Trade and Totomoxtle: Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region

of Veracruz, Mexico

Amanda KingInternational Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC, USA

Accepted in revised form December 5, 2005

Abstract. Following the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexican farmersaltered their livelihood strategies to respond to changing market incentives. While many commercial farmers re-sponded to falling maize prices brought on by NAFTA by shifting into the production of vegetables for export, thecoping strategies of low-income farmers have been varied, from diversifying income sources through off-farmemployment, to migration, to searching for niche markets for new or added-value products. In the Totonocan region ofthe state of Veracruz, Mexico, many farmers who can no longer earn sufficient income from the sale of maize grain areturning to a byproduct of maize to generate income. The commercialization of totomoxtle, or maize husks, fordomestic and international markets has not only enabled farmers to continue to profit from maize production,but it has also encouraged farmers to utilize and conserve criollo maize varieties that serve as importantreservoirs of genetic diversity. Moreover, the growing importance of totomoxtle in livelihood strategies hascaused some farmers to alter their maize management, selecting for better quality husks rather than for grainproduction. The purpose of this paper is to understand both the broad impact of NAFTA on the localagricultural economy and its more specific effects on the management of maize in the Zona Totonaca. Par-ticipation in international trade can lead to unexpected outcomes, in some cases creating new values for goodswith a long history of local consumption. Commercialization of maize husks is likely to be only a temporarysolution for the relief of rural poverty. Given the volatility of international markets, the long-term welfare offarmers may depend on the development of more diversified production strategies.

Key words: Crop genetic diversity, Farmer selection, Maize varieties, Mexico, North American Free TradeAgreement, Rural livelihoods, Totomoxtle

Amanda King Amanda King holds an MSc from the University of California-Berkeley in Environmental Science,Policy, and Management. She was a Mickey Leland International Hunger Fellow based at the International Center forMaize and Wheat Improvement (CIMMYT) in El Batan, Mexico in 2003 and at the International Food PolicyResearch Institute (IFPRI) in Washington DC in 2004. She is currently conducting research in East Kalimantan,Indonesia on oil palm plantations and changes in local livelihoods.

Introduction

More than 10 years after the implementation of the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) researchersand policy makers agree that its impacts on Mexicanagricultural production have been extensive (Zahniserand Link, 2002; Audley et al., 2003; Lederman et al.,2003; Wise et al., 2003). One of the expected outcomesof NAFTA was that it would encourage a transition intothe production of goods for which member countriessupposedly have a ‘‘comparative advantage,’’ as part of abroad scheme to improve overall economic efficiency

(Yunez-Naude and Barceinas Paredes, 2002). For Mex-ico, this meant shifting out of small-scale maizeproduction into more profitable products for export, suchas fruits and vegetables. Farmers� actual responses toNAFTA-related changes in export/import market oppor-tunities, however, have largely depended on their eco-nomic status. While many commercial farmers withlarge-scale landholdings have responded to falling maizeprices by shifting into the production of vegetables forexport, the coping strategies of low-income farmers havebeen varied, from diversifying income sources throughoff-farm employment, to migration, to searching for

Agriculture and Human Values (2007) 24:29–40 � Springer 2006DOI 10.1007/s10460-006-9031-3

niche markets for new and added-value products (Nadal,2000). Contrary to expectations maize production inMexico has held relatively steady, remaining an impor-tant part of farmers� livelihoods.

In the Totonocan region of Veracruz state, manyfarmers who can no longer generate sufficient incomeselling maize grain are turning to selling a byproduct ofmaize production, as one of many coping strategies. Thecommercialization of totomoxtle, or maize husks, fordomestic and international markets has not only provideda way for farmers to continue to profit from maize pro-duction, but has had several important ecological impactson a local scale. In this particular region the developingmarket for totomoxtle has encouraged farmers to utilizeand conserve criollo maize varieties that serve asimportant reservoirs of genetic diversity (Bellon andRisopoulos, 2001).1 Moreover, the growing economicimportance of totomoxtle has caused some farmers toalter their maize management practices, placing greateremphasis during seed selection on better quality husksrather than grain yields.

