Territorial Governance. A Comparative Research of Local Agro-Food Systems in Mexico

15 Pages·2017·0.73 MB·English

agriculture
Article
Territorial Governance. A Comparative Research of
Local Agro-Food Systems in Mexico
GerardoTorres-Salcido1,* ID andJavierSanz-Cañada2
1 LatinAmericanandCaribbeanResearchCenter,NationalAutonomousUniversityofMexico
(CIALC/UNAM),TorreIIdeHumanidades,Piso3,CiudadUniversitaria,MexicoCity04510,Mexico
2 InstituteofEconomics,GeographyandDemography,SpanishNationalResearchCouncil(IEGD/CSIC),
Albasanz26,28037Madrid,Spain;[email protected]
* Correspondence:[email protected];Tel.:[phone](ext.42208)
Received:25November2017;Accepted:25January2018;Published:31January2018
Abstract: The article attempts to provide a theoretical discussion on territorial governance by
presentingboththeneo-institutionalistpositionandtheDeSousaSantos’alternativemodels,witha
viewofhighlightingthedimensionsthatcanberelevanttounderstandingtheterritorialdynamics
ofLocalAgro-foodSystems(LAFS).Thepaperaimstobuildupasystemofindicators,structured
in four dimensions, concerning the territorial governance of LAFS: (i) multi-level coordination;
(ii) democratic participation and accountability; (iii) cooperation among producers and other
stakeholders and (iv) relationships with the environment. We verify, as a hypothesis, that the
typology of markets to which the identity-based products are directed plays a decisive role in
the way that processes of territorial governance of LAFS are constructed. The results of an
empiricalresearch,developedinfourLAFSinMexico,arepresented: pricklypearcactusinMorelos,
blackberry in Michoacán, cuitlacoche (corn smut) in Tlaxcala and coffee in Veracruz. Two types
of territorial governance of LAFS may be distinguished: those that can be strengthened by the
geographicalandorganisationalproximityofthemarketsandtheactionoflocalstakeholdersand
governments—pricklypearcactusandcuitlacoche—versusthosewhicharedevotedtoexportand
areconductedbylargecompaniesinwhichmarketingnetworksinvolvecertificationmechanisms
andalargenumberofinstitutions—coffeeandblackberry.
Keywords:territorialgovernance;LocalAgro-foodSystems(LAFS);Mexico;multi-levelcoordination;
accountability;cooperation;environment
1. Introduction
Local Agro-Food Systems (LAFS; French acronym SYAL, Systèmes Agro-alimentaires Localisés)
constituteafieldofstudythathasbeenwidelydisseminatedinrecentyearsamongacademics,social
actorsandterritorialdevelopmentstakeholders[1–3]. AccordingtoSanz-CañadaandMuchnik[4],
LAFSareconceptualisedasconcentrationsoflocallynetworkedfarms,firms(agro-foodindustries,
marketing companies, auxiliary industries and service enterprises, etc.) and institutions (sectoral
institutions,localdevelopmentagencies,etc.),specialisedinproducingandmarketingidentity-based
foodproducts. LAFSperformcollectiveregulatorytasks,suchasidentificationofthespecificquality,
adoptionanddisseminationoftechniques,knowledgeandknowhow.
OneofthemainapproachesinstudiesonLAFSinvolvestheanalysisoftheeffectsoftheproximity
ofthefarms,firmsandinstitutionsspecialisedinanidentity-basedfoodsector,uponthedevelopment
of networks among local stakeholders, concerning different aspects, such as knowledge, trust or
supplier-consumerrelationships,amongothers[4]. Researchattemptstoestablishwhetherandhow
localstakeholderscanvalorisethefoodidentityandtheterritorialspecificitybymeansnotonlyof
Agriculture 2018,8,18;doi:10.3390/agriculture8020018 www.mdpi.com/journal/agriculture
Agriculture 2018,8,18 2of15
geographical,butalsooforganisational,proximity[5–8]. Whereasgeographicalproximityinvolvesthe
distancebetweentheagents,organisationalproximity,accordingtoTorreandGilly[9],isbasedontwo
typesoflogic: belongingandsimilarity. Theformerimpliesthatactorswhoarecloseinorganisational
termsbelongtothesamespaceofproximityrelationsandinteractions(firms,networks... ),whereas
thelattermeansthattheagentshavethesamereferencespaceandsharethesameknowledge.Research
conductedintermsofproximityenablesustoanalyseterritorialgovernancemechanisms,suchasthe
typesofrelationshipsbetweenlocalstakeholdersandinstitutions,whethertheseinvolvecooperation
and/orconflict,ortheexistenceofcommonculturalelements. Asgovernanceisconceptualisedasa
formofgovernmentinvolvedinthepoliticaldecision-makingprocessformultipleindependentprivate
andpublicstakeholders,whoarecoordinatedinanon-hierarchicalmannerandwhopresentmultiple
interactionsandmutualagreements,goodlocalgovernancethusconstitutesabasicrequirementfor
valorising territorial specific resources. The forms of horizontal and vertical coordination arising
betweenlocalstakeholdersandinstitutions,aswellasthesynergiesresultingfromtheirrespective
collectiveactions,aretheconsequenceofgeographicalandorganisationalproximity.
Withinthisperspective,theconceptofterritorialgovernancearisesfromtheincorporationofan
approachbasedupontheconceptofproximityintoresearchontherelationshipscomingaboutin
theLAFS;itisinscribedwithinthescopeofstudiesthatconsiderterritoryasaplaceofconstruction
ofcollectiveprojectsandarticulationoftherelationshipsbetweenglobalandlocalaspects[10]. Ina
predominantcontextofglobalisedmassfoodmarkets,wherethereexistsasymmetryinrelationto
informationandnumerousdecisionmakers,theconceptofterritorialgovernanceimplies,fromthe
decision-makingperspective,atleastfourfundamentalelements.
