuadernos de Economía 38(114) /*ref*/DE HAAN L (2000a). Livelihood, Locality and Globalization. Nijmegen University Press, Nijmegen /*ref*/DE HAAN L (2000b). The Question of Development and Environment in Geography in the Area of Globalisation. GeoJournal 50:359-367 /*ref*/DE JANVRY A, HELFAND S (1990). The dynamics of peasant agriculture in Latin America: Implications for rural development and agroecology. In: Altieri MA, Hecht SB (eds). Agroecology and Small Farm Development. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Ann Arbor, Boston, USA, pp 61-69 /*ref*/DE JANVRY A, SADOULET E, ANDA GD (1995). NAFTA and Mexico’s Maize Producers World Development 23:1349-1362 /*ref*/DE JANVRY A, SADOULET E, YOUNG LW (1989). Land and labour in Latin American Agriculture from the 1950s to the 1980s. Journal of Peasant Studies 16 (3):396-424 /*ref*/DEVEREUX S, BAULCH B, HUSSEIN K, SHOHAM J, SIDA H, WILCOCK D (2004). Improving the Analysis of Food Insecurity: Food Insecurity Measurement, Livelihood Approaches and Policy: Applications in FIVIMS. Available at: http://www.fivims.net/documents/Final%20Paper5.pdf (Access date: 29-02-2008) /*ref*/DIXON JM, GULLIVER A, GIBBON D (2001). Farming Systems and Poverty: Improving Farmer’s Livelihoods in a Changing World, FAO & World Bank, Rome, Italy & Washington DC /*ref*/DORWARD A, POOLE N, MORRISON J, KYDD J, UREY I (2003). Markets, institutions and technology: missing links in livelihood analysis. Development Policy Review 21(3): 319-332 /*ref*/DYER GA, TAYLOR JE (2011). The Corn Price Surge: Impacts on Rural Mexico. World Development 39(10):1878-1887 /*ref*/ELLIS F (2000). Rural Livelihood and Diversity in Developing Countries: Analysis, Methods, Policy. Oxford University Press, Oxford /*ref*/FARRINGTON J, CARNEY D, ASHLEY C, TURTON C (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods in Practice: Early Application of Concepts in Rural Areas. ODI Natural Resource Perspective No. 42, The Overseas Development Institute, London /*ref*/FERNÁNDEZ CASTILLO S (2004). Farewell to the Peasantry? (Post) Modernizing Rural Mexico: The Case of the Ejido Peasants in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Ph. D. Thesis, Lund, University of Lund /*ref*/FITTING E (2004). No hay dinero en la Milpa: el maíz y el hogar transnacional del sur del valle de Tehuacan. In: Binford L (ed). La economía política de la migración internacional en Puebla y Veracruz: siete estudios de caso. CONACYT, Mexico DF. pp 61-101 /*ref*/FITTING E (2006). Importing Corn, Exporting Labour: The Neoliberal Corn Regime, GMOs, and the Erosion of Biodiversity in Mexico. Journal of Agriculture and Human Values 23:15-26 /*ref*/GARCÍA BARRIOS R, GARCÍA BARRIOS L (1990). Environmental and Technological De gradation of Peasant Agriculture: A Consequence of Development in Mexico. World Development 18(11):1569-1585 /*ref*/GARCÍA RAÑÓ H, KELEMAN A (2007). La crisis de la tortilla del 2007: Coyuntura, o ¿falla estructural? Oxfam International, Mexico City, Mexico /*ref*/GARCÍA-SALAZAR JA, SKAGGS R, CRAWFORD TL (2011). PROCAMPO, the Mexican corn market, and Mexican food security. Food Security 3:383-394 /*ref*/GONZÁLEZ DÁVILA O (2010). Food security and poverty in Mexico: the impact of higher global food prices. Food Security 2:383-393 /*ref*/HAMILTON S, FISCHER EF (2003). Non-traditional agricultural exports in highland Guatemala: Understandings of risk and perceptions of change. Latin American Research Review 38(3):82-110 /*ref*/HANSON GH, HARRISON A (1999). Trade Liberalization and Wage Inequality in Mexico. Industrial and Labour Relations Review 52(2):271-288 /*ref*/KEILBACH BAER NM (2005). Maíz y frijol en México: perspectivas frente a la liberalización total de su comercio en el 2008. Documento de referencia para la Campaña Comercio Justo de Oxfam-Centroamérica /*ref*/KELEMAN A, HELLIN J (2009). Specialty Maize Varieties in Mexico: A Case Study in Market-Driven Agro-Biodiversity Conservation. Journal of Latin American Geography 8(2):147-174 /*ref*/KELEMAN A, BELLON MR (2009). Maize Diversity, Rural Development Policy, and Farmers’ Practices: Lessons from Chiapas, Mexico. The Geographical Journal 175(1):52-70. /*ref*/KING A (2006). Ten Years with NAFTA: A Review of the Literature and an Analysis of Farmer Responses in Sonora and Veracruz, Mexico. CIMMYT Special Report 06-01, CIMMYT/Congressional Hunger Centre, Mexico DF _81 /*ref*/LEVY S, VAN WIJNBERGEn S (1992). Maize and the Free-Trade Agreement between Mexico and the United States. World Bank Economic Review 6(3):481-502. /*ref*/LEVY S (1994). Mexican Agriculture in the Free Trade Agreement: Transition Problems in Economic Reform. Working Paper No. 36. OECD Development Center, Paris /*ref*/LIPPER L, COOPER D (2009). Managing plant genetic resources for sustainable use in food and agriculture: balancing the benefits in the field. In: Kontoleon A, Pascual U, Smale M (eds). Agrobiodiversity, conservation and economic development. Routledge, New York, pp 27-39 /*ref*/LONG N, VILLARREAL M (1998). Small product, big issues: value contestations and cultural identities in cross-border commodity networks. Development and Change 29:725-750 /*ref*/MARSDEN T, MUNTON R, WARD N, WHATMORE S (1996). Agricultural Geography and the Political Economy Approach: A Review. Economic Geography 72 (4):361-375 /*ref*/MCCULLOCH N, WINTERS LA, CIRERA X (2001). Trade Liberalization and Poverty: A Handbook. Centre for Economic Policy Research, London /*ref*/MEILLEUR BA and HODGKIN T (2004). In-situ conservation of crop wild relatives: status and trends. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:663-684 /*ref*/NADAL A (2000). The Environmental and Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico. WWF/Oxfam, Gland/Oxford /*ref*/NADAL A (2002). Corn in NAFTA: Eight Years After. A Research Report Prepared for the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation, May 2002. Available at: http://www.cec.org/files/pdf/ECONOMY/Corn-NAFTA_en.pdf (Access date: 24-04-2007) /*ref*/NADAL A, GARCÍA RANO H (2006). Trade, Poverty & the Environment: A Case Study in the Biosphere Reserve Sierra de Santa Martha. Final Report to World Wildlife Foundation. World Wildlife Foundation, Mexico City /*ref*/NAYLOR RL, FALCON WP, PUENTE-GONZÁLEZ A (2001). Policy Reforms and Mexican Agriculture: Views from the Yaqui Valley. CIMMYT Economics Program Paper No. 01-01, CIMMYT, Mexico DF /*ref*/NIEHOF A (2004). The Significance of Diversification for Rural Livelihood Systems. Food Policy, 29(4):321-338 /*ref*/NIEHOF A , PRICE LL (2001). Rural Livelihood Systems: A Conceptual Framework. Wageningen–UPWARD Series on Rural Livelihoods No.1, WU, UPWARD, Wageningen /*ref*/NORMAN D, DOUGLAS M (1994). Farming Systems in Development and Soil Conservation. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy /*ref*/OECD (2007). Agricultural and Fisheries Policies in Mexico: Recent Achievements Continuing the Reform Agenda. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris /*ref*/PERALES HR, BENZ BF, BRUSH SB (2005). Maize diversity and ethno-linguistic diversity in Chiapas, Mexico. Proceedings of the National Academy of. Sciences 102(3):949-954 /*ref*/PRESSOIR G, BERTHAUD J (2004a). Patterns of population structure in maize landraces from the Central Valleys of Oaxaca in Mexico. Heredity 92:88-94 /*ref*/PRETTY JN (1995). Regenerating Agriculture: Policies and Practice for Sustainability and Self-Reliance. Earthscan Publications, London /*ref*/PUYANA A, ROMERO J (2006). 