This study was part of a larger investigation of theimpact of NAFTA on Mexican maize and wheat farmers(King, 2006). This paper will address both the broadimpact of NAFTA on the local agricultural economy andits more specific effects on the management and role ofmaize in the Zona Totonaca. This case study demon-strates that broad-scale economic changes and shiftingmarket incentives can have adverse but also unpredict-able repercussions on local livelihoods. Moreover, theshift toward globalized production and consumptionpatterns can in some cases impart new value to locallymanaged resources.

NAFTA�s impact on maize production

A number of domestic policy reforms introduced inMexico during the 1980s were intended to address highlevels of government intervention in Mexico�s economyand in the agriculture sector in particular. Starting in 1983the de la Madrid administration undertook the reform ofthe National Basic Commodities Company (CONA-SUPO), a state trade agency that provided price supportsto producers of food staples. In the 1980s and continuingthrough the early 1990s price supports that had previouslybeen provided by CONASUPO were removed for mostcrops (Appendini, 1992). Other domestic reforms thattook place during this time involved the general divest-ment of public enterprises, a process that affected not onlythe provision of credit and inputs such as fertilizers andseed, but also the management of agricultural extensionand irrigation infrastructure.

Before NAFTA was implemented, macroeconomicmodels had predicted that maize output would decline up

to 20% (Dyer-Leal and Taylor, 2002). Some analystssuggested that while production would continue on irri-gated lands, commercial maize growers in rain-fed areaswould be hurt by falling grain prices and would eithermake their production more efficient or would shift intoother activities. Subsistence growers and landless work-ers, on the other hand, were expected to suffer job lossesand lower wages, and would likely be forced to look foralternative employment activities (Levy and van Wijn-bergen, 1994).

NAFTA took effect on January 1, 1994. Maize wastreated as a special case under NAFTA because of itsimportance as a staple food crop. Under provisions of theagreement, Mexico was to have an extended period oftransition during which tariffs on maize imports weredropped at regular intervals, and penalties could becharged on the imports that were above the approvedquota. However, because of inflationary pressures, theMexican government never enforced the tariff rate quotafor maize, which meant that rather than passing through a15 year transition period, domestic prices aligned withUS prices in less than 30 months (Nadal, 2000). US cornexports subsequently grew from a pre-NAFTA averageof 1.6 million tons to an average of 6.3 million tons from1994 to 2003 (Nadal and Wise, 2004). This flood ofmaize imports caused a significant drop in producerprices, which fell 44% in real terms between 1994 and2000 (Nadal, 2002; see Table 1). It also contributed toserious social problems including the intensification ofpoverty in marginal areas and increasing rural out-migration, the rate of which has grown steadily over thepast 10 years (Taylor and Dyer, 2003).

Following the implementation of NAFTA, maizeproduction did not decline as had been predicted. Instead,despite increases in US maize exports, domestic maizeproduction actually increased as production in irrigatedareas intensified and the area devoted to rain-fed maizeproduction expanded, with farmers squeezing as muchas they could out of marginal lands (Nadal, 2002).While falling maize prices had the effect of spurring

Table 1. Constant prices for selected crops.

Year Corn Sorghum

1992 $893.66* $515.851993 $821.21 $458.101994 $656.22 $406.871995 $808.58 $697.44

1996 $790.87 $629.001997 $618.66 $448.681998 $570.08 $401.42

1999 $491.78 $331.042000 $467.65 $324.38

*All figures based on 1994 peso values per ton.Source: PoderEjecutivo Federal (2001).

30 Amanda King

commercial farmers to produce more efficiently anddisplacing those farmers who could not compete, theeffect that NAFTA had on rain-fed, low-income pro-ducers is not as easy to interpret (Nadal, 2002). Onehypothesis, examined here in the context of Veracruz, isthat in a restructuring of the rain-fed maize sector fol-lowing liberalization, maize production was relegated tothe status of a subsistence activity while farmers soughtto channel their resources into other crops or income-earning activities (Dyer-Leal and Taylor, 2002).

Despite the fact that national levels of maize produc-tion have not shown evidence of a drastic change afterthe implementation of NAFTA, many researchers con-tinue to voice concern about the potential environmentalimpacts associated with agricultural intensification (Na-dal and Wise, 2004). Among the environmental impactsare changes such as increased soil erosion, high levels offertilizer application, and unsustainable water usage. Inaddition, some researchers worry that migration and so-cial change associated with economic transition haveaccelerated the loss of traditional knowledge and man-agement practices that underpin the conservation oflandraces and criollo varieties (Bellon et al., 2003; Nadaland Wise, 2004).2 To date, little empirical evidence ofthis erosion has been documented, except by Sanchezet al. (2000). Nevertheless, the falling price of maize andthe high levels of migration in Mexico since the imple-mentation of NAFTA raise questions about whichincentives remain for the conservation of farmer varietiesand, perhaps more importantly, who will remain inagricultural production.

