SUSTAINABLE URBAN AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT IN MEXICO.
A METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH1
Pablo Torres-Lima, Luis Rodríguez-Sánchez and Oscar Sánchez-Jerónimo2
Abstract
Mexico has embarked on a course of economic openness, and unless that whole
effort is reversed, the process will require an allocation of labor away from agriculture toward
the production of other goods and services or into the informal economy. However, urban
agriculture is a food production alternative that directly influences household labor allocation
at urban regional level. Our methodological approach is a mix of regional economic analysis
with survey and life-history interviews of participants in the process towards sustainability. By
assessing economic, social and agroecological indicators that enhance or decrease
sustainability of urban agriculture, our methodology contributes to defining development
strategies and policies that lead to sustainability in different regional and economic contexts.
I. Framework of the methodology
In the last two decades, privatization and economic openness have been seen as
fundamental determinants in sustainable agricultural development. As countries develop
economically, less labor and more capital are used in agriculture. This trend leads to a
greater use of technology and the result is that it is easier to make gains in production with
increased yields rather than through increased area. From a global perspective, in the longterm agriculture in a privatized and open system will concentrate on the most productive
lands. This trend may help to preserve the more environmentally sensitive lands that are
marginal for agricultural production. However, current agricultural practices are disturbing the
stability between environment and human technological capital due to the limitations of
social and economic development.
Today, Mexico has embarked on a course of economic openness, and unless that
whole effort is reversed, the process will require the absorption or reallocation of the labor
that is being displaced from agriculture toward the production of other goods and services or
into the informal economy. In 1994, Mexico’s agricultural work force represented 9 million
people, which was 27.5% of the total economically active population. 800,000-900,000 new
job seekers entered the labor force each year during the period from 1988 to 1993
(Cornelius, 1994). These data suggest that labor re-allocation may involve the overwhelming
of labor markets or significantly increase migration trends.
The linkages among capital, labor markets and agricultural development in Mexico
1
This paper was made possible by a research grant from CONACYT No. G33706-S to Pablo Torres-Lima,
and with the financial support of Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco, whose help is gratefully
acknowledged.
2
Departamento de Producción Agrícola y Animal, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Xochimilco.
Calz. del Hueso No.1100 Col. Villa Quietud, Coyoacán 04960 México D.F. México. Tel. 52 5483-7230
ptorres cueyatl.uam.mx
1
are reformulating the relationships among regional economic growth, environmental
management policies, private enterprises, local communities, and households needs.
Answers to food production needs, job creation, income, and environmental management in
regional settings are useless without reference to these linkages. The weak rural economy
and employment-generating capacity of Mexican agriculture relative to population growth,
imply new labor allocation strategies that are the result of current economic production
patterns within ever-changing regional, national and transnational contexts. For instance, the
increased integration of the urban and rural labor market in Mexico indicates that: (a) the
share of rural economically active population (EAP) working in nonagricultural activities
increased from 23% in 1970 to 42% in 1980, and (b) the share of agricultural EAP that is
urban based, increased from 24% to 26% in the same period (De Janvry, et al., 1989).
However, the analysis of the relationship between labor dynamics and economic growth and
development at the macro level must be augmented by examining the household labor
strategies and economic decisions affecting the sustainability of agriculture and land use at
local level.
Our research methodology has focused on the extent to which the urban agricultural
development of the modern Mexican economy has relied upon the labor allocation and nonsustainable resource use and management. Analysis of the implication of these processes
may suggest issues and questions for future regional economic growth and sustainable
development in Mexico. The scope of our interdisciplinary work on key issues related to
sustainability consists in: (a) examining regional economic information, data on labor and
natural resources use, and (b) understanding how individual household decisions are based
on economic strategies and the different attributes of natural environments in which regional
people derive their livelihood. We attempt to indicate to what extent market forces and
technology intervene in the development process vis-à-vis resource use.
To make a comparative study of labor allocation and sustainable urban agricultural
development in different regions of Mexico, particularly in Mexico City, Guadalajara, Jalapa
and Saltillo, we have constructed regional models based on the responses of agricultural
families to changes and inter-relationships among natural resource use, farm income,
access of households to land, credit, labor opportunities, markets, and economic incentives,
institutions, and policies. We have developed these models at the household level and within
a regional/national framework.
