Rural Mexico after
Free Trade: Coping
with a Landscape of Change
Looking for alternatives. In response to low grain prices, some farmers in Veracruz have been experimenting with different crops. Laurentino grows hybrid maize, which he manages to sell for 1.5 pesos (US$ 0.13) per kilogram of grain. “In reality, maize is not good business,” he says. “I can’t improve my life growing maize.” His main income comes from chili peppers, which he learned to grow from his father. |
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect on 01 January 1994. Signed by the governments of the Canada, Mexico, and the United States of America, the agreement was intended to eliminate trade barriers, promote fair competition, and increase opportunities for investment, among other objectives. With support from the Mickey Leland International Hunger Fellows Program of the US Congressional Hunger Center, in 2003-04 CIMMYT research fellow Amanda King studied how groups in two contrasting regions of Mexico—wheat farmers in the northwestern state of Sonora and maize farmers in the eastern state of Veracruz—have adapted to post-NAFTA changes in agriculture. “The study cannot claim to represent the great diversity of rural livelihoods and settings in Mexico,” says King, “but it gives a glimpse of the personal costs and benefits of competition and how local livelihoods are evolving amid global change.”
In hot, dry Sonora, agriculture is often mechanized, and farmers make use of improved seed, fertilizer, pesticides, and irrigation. Their harvests are largely destined for industry and export markets. State-wide, agriculture has been challenged by repeated droughts and water shortages in recent years. Some individuals with larger holdings, political connections, and access to important resources have taken advantage of NAFTA’s opportunities. Those with fewer resources have either adapted by banding together into producers’ groups, which offer greater efficiency and access to markets, or have been pushed out of farming altogether. Those who leave their farms often resort to wage labor or migrate to large cities or the USA to seek work.
Farmers in Veracruz crop small plots to sustain the household or to sell in local or regional markets. They often prepare the land by hand, and buy chemical fertilizers and pesticides only when household incomes allow—which is seldom. These farmers may appear to practice a form of agriculture that has little future in a post-NAFTA world, but many have continued to farm, by developing their own coping strategies. Some have created small-scale organizations to solicit government assistance or bargain for greater market access. Others have diversified into new crops and income-earning activities as a means of reducing economic vulnerability.
“The production and export of dried maize husks to wrap tamales have become an important source of income for many in Veracruz,” says King, pointing out that, in many communities, husks are actually more profitable than maize grain. “Among other things, I hope my study will provide ideas about the kinds of domestic infrastructure needed to protect social welfare, as developing countries open markets.” For CIMMYT, one lesson may be that breeders need to follow closely the changes in farmers’ livelihood strategies and, often, focus on traits other than yield to offer products of relevance to farmers.
Back to Contents
January, 2005