Study area

While it is not one of the poorest states, Veracruz isconsidered by the Mexican government to be a marginalstate with pockets of poverty that overlap with areasdominated by indigenous populations. Veracruz is one often states in Mexico with the highest proportion ofindigenous peoples, including Totonacos, Huastecos,Tepehuas, Otomıs, Popolucas, Mixtecos, Zapotecos,Mixes, Nahuas, Chinatecos, Mazatecos, and Zoques.According to the latest census of the National Institute ofStatistics, Geography and Informatics (INEGI, 1998),754,300 people speak indigenous languages, or 10.9%of the total population.

Although sugar cane and citrus are important cashcrops in Veracruz, maize production is still one of themost common occupations in the state. According to theSecretary of Rural Agricultural, Forestry, and FisheryDevelopment of the government of Veracruz (SEDA-RPA), Veracruz is the sixth highest producer of maize ata national level, with an area of 669,237 hectares undercultivation. Approximately 40% of maize production is

for consumption within the household, while 55% is soldto the flour industry, nixtamal millers,3 and state or na-tional level tortilla makers (SEDARPA, 2003). Althoughcriollo varieties are more common in Veracruz, accordingto researchers of the National Institute of Forestry,Agricultural and Animal Research (INIFAP), hybrids areused in about 20% of maize production. It is important tonote that while Veracruz has some commercial maizeproduction mostly in the southern part of the state, thereare few farmers who produce on the scale found innorthern states where the most competitive commercialmaize growers are located. Yields in the best producingareas of Veracruz can reach as high as 7 metric tons perhectare; however, according to INIFAP researchersaverage yields in most of the state are lower than2 metric tons per hectare.

The Zona Totonaca lies to the north of the state ofVeracruz, below the Huasteca region in the area of Pa-pantla, once known as the vanilla capital of the world(Figure 1). The Zona Totonaca is inhabited primarily byTotonacos, although there are also pockets of otherindigenous groups, particularly the Otomı. While manycommunities in the area are isolated by the lack oftransportation infrastructure and poor quality roads, mosthave electricity, clinics, and primary schools.

Although maize production in the Zona Totonaca ismostly for household consumption, small quantities ofmaize are sometimes sold in local or regional markets tocontribute to household income. The maize varietiesgrown in this area are primarily criollo varieties andsome landraces that have been kept by families overgenerations. In this area, land holdings are usually lessthan 5 hectares and are prepared manually. Fertilizers aremostly organic, and pesticides are used when householdincomes will allow. High levels of rainfall in this regionallow for production of maize in both the spring-summerand the fall-winter seasons. In addition to agriculturalproduction, many families augment their income eitherthrough off-farm employment in larger cities or as daylaborers in larger farms, orchards, or ranches.

The Zona Totonaca�s tropical climate and positionbetween low and high altitude areas are two importantfactors explaining its rich crop diversity (del Angel-Perezand Mendoza, 2004). Farmers in the region plant maize,coffee, vanilla, citrus, and sugarcane. They also harvest anumber of other crops including chayote (a type ofsquash), sesame, beans, and wild lentils and rely onforaged foods such quelites (leafy greens) and wildpotato. Although farmers produce a wide variety ofcrops, much agricultural production in the marginalzones of Veracruz goes toward feeding the household.Due to the steep and irregular topography of the land andthe isolation from regional markets, this region does notproduce large quantities of cash crops. Importantexceptions are citrus, coffee, and banana. Citrus has

Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region 31

traditionally been a crop of major importance in Vera-cruz, though the price obtained per ton is low and most ofthe production is sold in national markets rather thanexported to the US. Coffee similarly has lost much of itsmarket value because of worldwide overproduction thatled to a dramatic fall in prices in 1989. Farmers whogrow cash crops often sell in regional markets or tointermediaries, who transport goods to more distantmarkets in Mexico City or Puebla.