First,itshouldbepointedoutthat,accordingtoTorreandTraversac[11],territorialgovernance
consistsofapplyingprocessesofnetworkedcollectiveorganisationinwhichmulti-levelmanagement
takesplaceamongstakeholders,enterprisesandlocalinstitutions;multi-levelcoordination,inherent
tothescaleofterritorialwork,representsanecessaryconditionforattainingterritorialgovernance.
Withinthescopeofthistypeofcoordinationrelationship,thereisaneedtohighlightthecentralrole
takenonbythelocalnetworksthatdisseminateknowledgeandinformation.
Second,thenewapproachesinterritorialdevelopmentplaceparticularemphasisonincorporating
anintrinsicvisionintotheconceptofgovernance,bywhichthelocalstakeholdersandinstitutions
are requested to modify their actions and decision-taking frameworks, changing from pyramidal
and centralised government organisations to networked systems in which decisions are taken
in a more decentralised manner and into which public-private partnerships are incorporated [8].
Withinthesenewframeworks,participatorydemocracyandaccountabilityarefeaturesthatdefinethe
decentralisationofthedecision-takingprocess.
Athirdelement,inherenttotheconceptofterritorialgovernance,involveshorizontalrelationships
ofcooperation(orconflict)amongproducersandothersocio-territorialagents,suchasconsumers,
which are based upon organisational proximity—empowerment of the stakeholders, a common
territorial identity and values of mutual trust and specific local agreements, among other aspects;
alltheseelementscontributetogeneratingterritorialisedsocialcapital.
Afourthaspectoftheconceptofterritorialgovernancereferstotherelationshipsbetweenthe
LAFSandtheenvironment,becausemultifunctionalapproachesonagro-foodsystemsmustnecessarily
convergeintheanalysisofenvironmentalissuesandinthemanagementofcommonassetsinvolving
naturalresources.
Somestudieshaveaddressedgovernanceanditscorrespondingconstructionofindicatorsinan
exhaustive manner. The World Bank possesses a large database on global governance [12], which
groupsdataintosixdimensions: voiceandaccountability;politicalstabilityandabsenceofviolence;
governmenteffectiveness;regulatoryquality;ruleoflaw;andcontrolofcorruption. Theshortcoming
of these indicators is that they are not pertinent with regard to addressing the specific dynamics
oftheterritoriesandtheirsocioeconomicrelationships. Moreover,theyexcludetheenvironmental
dimension,aswellasthedynamicsofurban-rurallanduse.
Agriculture 2018,8,18 3of15
Otherwise, few studies deal with the problem of indicators in the research on territorial
governance. OneoftheseisthatofCorrea-Gómezetal.[13],whichisaseminalstudyincomparative
researchintoLAFS;inthisarticle,theauthorsattempttobuildcommonindicatorsinordertofindthese
typesofsystemsinColombia. AnotheroneisthatofJaninRivolin[14],whoproposesinstitutionally
positioningindicatorsofterritorialgovernanceintheEUregionalpolicy.
A first objective of the present paper involves making progress in research on the territorial
governanceofLAFS,anaspectpoorlyaddressedintheliterature: LAFSisthusourunitofempirical
analysis. A second objective of our research is to build up a system of indicators devoted to
characterising the willingness of LAFS, to develop collective action, useful to local stakeholders’
strategiesandforthedesignoflocalandregionalpolicies. Ourmethodologicalapproachisdefined
bythebuildingofasystemofindicatorswiththefourdimensionsofterritorialgovernanceofLAFS
mentionedabove.
In accordance with the elements outlined as being constitutive of the concept of territorial
governance,ourresearchhypothesisiswhetherthetypologyofmarketstowhichtheidentity-based
productsaredirectedplaysadecisiveroleinthewaytheprocessesofterritorialgovernanceofLAFS
areconstructed—thatis,weanalysewhatfeaturesterritorialgovernanceacquiresfromthesesystems
whentheexportmarketsaredominatedbybigcompanies,orrather,whenproximitymarketsprevail.
Strategiesaimedathighlightingthevalueofproductscanbeseenindifferentmodelsofterritorial
organisation,afactthatinvolves,amongotherthings,differentformsofcoordinationoftheactors[15]
ordifferentformsoforganisationallearning[16].
To this end, our article presents the results of the research, which is based on diagnosis and
analysis of four LAFS, emphasising the empowerment of local actors and their influence on the
territorialdynamicsoflocalcommunitiesincentral,EasternandWesternMexico: pricklypearcactus
(Opuntiaficus;NopalinSpanish)productioninTlalnepantla,Morelos;blackberryproductioninValle
deLosReyes,Michoacán;Cuitlacoche(Ustilagomaydissp.);cornsmutwhichgrowsonyoungcorncobs)
producedingreenhousesinSanMiguelXochitecatitla,municipalityofNatívitas,Tlaxcala;andcoffee
productioninIxhuatlándelCafé,Veracruz.
Thepresentpaperisdividedintosixsections. Thesecondsectionaddressesthecurrentdebateon
territorialgovernanceanditstheoreticalbackground,aswellastheparticularitiesthereofinLAFS.
Thethirdsectiondescribesthematerialsandmethodsemployedinthedevelopmentofterritorial
governanceindicators. Inthefourthsection,themaincharacteristicsofthecasestudiesaresetforth.