II. Research Questions
Most theoretical models and methodological approaches relevant to solving the
2
dilemma of economic growth/sustainable agricultural development, face the challenge of
addressing the role played by social and technological changes in enhancing labor
productivity while reducing negative environmental impact. Examples of such changes in
urban and rural Mexico have entailed social and technological transformations affecting
environment, economic growth, population and health. Linkages among urbanization,
agriculture and sustainable development have challenged existing boundaries between
urban and rural scenarios. In some cases, labor allocation processes have been the result of
the coexistence of agricultural production and urban development. By focusing on regional
differences and commonalties, we have demonstrated current variations and regional
interrelationships. Therefore, we believe that the range of possible interrelationships may be
determined by integrating regional and household needs, resources and decisions with
national economics, social and political institutions.
Our methodological approach has been to assess the extent of these
interrelationships and processes as a result of new spatial and temporal arrangements
between regional economic growth and sustainable urban agriculture development in
Mexico.
Our objectives have been 1) to examine the relationships between economic
growth and sustainable development in Mexico; 2) To analyze the cross-regional linkages
between capital and labor markets and sustainable urban agriculture development; 3) to
identify the linkages between agricultural labor markets and other sectors of the economy.
Specifically, we have addressed the following issues:
1. To what extent these regional interrelationships among natural resources management,
economic growth and sustainable development have altered the linkages between rural
and urban labor markets? Primary and secondary data on labor allocation in different
regional and economic contexts was compared in order to develop a cross-regional
profile of the labor allocation process.
2. How the emergence of these regional interrelationships has accompanied household
decision making on economic strategies and use of natural resources? How the linkages
between local decisions at households and regional levels can lead to sustainable urban
agriculture development strategies.
3. What will be the relationship between economic growth and sustainable urban
agriculture development across the regions of Mexico? Explored by assessing the
economic, social and agro-ecological indicators that enhance or decrease sustainability.
III. Design Methodology
To assess quantitatively and qualitatively the progress towards sustainability gives
3
rise to further complications when different locations are compared. However, a new set of
indicators and methodologies at the level of households and of regions provides the
advantage of bringing basic economic needs, productivity, and natural resource
management into the analysis of sustainable urban agriculture development. Therefore, we
have included two units of analysis: the regional context that affects and promotes labor
allocation processes, and the household, which is the sphere where decision-making
processes are concerned with sustainability.
The methods and techniques used in our methodology are a mix of economics and
anthropology. The linkages between local decisions at household and regional levels and
global market forces lead us to employ methods that trace attitudes, decisions and results of
labor allocation in urban agriculture. To do this we have carried out: (a) a cross-regional
analysis of economic trends and technical coefficients, social and demographic issues, and
agro-ecological components; and (b) an extended survey with a sample of individuals and
life-history interviews in each of the research sites. We have randomly stratified the sample
to reflect regional landscapes, individuals and households that contain indicators of
sustainability and those which do not.
We have identified indicators of sustainability that affect the economic growth and
sustainable agriculture development across the regions selected, as follows:
(1) Soil and water quality and quantity. We have determined the interrelationships
between soil and water quality and quantity, and human activities and welfare (i.e. water and
soil pollution levels including use of pesticides and fertilizers, availability of irrigation and
potable water throughout the year, and water-borne diseases of humans and animals). Soil,
water and natural resources conservation, degradation and rehabilitation processes
occurring across regions have been identified. We have also evaluated the perceptions of
the people concerning the sustainability of the resource base.
(2) Agricultural practices and natural resources management. We have identified and
evaluated the existing and potential farming techniques and practices with respect to their
ecological soundness, land use sustainability, labor productivity, food security, economic
feasibility across regions and enhanced agricultural landscape and urban areas.
(3) Factor and product markets. We have determined the interrelationships between
access to land, labor, technology, capital, market and resource use practices among
household members. We have also assessed these practices, including technology
adoption, labor and cash allocation, and utilization of natural resources, in regard to social
sector development and services, institutional arrangements, private systems, and economic
and resource-conservation policies that enhance equity of access to and stewardship over
4
natural resources, human health and economic welfare.
By integrating these three issues, our methodology has tried to identify
technologies, labor-relationships, land use policies, marketing restrictions, and transaction
costs associated with the promotion and increase of urban agricultural sustainability while
enhancing economic growth and regional development. The basic outline that we have
used in regional studies (Guideline on sustainability indicators for regional urban
agriculture in Mexico City) is described as follows:
A. Description of the historic and spatial context of regional agriculture.
1. Geographic delimitation (soil, climate, hydrography, biodiversity).
2. Historic context of agriculture (production spaces, urban growth and agricultural
zones, changes of land use, land tenure and agricultural organization,
technological management and production systems, crops and livestock
production, urban agriculture and conservation of natural resources (water, soil
and biodiversity), economic importance of regional urban agriculture, agricultural
management systems, and a typology of urban agriculturalists.