Study methods

A variety of different methods were used to assemble theinformation that is presented in this article. Backgroundinformation on NAFTA was drawn from reports by theWorld Bank, the North American Commission forEnvironmental Cooperation (CEC), and the EconomicResearch Service of the US Department of Agriculture(USDA). While this article cites analyses of primary dataauthored by a wide range of academic sources andresearch institutions, many of the site-specific insights onproduction were derived from the author�s participationin a survey on geneflow conducted by the InternationalMaize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) inNovember of 2003 in five Mexican states.4 Other than

Table 2, which was derived from a subset of the surveydata, all information not cited is based on the author�sadditional fieldwork.

Along with information from published reports andobservations from the geneflow survey, an additional45 days of field research were carried out betweenOctober 2003 and May 2004 in the municipalities ofCoyutla and Espinal, Veracruz. The state of Veracruz wasselected as a site for further research in part because thedivision of maize production between commercial andhousehold uses provided insight into NAFTA�s impactsfrom both a producer and a consumer point of view.Within Veracruz, the area surrounding Coyutla andEspinal was selected because it is a major center of tradein maize husks. Respectively, Coyutla and Espinal sit atroughly 525 ft. and 330 ft. above sea level, with meanannual precipitation levels of 2,985 mm and 1,889 mm,and have populations of 18,890 inhabitants and 23,751inhabitants.

During field visits to Veracruz, over 40 semi-structuredinterviews were carried out with a range of actors fromgovernment, civil society, and farming communities.First interviews were carried out with representatives ofthe Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Develop-ment, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA) and the govern-ment bodies established to manage NAFTA-related

Figure 1. Study area of the Zona Totonaca of Veracruz.

32 Amanda King

assistance programs. In order to obtain information aboutthe commodity chains for basic grains, interviews wereconducted with representatives from agro-industries,retailers, marketing intermediaries, and managers andmembers of farming cooperatives as well as individualfarmers. In addition, three focus group discussions

conducted specifically on farmer participation in thetrade for maize grain and maize husks were carried outwith farmers in the municipality of Coyutla, Veracruz.Many of the state-wide insights were obtained frominterviews with researchers from the National Institute ofForestry, Agricultural and Animal Research (INIFAP)

Table 2. Costs of maize production (spring–summer season, 2003–2004).*

Activity Unit Cost (pesos) Quantity pesos/ha

Soil preparationDisk harrow 250 0 0Plough 450 0 0

Harrow 250 0 0Furrow 200 0 0Cleaning with machete (pesos/work day) 60 8 480

SowingMechanized 200 0 0Manual (# of work days) 60 6 360

Seed (pesos/kg) $3/kg criollo maize 20 60$35/kg hybrid maize

CultivationManual weeding (# work days) 60 6 360

Weeding (animal-drawn plough/tractor) 200 0 0FertilizersUrea (kg) 3.0 100 300

18–46–00 (kg) 3.7 50 185Ammonium Sulfate (kg) 2.2 250 550Cost of application ($/work day) 60 2 120

HerbicidesHarmony (grs 120) 120 20 grs 120Esteron 47 (lt) 65 1 65

Hierbamina (lt) 60 1 60Application of herbicide ($/workday) 80 1 80

HarvestCutting the ear (# work days) 60 9 540

Cutting fresh maize (# work days) 60 0 0Selling fresh maize (# work days) 60 0 0Transport of ears (# of trips) 100 3 300

Husk removal (# work days) 60 5 300Grain removal (# work days) 60 9 540Harvest of forage (# packs/ha) 200 0 0

Cost of packing ($/pack) 10 0 0Harvest of fresh maize (# ears) 60 0 0Harvest of husks (# rollos) 1 1200 1200Total production costs – w/out husk 4420

Total production costs – w/ husk 5620

Total income per productGrain (kg/ha) 1.60 3000 4800

Husk ($ rollos) 3.50 1200 4200Forage (# packs) 12.00 0 0Fresh maize (# ears) 1.00 0 0

Net utility ($/ha) grain 380Net utility ($/ha) grain + husk 3380

Source: Twenty farmer interviews from the community of Arenal (Espinal Municipality), CIMMYT gene flow study, November2003.

Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region 33

and CIMMYT, and facts specifically related to Coyutlaand Espinal were obtained from interviews with localgovernment officials including the Coordinator ofagricultural projects of Coyutla municipality and theCoordinator of Cadres for the municipalities that com-prise the Zona Totonaca, including Espinal, Zozocolcode Hidalgo, Coxquihui, Chumatlan, Coyutla, FilomenoMata, Mecatlan, and Coahuitlan.

While these regionally focused qualitative studiescannot represent the experiences of all maize farmersunder NAFTA, the literature reviewed and the case studypresented in this report provide both an overview and amore focused examination of the ways in which inter-national trade legislation has shaped the decision-makingand livelihood strategies of a subset of Mexican maizefarmers. There is little primary data available on theproduction levels, market size, and export quantities ofmaize husks. This can be attributed to the fact that maizehusks are a crop byproduct of regional importance thatclaims a relatively small share of international agricul-tural markets. With continued migration and the growthof Latino communities in the US, the domestic andinternational markets for maize husks can be expected togrow. Further research is needed to determine the size ofthe market for maize husks, the levels of farmer partici-pation, and the economic impact of the trade.

Results and discussion

Maize production in Veracruz

After the implementation of NAFTA, many farmers whowere producing for commercial sale were able to achieveneither the efficiency nor the output to enable them tocompete against grain producers in the north of Mexicoor against imports from the US (Nadal, 2000). Becauseof the proximity to the city of Veracruz, one of the majorport cities where American grain arrives in Mexico, theflood in imports encouraged by the failure of the Mexi-can government to implement the tariff rate quota formaize created strong competition for grain producers inVeracruz state. At the same time that maize grain pricesfell, farmers who were augmenting household incomeby working as wage laborers suffered drops in wages(Dyer-Leal and Taylor, 2002).

Before the disappearance of CONASUPO, manymaize farmers in the Zona Totonaca had sold their maizeat a guaranteed price to Diconsa, a government-runorganization responsible for the provision of basic goodsto marginal zones. According to a manager for theDisconsa warehouse which serves as the distributioncenter for the eight municipalities that make up the ZonaTotonaca, after government price-supports were phasedout, selling maize grain to Diconsa was no longer as

profitable but farmers in the area continued to producemaize for household consumption and for sale at localmarkets. Following the implementation of NAFTA, thefalling price of grain affected local-level sales, causingfarmers to look toward alternative crops for income or toexpand into other income-earning activities.

According to local government officials, some farmersin Coyutla municipality opted to plant citrus or search forjobs as wage laborers, either in larger citrus plantations orin cattle ranches closer to the coast. Others currently sellsmall quantities of citrus, pimiento, chili, and tomatoes inlocal or regional markets to augment their earnings.According to one agricultural officer in Coyutla, areconversion program promoted by the InternationalCoffee Organization provides important financial supportto farmers who use old coffee orchards to plant pimientoor vanilla. Coffee growers suffered a strong economicshock when the price of coffee fell below the cost ofpaying laborers to harvest it. While selling fruits andvegetables has become an important alternative to sellingmaize grain, according to farmers in communities sur-rounding Coyutla, most of this production remains small-scale and informal due to unstable prices, pest anddisease problems, and the long transport distancesrequired to market crops. Those farmers who are able toproduce on a larger scale usually have access to othersources of income, such as livestock, that allow them totake the risks involved in planting higher-value crops.

Another source of difficulty for farmers seeking todiversify their livelihood strategies are the rising costs ofproduction. While most small-scale farmers in the ZonaTotonaca keep their seed from season to season andutilize lower quantities of chemical fertilizer and pesti-cides than large-scale commercial growers, many indi-cate that they have been greatly affected by the loss ofreliable sources of credit. Prior to the implementation ofNAFTA, most of the ejidos and small producers receivedcredit through Banrural. When Banrural was closed,small-scale farmers in many parts of Mexico were forcedto turn to other sources of financial support, includingmarketing intermediaries and private despachos, indi-viduals who provide credit and extension services (de Ita,2003). Currently many farmers still do not have access toproduction credit, and this problem remains a barrier fordiversification into alternative crops (Nadal, 2000).