Resultsoftheempiricalresearcharepresentedinthefifthsection. Finally,theresultsarediscussed,
inthelightoftheoreticalproposalsandoftheresearchagenda,intheconclusionssection.
2. TheoreticalFramework: ConceptualDebateandDimensionsofTerritorialGovernance
The term governance is used in different ways, but it is always considered as a new form of
publicstewardshipandcollectiveresourcemanagementthatgoesbeyondtheusualandhierarchical
form of public government—it emphasises decentralised processes of decision-making, involving
participationofthepublicinstitutions,theeconomicfabricandthecivilsociety,aswellascoordination
among the actors [17,18]. Regardless of the genealogy of the concept [19,20], this section aims to
highlightsomesocio-economicandterritorialcharacteristicsofgovernance. Tothisend,weunderline
the differences and similarities between two apparently opposing positions—on the one hand,
the New Institutionalism of Williamson [21,22] and, on the other, alternative positions, like that
of De Sousa Santos [23,24], who, based on the meaning of local and on the ecology of knowledge
from the global South, seeks to construct an anti-capitalist epistemology. Both positions seem
partiallyirreconcilable—whileneo-institutionalistpositionsdrawattentiontothecostofagreements
and contracts for the enterprise, the alternative ones emphasise conflict as key to the distribution
of knowledge and power, and also acknowledge diversity in the global world. Nevertheless,
both positions coincide in a number of ways and share some dimensions that can be applied to
thefieldofterritorialgovernance.
Agriculture 2018,8,18 4of15
NewInstitutionalEconomicsseekstoreducethetransactioncostsofcontractsandagreements[21]
andthereforestudiesgovernancebyidentifying,explainingandmitigatingtherisksarisingfromthese
contracts.Williamson[22](pp.54–61)providesadetailedreviewofthesecostsbyemphasisingtherole
ofbehavioursandexpectations,propertyrights,technology,thedifferentformsofbusinessintegration
andtheimpactsofpublicpolicies,especiallyanti-monopolyregulations. However,oneofthebiggest
challengesofthisdisciplineinvolvesmeasuringtransactioncostsandtheimpactsofhierarchyand
bureaucracyontheformalstructureofcompaniesandthewell-beingofagents.
For critical authors, dissemination of the concept of governance responds to the need for a
neo-liberalmatrixthatseekstogivenewlegitimacyto21stcenturycapitalism. Aspointedoutby
DeSousaSantos[23](p. 33),theconceptofgovernancehascuriouslybecomewidespread,together
with that of globalisation, raising the question of whether it could represent an epistemological
subordinationofcolonialsocietiesandlocalformsofproductiontoglobalcapitalism. Accordingto
thesameview,theoriginofgovernance,orratheroftheneedforgovernmentofglobalcapitalism,
canbefoundinthecrisistriggeredbythestudentmovementsoftheseventiesandthesubsequent
questioningofthelegitimacyofcapitalism.Theanti-globalisationsocialmovements,aswellasthelocal
movements—withaglobalimpact—demandingequalityandrecognitionofdifference,paradoxically
constitutethemanifestationofnon-capitalistgovernance,settingupagreementsandcontractsfrom
below [23]. The latter proposals do not exclude the possibility of building alternative governance
that offers dimensions relevant to both the local and the global contexts, seeking common spaces
withtheconceptofneo-institutionalistgovernance. Examplesofsuchdimensionscouldbevoluntary
participation,horizontaldecision-making,autonomy,coordination,associationandself-regulation,
amongothers.
Inadditiontothesedimensions,commontotheneo-institutionalmatrix,andthealternativeview
ofgovernance,theenvironmentshouldbetakenintoaccount.AccordingtoOstrom[25],alsoassociated
withtheschoolonNewInstitutionalEconomics,localcontextscanbeconducivetobuildinginstitutions
thatallowself-managementandself-regulationwithpositiveexternalities. Thiscanbeachievedby
activatingstandardsandconventionsforthemanagementofcommonresources,whichisnotpossible
without strong social relationships based on networks, rules, standards and social beliefs—that is
tosay,acomprehensivesocialcapital. Forthesameauthor,thesecontexts,togetherwithcollective
actionandmanagementoftheinstitutions,leadstoanalysisatdifferentscalesinwhichlocalsystems
constitute a part of nested subsystems, which together define a social- ecological system, which is
characterised, from the research point of view, by a whole series of variables defining collective
action at different levels [26]. Another remarkable contribution is the book edited by Torre and
Traversac[11]onthemechanismsandtoolsofterritorialgovernance,suchasmulti-levelcoordination
oflawsandregulations,aswellastheinstrumentsofinformative,deliberativeanddecisiveencounters.
Interpreting agreements and conventions as axes of institutional construction on a local scale and
accordingtoresourceavailability, ageneralframeworkofterritorialgovernanceandLAFScanbe
builtupontheneo-institutionalistcontributions,thesocialmovements’alternativeapproachesand
Ostrom’ssocial-ecologicalsystem.
The contributions by the above-mentioned authors provide a more accurate definition of
territorial governance, in that they enable the very dimensions of this concept to be established,
as the capacity to construct and conserve the institutions at a local level, to facilitate macro-,
meso- and micro-encounters, as well as dialogue for coordination [27]. Territorial governance is
based on bottom-up management of processes of socio-economic and institutional proximity, in a
decentralisedfashion,bymeansofmultipleformsofgovernment,throughformsofself-management
and self-regulation of communities—conventions and agreements—and based upon institutions
that facilitate coordination at different levels. In short, territorial governance is the capacity to
construct (a) a public agenda with a bottom-up proximity-based focus; (b) decentralised forms of
managementcombinedwithstakeholderautonomy;(c)multi-levelformsofcoordination,resulting
Agriculture 2018,8,18 5of15
inreducedtransactioncoststhroughlinksoftrustandreciprocity;and(d)formsofecologicaland
socialmanagement.