10 años con el TLCAN. FLACSO and El Colegio de México. Mexico City /*ref*/RHOADES RE (1991). The Art of the Informal Agricultural Survey. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture Research Guide 36. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture Research, Ibadan, Nigeria /*ref*/SADOULET E, DE JANVRY A, DAVIS B (2001). Cash Transfer Programs with Income Multipliers: PROCAMPO in Mexico. World Development 29(6):1043-1056 /*ref*/SCOONES I (2009). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. Journal of Peasant Studies 36(1):171-196 /*ref*/SILVERMAN D (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. Sage Publications, London /*ref*/SKOUFIAS E, DAVIS B, VEGA S de la (2001). Targeting the Poor in Mexico: An Evaluation of the Selection of Households into PROGRESA. World Development 29(10):1769-1784 82_ /*ref*/TAYLOR JE, YÚNEZ-NAUDE A, BARCEINAS PAREDES F, DYER G (2005). Transition Policy and the Structure of the Agriculture of Mexico. In: Huff KM, Meilke K, Knuston RD, Ochoa RF, Rude J, Yúnez-Naude A (eds). North American Agrifood Market Integration: Situation and Perspectives. Friesen Printers, Altona, Manitoba, pp 86-118 /*ref*/TAYLOR JE, DYER GA, YÚNEZ-NAUDE A (2005). Disaggregated Rural Economywide Models for Policy Analysis. World Development 33(10):1671-1688 /*ref*/TEN KATE A (1992). Trade Liberalisation and Economic Stabilization in Mexico: Lessons from Experience. World Development 20(5):659-672 /*ref*/TUCKMAN BH (1976). The Green Revolution and the Distribution of Agricultural Income in Mexico. World Development 4(1):17-24 /*ref*/WIGGINS S, KEILBAUCH N, PREIBISCH K, PROCTOR S, RIVERA HERREJÓN G, RODRÍGUEZ MUÑOZ G (2002). Agricultural Policy Reform and Rural Livelihoods in Central Mexico. Journal of Development Studies 38(4):179-202 /*ref*/WINTERS LA (2000a). Trade and Poverty: Is There a Connection? In: Nordstrom BD, Winters LA (eds). Trade Income Disparity and Poverty. World Trade Organisation, Geneva, pp 43-69 /*ref*/WINTERS LA (2000b). Trade Liberalisation and Poverty. Prus Working Paper No. 7, Research Unit Sussex, Sussex, UK /*ref*/WINTERS LA (2002). Trade, Trade Policy and Poverty: What Are the Links? World Economy 25:1339-1367 /*ref*/WORLD BANK (2007). World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. The World Bank, Washington DC /*ref*/WORLD BANK (2008). Mexico Country Brief. Available at: http://go.worldbank.org/ZF-QFJM2DO0 (Access date: 18-06-2008) /*ref*/YÚNEZ-NAUDE A (2003). The Dismantling of CONASUPO, a Mexican State Trader in Agriculture. World Development 26(1):97-122 /*ref*/YÚNEZ-NAUDE A, BARCEINAS PAREDES F (2002). Lessons From NAFTA: The Case of Mexico’s Agricultural Sector. Available at: http://www.globalsubsidies.org/private/modules/knowledgebox/io/file.php?entry=432&field=32 (Access date: 14-02-2007) /*ref*/YÚNEZ-NAUDE A, TAYLOR JE (2006). The Effects of NAFTA and Domestic Reforms in the Agriculture of Mexico: Predictions and Facts. Région et Developpement No. 23. Available at: http://www.regionetdeveloppement.u-3mrs.fr/pdf/R23/R23_Yunez_Taylor.pdf (Access date: 25-03-2007) /*ref*/ZAHNISER S, COYLE W (2004). US-Mexico Corn Trade During the NAFTA Era: New Twists to an Old Story. Available at: www.ers.usda.gov (Access date: 20-03-2007)
Rights	Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International.