With production for domestic markets relatively lim-ited, production of crops for export would seem to beeven more out of the reach of small-scale farmers.According to many of the farmers interviewed, commonproblems that prevent them from taking advantageof newly established export opportunities includedifficulties in producing sufficient quantities to interestpotential buyers and in meeting the quality standardsrequired for export. Most farmers find it challenging toestablish marketing contacts abroad and cannot afford the

34 Amanda King

costs of transportation and the development of infra-structure for production on a large scale (e.g., packingfacilities, nurseries, or greenhouses). Despite theseobstacles NAFTA has had at least one unexpected out-come in terms of integrating marginal farmers intointernational markets. In the Zona Totonaca, farmershave entered heavily into the production of maize husksfor export.

Totomoxtle production

While maize husks have long been used domestically andhave been marketed regionally over the last 20 years,according to one company involved in maize husk pro-duction, only in the last ten years has the export marketreally seen substantial growth. Veracruz and the Toton-acan region in particular are major centers of production.According to CIMMYT researchers, other importantareas of maize husk production include the region aroundthe municipality of Chalco in the state of Mexico, At-lixco in the state of Puebla, and Tetela and Cuautla inMorelos. Other states where husk production and com-mercialization has been documented include Jalisco,Colima, Nayarit, Michoacan, Oaxaca, and Tamaulipas(Long and Villareal, 1998). Maize husk that is producedin these areas is commonly collected and sent to thewholesale and retail markets in the hub cities of MexicoCity, Reynosa, and Guadalajara, where it is finally rero-uted to markets in the US.

Maize husks are used in several common ways. Themost common use is for making tamales, a food origi-nating with the Aztecs that consists of maize-baseddough filled with a number of ingredients (chilies, meat,vegetables, cheese, or sometimes sweet ingredients) andsteamed in a maize husk. Maize husks can also be usedfor handicrafts – most commonly dolls and flowers. Theexport market for both maize husks and for productsmade from these husks has grown over the last 10 yearsmainly due to demand from permanent and transitoryLatino communities in the US. These communities,which have expanded due to higher migration rates, oftencrave foods, like tamales, that are symbolic of home.Moreover, foods that originate in the home countries ofimmigrants are increasingly being integrated intoAmerican cuisine (Long and Villareal, 1998).

Product differentiation

Most Mexicans in maize-growing areas utilize the entiremaize husk, known in Veracruz as hoja entera, which iseasier to use for making tamales. The maize husks thatare exported to the US are known generally as hojadisqueada, or disked husk, due to the fact that the leavesare cut off at the base using a mounted table saw blade,

making them more uniform, lighter, and easier to packfor export. Because transport is such a major concern forfarmers in this region, production of the disked husk forexport has developed mainly in towns along majortrucking routes or with good vehicle access. In the moreremote villages of the Zona Totonaca the emphasis is onthe production of whole husks, which will be consumedwithin Mexico.

Just as the products themselves have developed dif-ferently, separate production processes have also devel-oped for the husks used domestically and those sent forexport. The production process for domestically usedhusks is centered around the household. The husks comefrom maize ears that have been sown and harvested by afamily group, and the leaves are removed for the mostpart by women and children. It is an activity that isuncompensated except through the sale of the finalproducts and, therefore, tends to be done whenever thereis free time. The husks are packed into bundles of15–20 husks called manojos. The manojos are groupedinto bundles of four, called rollos. These rollos arecollected by buyers within towns and later sold tointermediaries who travel among villages generatingpacks of 150 rollos called pacas, which they transport tomarkets in the environs of Mexico City or directly to theCentral de Abastos, Mexico City�s wholesale market. Thelocal price for maize husks varies from Mex$5 to Mex$7per manojo, depending on the market conditions.5

According to one intermediary, when markets are good,she and her husband take 50 pacas to market three timesa week, earning Mex$50 (around US$4.50) gross profitper paca. In the Zona Totonaca there is fierce competitionamong intermediaries. In order to establish a reliableclientele intermediaries will attempt to form personalrelationships with their suppliers, often paying them inadvance for their weekly sale.