We are aware that territorial governance is a concept under construction which, according to
Weberianmethodology,canbecomparedtoanidealtypology—theobjectiveentailsconstructinga
proxyofthisconceptwithinthecontextofruralchangeinMexico,bymeansofexploringthefour
above-mentioneddimensions.
3. MaterialandMethods
Thepresentpaperattemptstoestablishindicatorsfortheaforementionedtheoreticaldimensions
and to provide a methodological viewpoint, in order to conduct comparative studies on LAFS.
TheterritorialgovernanceofLAFSisconsideredtoconstituteacomplexsystem,notonlybecause
it includes many different types of local actors and institutions, but also because there are a great
varietyofproducers’strategiesofappropriationandvalue-addition,andagreatvarietyofhuman
andnaturallinksbetweentheLAFSandtheenvironment. Basedontherecognitionofthiscomplexity,
the following requirements were established for the selection of case studies: (1) a noteworthy
territorial anchorage of the product; (2) the existence of specific rural agro-industrial projects or
practices related to different market scales—urban, regional, national or international; (3) LAFS
developmentstrategiesareassociatedwiththedisseminationactivitiesofhighereducationinstitutions;
(4)collectiveactionthatprovidesevidenceofcooperationand/orconflictforthedevelopmentofthe
LAFS;and(5)environmentalconcernsintheuseofnaturalresources.
Ourempiricalresearchconsistedoffieldtripsinwhichwefirstappliedparticipatoryobservation
techniques—non-structured methods based on conversations with the stakeholders from four
LAFS—inordertoverifytheeligibilityrequirements,establishdiagnosesandconstructrelationshipsof
trustwiththestakeholders. Ourmethodologicalapproachinvolvesacasestudywhich,inaccordance
withthetypologyestablishedbyYin[28],correspondstoresearchonmultiplecaseswhichinturn
are subdivided into subunits—organisations of producers and small family businesses. In this
sense, we conducted semi-directive interviews with relevant socio-territorial agents, applying a
standardisedquestionnaire. Tothisend,thefollowingstakeholderswereselected: representativesof
publicadministration,producerorganisationsandresearchersandscholars,amongotherkeyactors.
Thequestionnairefortheinterviewscomprisedthefollowingsections: thehistoryoforganisationsor
companies;participationofpartnersinmeetingsandinthedecision-makingprocess;agro-industrial,
infrastructureandserviceactivities;andmarketing,disseminationandpromotionalactivitieslinked
withhighereducationinstitutionsandwithdifferentlevelsofthepublicadministration. Eachofthe
main parts of the interview questionnaire corresponded to each of the dimensions of territorial
governance that we defined in the Introduction. Table 1 shows the main features of the case
studies—products, territorialanalysis unitsandnumber oftheinterviews (30) andfieldtrips (11),
conductedfrom2013to2015.
Table1.Maincharacteristicsofthecasestudies.
NumberofOrganisations Numberof NumberofField
Locality Product
andCompanies Interviews Visits
Pricklypearcactus 5organisationsand
Tlalnepantla,Morelos 16 4
(Opuntiaficus) 1company
IxhuatlándelCafé,
Coffee 1organisation 4 2
Veracruz
LosReyes,Michoacán Blackberryandotherberries 1organisation 4 3
S.MiguelXochitecatitla, Cuitlacoche(Ustilagomaydis)
2familybusinesses 6 2
Tlaxcala andothervegetables
Total 30 11
Source:Ownelaborationbasedonthefieldwork(2013–2015).
Agriculture 2018,8,18 6of15
Table2showsthedescriptionoftheeighteendummyindicators,groupedintofourdimensionsof
territorialgovernance. First,the“multi-levelcoordination”dimensionincludesfiveindicatorsthat
entailthesetting-upofagreements,bothformalandinformal,withthreelevelsofpublicadministration,
aswellaswithhighereducationinstitutionsandwithinputandtechnologicalcompanies. Second,
the ”democratic participation and accountability” dimension offers five indicators that reflect the
organisation of meetings and assemblies, renewal of leaders, equal access to common resources,
theexistenceofaccountabilityaswellasthecapacityfordialogueandagreementofthestakeholders.
Theindicatorsassignedtothedimension,“cooperationamongproducersandotherstakeholders”,
make reference to the existence of joint purchase of inputs, infrastructures and collective savings
instruments,totheparticipationincollectivetasks,suchasthemaintenanceofcommonlandplots
aswellastotheprevalenceofvaluesthatshapesocialcapitalofcommunities,suchastrustinthe
spokenwordintransactions. Thefinaldimensionconcernsthe“relationshipsbetweentheLAFSand
theenvironment”andincludesfourindicators;oneindicatorisrelatedtotheexistenceofterritorialor
environmentalcertificationofproducts,anotheroneinvolvestheuseofcompostorbio-fertilisersand
tworefertothemanagementofcommongoods,suchaswaterandforests.
Table2.Descriptionsofthedimensionsandindicatorsofterritorialgovernance.