B. Regional framework for urban agriculture systems
The regional analysis is based on the Driving Force-State-Response (DSR) framework
(OCDE, 1999) for the urban agriculture systems. The sustainability indicators should be
described in year series, such as: 1980-1985, 1986-1990, 1991-1995, 1995-2000. The
analysis model includes the following components: Water and soil, climate, biotic
resources and human and cultural resources. Each of these should be described
according to the indicators of pressure on the regional resource base where urban
agriculture is carried out, including the following variables:
A. Economic: labor, financial resources, services and products, land and water
markets.
B. Social: Organization, participation, demography, quality of life and food selfsecurity.
C. Technical: inputs and management systems, strategies of technological
development.
D. Environmental: land uses, biodiversity, soil and water management, pollution and
natural resources degradation at regional level.
E. Institutional: Public policies for economic and social development, environmental
laws, urban planning and development.
5
C. Integration of Indicators within a DSR framework.
1. Construction of systems categories.
2. Construction of regional systems.
3. Construction of regional scenarios for each category and for overall temporal
indicators.
4. Construction of regional urban agriculture sustainability model according to the
regional historic and spatial context, urban agricultural systems and possible
scenarios.
The data base requirements that have been identified are the following:
1. Climate, land/soil and water characteristics, biodiversity and resource conservation,
crop production, farming technologies, and socioeconomic, demographic and
institutional profile of the regions studied as related to geographical and natural
resources use, and it's impact on resource conservation, biodiversity, and traditional
values. This information has been gathered by compiling current secondary data
(official, private and agencies reports), interviewing key informants, and conducting a
rapid rural reconnaissance.
2. Assessment of resource use and resource access by households in the different
regions; agricultural productivity and returns on investment farmers obtain from their
agricultural activities; and, of economic relationships across the regional landscapes
as related to sustainable urban agriculture development. Including, labor movements
across regions, markets locations, and the range of influence of economic agents,
government programs and development interventions. This information has been
recorded by surveying and interviewing household members in each different region.
D Practical implementation
In 1999, our methodology was applied in a study of México City´s urban agriculture
region and household units. At regional level, we used some sustainability indicators for
economic and agroecological aspects. These indicators were defined as a monitoring keys
that made possible the definition of regional environmental and productive trends by using
economic data, geographical information systems and landscape information. The value
of determining the region´s profile was to define the territorial and political context in which
the urban agriculture occur.
At household level, we interviewed 392 agricultural producers inquiring about: a)
6
demographic and family data, b) life quality, c) environment, d) agricultural and livestock
production, e) agricultural economy. The survey included information on farmer´s
perceptions of economic, technological and environmental issues. Moreover, we asked
about levels of organization for agricultural production and marketing. The latter types of
data have not previously been collected or reported, yet gave us a clear sense of what
was the real situation of urban agriculturalists.
Lessons learned
1) The regional level implies certain level of generalization and reduces the specificity
sustainablity factors, which can be avoided by doing field work at household level.
2) The measurement of some environmental (i.e. erosion) and productive (technology)
sustainability indicators requires high cost, sophisticated equipment and trained
personnel. Therefore, the regional analysis should be done.
3) Both approaches (regional and household levels) should be complementary to each
other. The conjunction of these levels has allowed the identification of:
a) negative institutional and household experiences concerning sustainability,
b) specific factors and resources that contribute and promote regional
sustainability,
c) family and community actions,
d) regional policies, and
e) cross-cultural proceses among urban agriculturalists.
IV. Expected Contributions to Urban Agriculture Studies
Part of the agenda of analysts of sustainable urban agriculture development should
address the complex causes and consequences of poverty and environmental degradation,
and understand the multiple dimensions of sustainability (Richards, 1986). However, most
writing by sustainable development advocates tends to focus on rural problems and smallscale programs targeted at the needs of rural peasants. As a consequence, crucial urban
issues have been systematically neglected (Lewis, 1992). Moreover, increased integration of
urban and rural labor markets in relation to this sustainable approach has rarely been
studied. Ecological economics studies have considered aspects of linkages among
technology, management of natural resources and environmental deterioration. However,
none have focused primarily on the regional comparison between labor allocation and
sustainable urban agriculture development.
The concept and meaning of "sustainable" refers to nature’s and people’s
7
sustainability and the sustainability of the market and the production process (Shiva, 1992).