After being transported to urban centers, the entirehusks are sold directly or are sorted and repackedaccording to quality. The method of packing leavesvaries regionally and, to consumers, is symbolic of thequality of the leaves. In the Central de Abastos the var-ious types of rollos are sold at different prices, reflectingthe differing number of leaves per pack. Hoja de Pina, or‘‘pineapple leaf,’’ is the most common packing form inVeracruz, generally containing 60 husks per rollo, andsold at around Mex$8. Dos Gajos, or ‘‘two bunches,’’costs Mex$13 per rollo and is a common packing methodfrom Morelos that utilizes 80 leaves. Reilete, or ‘‘pin-wheel,’’ a style common to Puebla, is made up of60 leaves and costs around Mex$12. The leaves in themore costly Reilete are considered by many individualconsumers to be of higher quality, due to their lightercolor and finer texture. However, many tamale makers inMexico City prefer Dos Gajos because it is a moreeconomical option. Pacas, or the large packs of maize

Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region 35

husks, can weigh up to 45 kilos, and sell for Mex$750(around US$70).

The husks that are destined for export go through anentirely different production process, one that is managedall the way from the planting of the maize to the point ofsale. Unlike the process for whole husks, the variousproduction tasks are separated and carried out byemployees who are paid by the hour or the number ofkilos produced. To begin the process a farmer may begiven a contract to produce a certain quantity of maize.After the maize is grown, it will either be harvested by thefarmer or by laborers contracted by the packing company.

Following the harvest, the first task is to disk themaize. This involves cutting the maize leaves away byrunning the whole ear along the edge of a mounted tablesaw and placing the cut husks into a wooden press (seeFigure 2). The work is entirely manual and pays aroundMex$5–Mex$10 per kilo, depending on the quality of theleaves. The saw itself can cost as much as Mex$200. Thenext step is to bleach the maize leaves in order to meetUS import specifications. This is done by sealing them inan oven filled with a gas produced by burning sulfur. Theprocedure may have to be repeated up to three times toget the leaves white enough.6 Next, leaves are sorted byquality and packaged for export in plastic bags withlabels to identify their brand. Both the packing and theprice of husks for export are determined by weight, ratherthan by quantity. High quality leaves are sold for as muchas Mex$12 per kilo. After packaging, disked leaves aretransported by truck to hub cities, where they are rero-uted either for the border or for domestic markets in areasthat do not produce maize.

While the production process for exported husks ismonetized, husk production is still associated with thesubsistence orientation of rural households, and sometasks in the production process are carried out in ex-change for ‘‘favors’’ or non-monetary payment. For

example, Long and Villareal (1998) note that in Jalisco,the owners of packing plants work through arrangementswith labor squad leaders called cuadrilleros, who bringtogether men to harvest maize and strip off the husks.The owner of the field, in effect, gets his maize harvestedfor free, the payment being simply the right to appro-priate the husks. Working in the packing plants involveslong hours with low pay and is often considered a markerof poverty. While many of the jobs involved in producinghusks for export are delegated to men, particularly‘‘dangerous’’ tasks such as disking, women and childrencontinue to be involved in the production process aslaborers. Working in packing plants in particular consti-tutes an important source of employment for women,especially those who have very little schooling (Longand Villareal, 1998).

Household economics

The profitability of maize husks for export depends inpart on economies of scale. Many farmers in the ZonaTotonaca who are interested in selling for the exportmarket realize that it is not in their best interest unlessthey are able to obtain a sizable harvest. According toboth farmers and professional marketers of maize husks,production for export is an entrepreneurial activity thatrequires investment in the purchase of the saw andpresses for the maize leaves, the purchase of the maize tobe disked and the bags for packing, the payment ofemployees who work in harvesting, disking, bleaching,and sorting and, finally, the acquisition of some means oftransport to get the product to market. As a result, small-scale farmers in Coyutla and Espinal tend to producemaize husks for domestic consumption, both becausethere are fewer overhead costs and because intermedi-aries take on the responsibility of packing and transport.Those who have the resources to invest in production forexport tend to be wealthier entrepreneurs who live out-side of the communities in which the maize leaves areprocessed. In effect, while the production of maize huskshas changed household livelihood strategies in theTotonacan region, it has done so mostly by enablingsmall-scale farmers to augment income by selling wholehusks in regional markets or by working as wage laborersin the production of disked husks for export. Neverthe-less, communities are increasingly taking note of theprofits earned by private companies involved in exportproduction and are soliciting funds to start their owncommunity-based projects.

As a result of the drop in the price of maize grain, theproduction of maize husks in the Zona Totonaca hasbecome a more profitable option for farmers, who havethe capacity to make almost nine times more per hectarefrom the sale of grain and husks than they can make fromthe grain alone (see Table 2). Moreover, farmers who

Figure 2. The disking procedure for maize husk that is beingprepared for export.