Dimensions Indicator Description
1.Agreementswiththemunicipalgovernment Agro-industrial,marketingandcreditagreements
2.Agreementswiththestategovernment Agro-industrial,marketingandcreditagreements
3.Agreementswiththefederalgovernment Agro-industrial,marketingandcreditagreements
1.Multi-level
4.Agreementswithhighereducationinstitutions Agreementsfortechnologicalresearchandinnovation
Coordination
5.Agreementswithinputand Particularrelationswithinputand
technologicalcompanies technologicalcompanies
6.Organisationofmeetings Informativeanddecisionalmeetings
Accesstoinformation,transparencyandassessmentof
7.Equalaccesstoinformationresources
publicandprivateresourcesforinnovativeprojects
2.Democratic 8.Accountability Distributionandfreeaccesstoaccountingreports
Participationand Whethertheleadersarerenewedinaperiodof
Accountability 9.Regularrenewalofleaders X(1,2,4,6or8)years,accordingtotheregulatory
frameworkoftheorganisation.
10.Resolutionofcontroversiesbydialogue Differencesareresolvedwithintheframeworkofdialogue
andnegotiation andnegotiation,withoutphysicalconfrontation
11.Jointpurchaseofinfrastructures Jointpurchaseofvehiclesorwarehouses
Existenceoftandas(informalsavingassociations),financial
12.Collectivesavinginstruments
3.Cooperationamong cooperatives,etc.
producersandother 13.Assessmentandmutualsupportfromother Maintenanceoflandplots,logisticsandparticipationin
stakeholders producers(solidarityandreciprocity) collectivetasks.
Existenceofcashorin-kindloanswithoutasigned
14.Valueofthespokenword
contract
Qualitycertifications(designationsoforigin,organic,
15.Certificationprocesses
fairtrade,etc.),collectivetrademarks,etc.
Theproducersapplycompostorothermethodsof
4.Relationshipswith 16.Useofcompostorbio-fertilisers
agro-ecologicalfertilisation
theEnvironment
17.Agreementsonagriculturalwateruse Communalsystemsofirrigation
18.Agreementsonprotectionandconservation Managementofcommunalforestsandother
offorests commonresources
Source:Ownelaborationbasedonqualitativeinformationprovidedbyinterviewees.
There is a need to clarify critically the definition of these indicators. Firstly, at the territorial
ormicro-territoriallevel,asoccurswithfamilyfarms,agreementsarenotnecessarilyformalisedby
meansofwrittencontracts; arrangementsmaybeinformalasaresultoffamilyusesandcustoms,
andduetofriendshipsandtrustestablishedwithotheractors. Thesamecannotbesaid,forexample,
for the multinational companies that market blackberries in Los Reyes, Michoacán, or coffee in
Ixhuatlán del Café, Veracruz, where contract farming is generally set up with the most important
producers—AgroindustriasUnidasdeMéxicoispracticallytheonlybuyerofcoffee.Likewise,overseas
marketingofpricklypearcactusfromTlalnepantla, Morelos, reliesonbrokerswithwhomformal
agreementsareestablished;inparticular,brokersofpricklypearrentedawarehouseintheUnited
Stateswiththepurposeofhavinggreatercontrolovermarketingtheproduct,thusintegratingthe
Agriculture 2018,8,18 7of15
Agriculture 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16
process at both local and global levels. Additionally, political agreements are not always reached,
cthlausshgediv iwnigthr itsheet oruvliionlge nptacrotyn,fl tihcets P,aasrtiindoT lRaelnveopluancitolan,aMrioor Ienlostsi,tuwchioenrealc o(PmRmI)u, wnahlelann tdhoew lantteerrs rcelafushseedd
wtoi trhectohgenrisuel inthge paaurtthy,ortihteiesP anrotimdoinaRteevdo bluyc itornadaritiioonInasl timtuecainosn aaln(dP RcuI)s,towmhse;n ththise lleadtt etro rae fduisveiddetdo
creocmogmnuisneittyh eanaudt hliomriittieeds ancocmesins atote tdhbey mtraardkietti ofnoar lPmReI asnysmapnadthcuissetrosm [2s;9t]h. isledtoadividedcommunity
andlimitedaccesstothemarketforPRIsympathisers[29].