Therefore, sustainability depends on both the physical scale of the economy and the
physical capacities of the environment. The achievement of sustainable development
simultaneously across biological, economic and social systems will depend on priorities, time
and scale (local, regional, national or global) (Holmerg and Sandbrook, 1992). A framework
to evaluate sustainable development may include the following: (1) incorporates aggregate
and quantifiable indices, but does not lay out qualitative criteria, (2) addresses concerns and
trade-off among long term and short-term objectives, and micro and macro costs and
benefits; and (3) contrasts local people’s priorities and interests with “desirable” technology
(Altieri and Massera, 1993). One of the basic premises of sustainable development is that
economic growth must never undercut the productivity of the natural ecosystem. The
analysis of physical quality and availability of natural resources, and environmental
degradation should include the past effects and the future potential of technological change
and substitution.
Environmental problems are defined as any degradation in the assimilative and
regenerative capacities of the environment. This degradation may occur due to reasons of
allocation, distribution or scale. In this sense, allocation decisions are micro in nature and
scale issues are macro. The primary reason for allocative efficiency is to maximize the
present value of wealth of an economy while the primary reason for scale criteria is to
ensure the sustainability of the economy within environmental limits. Allocative decisions
depend on prices, whereas scale decisions depend on ecological criteria. Efficient allocation
of resources does not ensure optimal scale of the economy. Determination of optimal
allocation of economic and environmental resources clearly depends upon the relative
preferences of individuals, the development of technology and the resilience and
regenerative capacity of the ecosystem (Barbier, 1990). In our methodology, we have
considered the level of the region as the appropriate geographical scale to study resource
trade-offs and, at the same time, to address the attributes of regional ecosystems.
Particularly in Mexico, rural household strategies imply a strong integration into world
market economies. Wage labor from these households is highly diversified, working in
seasonal agriculture and off-farm jobs. These diversified sources of income have resulted in
several economic responses among household members; migration, labor allocation and
specific use of natural resources. In this context, it is also important in development
strategies to consider the large numbers of regional people who derive their livelihood
directly from nature through self-provisioning mechanisms based primarily on the principle of
sustenance. Nevertheless, labor market forces, land-use decisions and income levels are
8
influence by the minimum conditions necessary to meet the subsistence standard of living.
Since Mexican policy is generally not designed to consider environmental impacts
and trade-offs, our methodological focus on policy-making for economic growth and
sustainable urban agriculture development has included market links, employment trends,
resource management practices, and attitudes of community members towards
development program participation.
By using this methodological approach, the expected significance and contributions to
contemporary research and issues on economic growth and sustainable urban agriculture
development have been:
(1) Improved understanding of the convergence between economic growth and sustainable
development in Mexico. The research methodology described here has improved existing
approaches to understanding the impact of technology, resource use practices, economic
agents and policies, and development interventions across Mexican regions, as a part of the
forces operating at global scale.
(2) Improved understanding of the factors that enhance or decrease the sustainability of
regional urban agriculture development. In the short term, the proposed work has had
potential significance in providing the assessment and data concerning the sustainability of
economic growth and urban agriculture development across regions and the determination
of interactions among various biophysical, socioeconomic, and policy factors.
(3) More effective regional development policies in other regions. Our work has been able to
identify the potential economic growth and sustainable agricultural development options for
other regions of Mexico facing similar economic constraints and implementing development
strategies.
Bibliography
Altieri, M.A. and Masera, O. 1993. Sustainable Rural Development in Latin America: Building
from the bottom up. Ecological Economics. 7:93-121.
Barbier, E. B. 1990. “Alternative approaches to economic-environmental interactions”.
Ecological Economics. 2:7-26
Cornelius, W. A. 1994. Foreword. In. Cook, M. E., Middlebrook, K. J., Molinar Horcasitas, J.
(eds.) The Politics of Economic Restructuring. State-Society Relations and Regime Change
in Mexico. San Diego, Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, UCSD. p. xi-xix.
De Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., and Wilcox Y., L. 1989. Land and Labour in Latin American
Agriculture from the 1950s to the 1980s. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 16(3): 396-424.
Holmberg, J. and Sandbrook, R. 1992. Sustainable Development: What is to be Done? In
Holmberg, J. (ed.) 1992. Making Development Sustainable. Washington D.C., Island Press.
p.19-38.
Lewis, M. W. 1992. Third World Development and Population. In Lewis, M. W. (ed.) Green
9
Desilusions: An Environmentalist Critique of Radical Environmentalism. North Carolina,
Duke University Press. p.191-241.
OECD. 1999. Environmental indicators for agriculture. Vol. 1 Concepts and Framework.
Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Paris. p. 9-15.
Richards, J. F. 1986. World Environmental History and Economic Development. In Clark, W.
C. and Munn, R. E. (eds.) Sustainable Development of the Biosphere. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press. p.53-74.
Shiva, V. 1992. Recovering the real meaning of sustainability. In Cooper, D. and Palmer, J.
S. (eds.) The Environment in Question. New York, Routledge. p. 187-193.
10