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.:+52-5556-230-222(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.