4. Location of Case Studies
4. LocationofCaseStudies
The selected localities are located in Western, central and Eastern Mexico. They represent
differTehnet sfeolremctse dofl olacanldit ioewsanreerlsohciapt:e edjiidnosW, iensvteorlnv,icnegn tthrael caunldtiEvaastitoenrn oMf eexxciceos.siTvheelyy sremparlels penlottds ifinfe rSeannt
Mforigmuselo Xfloacnhditeocwatnitelras, hTilpa:xecjaidlao;s ,coinmvmoluvninagl ltahnedc iunl tTivlaaltnioenpaonftelax,c Mesosirveelolys; samndal lsmplaoltlshoinldSinangsM inig Luoesl
RXeoychesit, eMcaitcihtloaa,cTálna,x acanlda ;Icxohmuamtluánn adlella nCdafién, VTlearlancerpuazn. tOlau,rM reosreealorcsh; atnhdersemfoarell haodlddriensgssesin bLotohs fRaemyielys,
aMnidc hcooarpcáonra,taen fdarImxhinuga stlyásntedmesl. CFaigféu,reV e1r sahcoruwzs. thOeu lrocraestieoanrsc hoft htheer ecfaosree satudddireess.s es both family and
corpoHraotweefvaremr, ianlgl lsoycsatelimtiess. Fairgeu erxea1msihnoewd swthitehlionc aa tcioonmsmofotnh efrcaamseewstourdki erse.ferring to the concept of
LAFSH—ofwaremveerr,sa, allglrooc-ainlidtiuesstarirees,e rxeatmailienresd, swerivthicien parocvomidmerso,n infsrtaimtuetiwonosr kanredf ceorrlliencgtitvoe tahcetioconn inceteprtaoctf
aLtA tFhSe— tefrarrimtoerrias,l alegvroe-l.i nPdruosdturicetss, raertea ialenrcsh,osreerdvi ctoe pthroev tiedrerritso,riny sitnit uatlilo lnoscaalnitdiecso lalse cat ivreesaucltti oonf sinpteecriaficct
eadtathpehitce,r rhityodrriaicl laenvdel .cPlirmoadtuicc tscoanrediatinocnhso, reodn ttoheth eonteer rhitaonrdy, inbuatl lalolscoa liatise sa asreasurelts uolft opfasrptiecucilfiacr
medoabpihliisca,thioynd raicndan vdacluliem-aadtidcicnogn dstirtiaotnegs,ieosn, tdheevoenloepheadn dby,b tuhtea plsrooadsuacerre sourlgtaonfipsaatritoicnusl,a brym tohbei lfisaamtiiolyn
banudsinveaslusees-a adnddin bgys tortahteegr iaegs,ednetsv—elosupcehd basy uthneivperrosdituiecse roorr hgaignhiseart ieodnusc,abtyiotnh einfasmtitiulytibounssi,n tehses edsifafnedrebnyt
loetvheelrs aogfe ngtos—vesruncmheanst uannivde rmsiutiletsinoartihoingahle rcoedmupcaantiioens. inTsatkitiuntgio ninst,oth ceodnisfifdereernattiloenv etlhseoifr gporvoedrnumcteivnet
caanpdamcituieltsin aantdio nthaelicro lminpkaangieess .wTiatkhi nthgei nmtoarckoentssi, dthereastei olnoctahleitiireps raordeu ncotitv tehcea ppoacoirteiesst aonndest;h reaitrhleinr,k tahgeeys
wariet hchthareamctaerrkiseetds ,bthye rseesoloucracleit ioewsnareersnhoipt tahse wpoeollr aesst ao ngoeso;dr actahpearc,itthye yfoar roercghaanriazcatteiorins eadnbdy croellseocutirvcee
aocwtinoenr.s hipaswellasagoodcapacityfororganizationandcollectiveaction.

Figure 1. Locations of case studies. Source: National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI,
Figure1. Locationsofcasestudies. Source: NationalInstituteofStatisticsandGeography(INEGI,
http://www.inegi.org.mx/).
http://www.inegi.org.mx/).
This territorial anchorage of the products is, however, fragile and diffuse, as producers are in
Thisterritorialanchorageoftheproductsis,however,fragileanddiffuse,asproducersarein
some cases dependent on urban and foreign markets, rather than on a steady and mature local
somecasesdependentonurbanandforeignmarkets,ratherthanonasteadyandmaturelocalmarket.
market. In the case of Los Reyes, blackberry production is the result of recent crop conversion; fifteen
InthecaseofLosReyes,blackberryproductionistheresultofrecentcropconversion;fifteenyears
years ago, the land was used principally for sugarcane production. Prickly pear cultivation and its
ago,thelandwasusedprincipallyforsugarcaneproduction. Pricklypearcultivationanditsrelated
related agro-industry in Tlalnepantla are also recent and were developed in response to the low
income generated by traditional crops, such as cereals and temperate fruits. In San Miguel
Xochitecatitla, cuitlacoche and vegetables were grown in greenhouses to take advantage of their high
Agriculture 2018,8,18 8of15
agro-industry in Tlalnepantla are also recent and were developed in response to the low income
generated by traditional crops, such as cereals and temperate fruits. In San Miguel Xochitecatitla,
cuitlacocheandvegetablesweregrowningreenhousestotakeadvantageoftheirhighpricesonthe
Puebla,MexicoCityandTlaxcalamarkets. Thepriceofthisfungusdecreasedasaresultofcompetition
fromothergreenhouses,thefactthatconsumersshowedapreferenceforitmainlyduringtherainy
season and not throughout the year, and the tendency of urban consumers, observed since 2006,
tobuycannedediblefungi, massivelyimportedfromChileandChina[30]. InIxhuatlándelCafé,
althoughinhabitantshavepossessedcoffee-growingknowhowforoveronehundredyears,market
risksandroyarusthaveforcedmanyproducerstoconverttheircroptovelillo(plantainleavesused
inthepreparationoftamales)ortochayote(Sechiumedule); thelatteroriginatedinMexico, butas
itisaspeciesofthecucurbitaceousfamily,grownwithstakes,itrequiresthecoffeeandshadetrees
toberemoved,whichgivesrisetoerosion. Anotherimportantenvironmentalriskisposedbythe
eutrophication of water bodies, that is, excessive nutrient enrichment of water through runoff of
chemicalororganicfertilisers.
Crop cultivation created environmental problems in our case studies through the use of
agrochemicals, wastewatersandconflictsrelatedtoirrigation, littleinterestinforestconservation,
aswellasploughingtoincreasethecroppingarea;thisisthecaseofavocadogrowinginLosReyes
and of chayote in Ixhuatlán del Café. Attempts to solve these problems have beenmade by town
councilsandacademics,amongothers,buttodate,producershavegenerallyshownlittleconcern
inthissense. Environmentalissueswillnotbeaddresseduntilconsumersdemandenvironmental
certification. Table3presentssomegeographicaldataofthecasestudies.
Table3.Geographicaldataonthecasestudies.
Ixhuatlándel LosReyes, SanMiguel Tlalnepantla,
Variables
Café,Veracruz Michoacán Xochitecatitla,Tlaxcala Morelos
Elevation 800–1900m 900–3400m 2200–2300m 1700–3500m
23,005 69,723 2124 7166
Totalestimated
Women:11,557 Women:36,133 Women:1145 Women:3566
population(2015)
Men:11,448 Men:33,590 Men:979 Men:3600
Temperaturerange 16–22◦C 10–24◦C 14–16◦C 8–20◦C
Precipitationrange 1900–2100mm 1000–1500mm 800–1000mm 1000–1300mm
Agriculture(68%) Agriculture(45%) Agriculture(77%) Agriculture(41%)
Landuse
Urbanarea(2%) Urbanarea(1.8%) Urbanarea(14%) Urbanarea(1.2%)
Source: Own elaboration, based on data from: http://www.inegi.org.mx/geo/contenidos/geoestadistica/
catalogoclaves.aspx (accessed on 30 September 2017); http://www.beta.inegi.org.mx/proyectos/enchogares/
especiales/intercensal/default.html(EncuestaIntercensal2015.accessedon30September2017);thedataforSan
MiguelXochitecatitlacorrespondtothe2010GeneralPopulationandHousingCensus.
5. Results
Accordingtotheanalysisoftheindicators,observationsandinterviews,weaddressbeloweach
ofthefourdimensions,aswellasanoverallanalysisofterritorialgovernance.
5.1. Multi-LevelCoordination
In this dimension, connection with higher education and research institutions is critical with
regardtousingtechnologicalresourcesandimplementinginnovations. Noteworthyinthisrespectare
thelinksbetweencuitlacocheproducersandtheInstituteforScientificandTechnologicalResearch
of San Luis Potosi (IPICYT), which provides the inoculum they need to infect corncobs and grow
the fungus (interview with A. B., March 2013). The same question concerns the production of
blackberry and prickly pear—producers from Los Reyes have established links with the National
Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and with the National Polytechnic Institute (IPN);
producers in Tlalnepantla have strong ties with the UNAM and the Metropolitan Autonomous
Agriculture 2018,8,18 9of15
University-Xochimilco(UAM-X),amongotherhighereducationinstitutions. Thelinkswithmunicipal
governmentsareespeciallysignificantforintervieweesbut,inthecaseofproducersofcuitlacoche,
norelationshipwithmunicipalgovernmentwasreported. Moreover,duetothegreaterimportance
offederalsupportprogrammes,comparedwiththoseofotherlevelsofgovernment,threelocalities
actuallyhavestrongerlinkswiththefederalgovernmentthanwiththestategovernment. Itisonlyin
Tlaxcalathatamodestruralemploymentsupportprogrammeisrunbythestategovernment,known
astheStateSystemforthePromotionofCommunityEmploymentandDevelopment(SEPUEDE).
Thisprogrammehelpedtoboostcuitlacocheproductioningreenhousesinmarginalisedareasofthe
state. Tengreenhouses,eachoneofthembeingonethousandsquaremetersinsize,weresetupunder
thisprogrammeinordertotakeadvantageoftheopportunitypresentedbythisfungalcrop. Itis
worthemphasisingtheimportanceoftheagro-industryandofproductprocessingforthreeofthefour
localities. Inonelocality(SanMiguelXochitecatitla),wheretherearenoagro-industrialprocesses,
producers and partners of two companies—Ecoagricultores del Sur and Tecnoagricultores—have
theirownprocessesofinputsandinfrastructuregeneration,suchasthedesignandconstructionof
greenhouses, composting for fertilisers and even efforts to decontaminate the Atoyac river (direct
observation,February2013).
Furthermore,itwasobservedthatfamilyfarmers—cuitlacocheproducersor,inamoreorganised
way, prickly pear cactus farmers in Tlalnepantla—are more likely to have their own distribution
channels than farmers oriented towards the export—blackberry and coffee producers—which are
controlledbymarketingcompaniesconstitutingamarketclosetomonopsony. Aswillbediscussed
below,thisfacthasagreatimpactontheexistenceofdifferentgovernanceschemes.
5.2. DemocraticParticipationandAccountability
Horizontalityandtrustconstitutetwokeyelementsforbuildingthesocialcapitalrequiredfor
achievingterritorialgovernance.Withregardtothisdimension,thereappearstobealargegapbetween
localities,especiallywhenitcomestotransparency,accesstoinformationandregularreplacement
ofleaders. Thisgapisparticularlywideforwomen—astheymustfirsthavethepermissionoftheir
husbands, it is extremely difficult for them to develop projects. They also have to overcome the
oldcustomsofthecommunity’sdecisionmakersinordertoseetheirrightsrespected,toguarantee
accesstotheresourcestheyneed. InSanMiguelXochitecatitla,forexample,agroupofwomenfrom
EcoagricultoresdelSurattemptedtodevelopagreenhousepondfortilapiaaquaculturealongside
cuitlacocheorvegetableproduction. Aftersometime,theauthoritiesofejidodeniedthemresources
underthepretextthattheywerewastingwater. Thisraisedthequestionofwhetherthedecisionwas
relatedtothefactthatsomeofthesewomenhadbeenwarnedbytheirhusbandsthattheywerenot
allowedtofarmthefish,thuscreatinganatmosphereofdiscouragement(interviewwithM.C.and
M.G.,February2013).
5.3. CooperationandConflictamongProducersandOtherStakeholders
Although relationships of trust are considered typical of rural Mexican communities, serious
conflictsdooccurinthestudiedlocalities.Someofthemareofapoliticalnature,asisthecaseofprickly
pearproducersinTlalnepantla,dividedbytheelectionofthemunicipalpresident,whichresultedina
violentclashbetweenstatepoliceandcommunitarians,butalsoamongpeopleinthesamecommunity.
ApoliticalconflictalsooccurredinIxhuatlándelCafé,wherethemayor,amemberoftheNational
ActionParty(PAN),wassurroundedbyadherentsoftheInstitutionalRevolutionaryParty(PRI).Other
disagreementsresultedfromthefamilynatureofcompanies,forexample,inSanMiguelXochitecatitla.
Inothercases,confrontationarisesbecausecompaniesdistrustsmallproducers—Michoacánblackberry
producers,forexample,experienceseriousdifficultieswhentryingtomarkettheirproductandare
oftenleftsellingitattheroadside. Itshould,however,bepointedoutthatthecapacityforindustrial
processingofaproductthatisnotmarketedforexportisonlyincipient—itislimitedtopreparing
flavouredwaters,juicesandcakes(interviewwithC.M.inLosReyes,July2014).Itisclearthat,inthese
Agriculture 2018,8,18 10of15
contexts,thedegreeofhorizontalityorverticalityofcoordinationdependsonthefinaldestinationof
theproduct,regardlessoftheeffortsmadebytheproducerstoappropriateaddvalue. Itistherefore
obvious that for blackberry, and even more so for coffee, producers’ dependency on distribution
channelsimposedbycompanieslikeDriscoll’sandAMSA,greatlydeterminestheactionsexistingin
thelocality.
5.4. EnvironmentalManagement
Thedemandsoflargecompaniesconcerningthedistributionchannelsfororganicproductsand
productcertificationrequirementsareclearlyforcingproducers—especiallythoseofcoffeeand,to
alesserextent, thoseofpricklypear—toadoptcertainenvironmentalprotectionmeasures. When
producingblackberryorcuitlacoche,however,environmentalconcernsareofadifferentorder—in
LosReyes,therisksderivedfromtheuseofwastewaterthatcanaffectthefoodsafetyoftheproductare
amajorconcern,whileinSanMiguelXochitecatitla,themainissueofthefamilybusinessesproducing
vegetablesingreenhousesinvolvespollutionoftheriverAtoyac,producedbythedenimindustry,
andtheavailabilityofenoughwatersuitableforirrigation. Thelatterproducers,byformingpartof
thecompany,EcoagricultoresdelSur,areabletoproducetheirowncompost,whichisthenusedinthe
greenhouses. However,interviewsshow,fortheproductionofblackberryandpricklypear,massive
useofpesticides,neglectofthewaterbodiesandcontamination,thereof,byfertilisers. Thishasled
organisationsandcompaniestoseeklinkageswithresearchinstitutions,whichcanprovidethemwith
alternativesandhelpthemavoidtheriskoflosingincome,notonlybecausetheirproductsarerejected
at the US border, but also because high-profile consumers prefer certified products. On the other
hand,thereispracticallynoforestprotectioninLosReyes,Michoacán,inTlalnepantla,Morelos,orin
IxhuatlándelCafé,Veracruz. Forest,onthehighpartsoftheLosReyesValleyisbeingcutforavocado
planting. InTlalnepantla,regardingthedesignationoftheSierradelChichinautzinasaProtected
NaturalArea,in1988,mostsettlerswerenotinformedorconsultedaboutthisdesignation[31](p. 63).
Althoughsocialparticipationandcoordinationbetweenthethreelevelsofgovernmentappeartobe
recognisedinlegaldocuments,socialexclusionissuesarestillareality.
AccordingtoPazSalinas[31](pp. 79–80),threemainproblemspersist: (a)poorcoordination
between the different government entities; (b) the fact that social participation remains mostly
theoreticalandisrarelyputintopractice;and(c)thehistoricrelationshipthatsettlershavemaintained
with their resources, thus bringing about frequent conflicts with the government, which can only
beovercomewiththeactiveinvolvementofcommunitylandholdersandowners. InIxhuatlándel
Café, cutting down coffee plantations and shade trees to plant chayote has resulted in increased
deforestationandhigherwaterconsumption. Independentoffieldworkobservations,datafromthe
Agro-FoodandFisheriesInformationSystem(SIAP)oftheSecretaryofAgriculture,Livestock,Rural
Development,FisheriesandFood(SAGARPA)revealthatafteratotalof180hectareswereplanted
withchayotein2003,thisareawasreducedto85hectaresinthefollowingyears,beforeincreasing
againto115hectaresin2015. Inthissameyear,noagriculturaldamage(0%)wasreportedintheareas
plantedwithchayote—totalingonly2.8%oftheharvestedareaofcoffee—whilethoseplantedwith
coffeecaused38%oftheagriculturaldamage.
5.5. TerritorialGovernance: Dimensions,IndicatorsandModels
Table 4 presents the values for eighteen indicators of territorial governance, grouped by
dimensions,ofthefourstudiedLAFS.Eachofthevariableshasbeenconsideredasadummyvariable
(0,1)—avalueof1wasgiventothevariablewhentheattributewaspresentandavalueof0when
itwasnot. Thescorevaluesservetoestablishascaleforthedifferentdimensions: highvaluesshow
good performance of the dimensions and low values show poor performance (from 0 to 2 for the
dimensionspossessing5indicatorsorfrom0to1forthosewithfour). Table5showstheaveragelevel
ofeachofthefourdimensionsofterritorialgovernanceinthefourcasesstudied.