36 Amanda King

depend solely on maize grain can barely cover costs ofproduction. In a sample of 20 farmers, the net income forgrain production was found to be Mex$380 (roughlyUS$35) for the spring-summer season. As a result, whilefarmers with diversified production strategies perceivemaize husk production as an added source of cash, othershave turned it into their main source of income. Theadded income from maize husks also has important im-pacts in terms of incentives to continue maize productionin the region. While most farmers continue to producemaize for household consumption, the increasing valueof the maize husks provides an added incentive tomaintain or expand maize production.

Evidence that maize grain in the Zona Totonaca hasbecome more of a subsistence good is consistent with thehypothesis of Dyer-Leal and Taylor (2002). They suggestthat households in rural Mexico are consuming moremaize, both because they can buy imported maize morecheaply than other foodstuffs and because they still growtheir own maize, which is used almost exclusively forhousehold consumption. According to Nadal (2002) thedecline in prices of other crops under trade liberalizationhas also played a role. For example, the deregulation ofsorghum prices led to significant price reductions, thusreducing possibilities for conversion to this crop (seeTable 2). Furthermore, the volatility of prices for othercrops encouraged farmers to stay with maize. Both ofthese hypotheses help to explain national-level statisticsthat show that Mexican maize imports have soared eventhough maize acreage and domestic production levelshave not declined.

Another explanation, at least for the Zona Totonaca, isthat farmers are not growing maize for the grain alone butrather for the additional value obtained from the sale ofmaize husk. In this case, the value of maize husks couldbe contributing to the expansion or intensification ofmaize production, contrary to the expected productiondeclines associated with falling grain prices. By con-suming the grain and selling the husk farmers are optingout of competition with imported grain on the domesticmarket but are still earning income from a crop they havealways grown.

In Veracruz, as in other areas of Mexico, primarycommodities go through boom and bust cycles, as mar-kets become saturated with particular products and pricesbegin to fall. Both the domestic and the internationalmarkets for maize husks have grown over the last tenyears, and it is likely that they will continue to increasealong with the growth in immigration rates to the US.Nevertheless, the market for maize husks is both seasonaland susceptible to the common problem of overproduc-tion. In addition, while they are still limited in number,some US entrepreneurs are starting their own maize huskindustries in the southwestern US that contract Mexicanfarmers to grow maize for the leaves. In terms of its

potential to relieve rural poverty, participation in theproduction of husks for domestic consumption is likelyto be a temporary solution, particularly if farmers do notdevelop more diversified long-term production strategies.In order to make advances in the production of husk forexport, farmers will also need greater access to financialresources and transportation infrastructure, which, untilnow, they only have been able to obtain on a sporadicbasis, or in certain areas.

Ecological impacts

The growth in the market for maize husks has had someimportant consequences for maize production in the ZonaTotonaca that contrast with the environmental impactsNAFTA was expected to produce. As noted previously,the increase in migration following the implementationof NAFTA reforms led to the expectation that, with thedisplacement of farmers from the agricultural sector,criollo varieties and traditional knowledge related tomaize would be lost (Bellon et al., 2003; Nadal and Wise,2004). While this has likely occurred in some parts ofVeracruz and indeed throughout Mexico, in the Toton-acan region of Veracruz there is reason to believe that theproduction of criollo varieties may have been reinforcedby changes in market opportunities.

Maize husks in the Zona Totonaca are produced usingcriollo varieties of maize that have been found by farmersinterviewed to be of better quality in terms of their huskcoverage and weight than those of hybrids. As a result ofthe new-found value of maize husks, farmers have gaineda market incentive to continue to produce criollo varie-ties. It is important to note, however, that this incentivemay be short lived as the demand for maize husks issatisfied by cheaper sources located closer to the borderor if overproduction contributes to a decline in the marketprice. It is also important to emphasize that this marketincentive is location-specific. In her study of the localJala maize (Zea mays L.) in Nayarit Mexico, Rice (2004),also found that the market for husks has influenced thecriteria for desirable maize characteristics toward varie-ties with abundant husk coverage. However, rather thancriollo types, farmers prefer improved varieties in thatparticular region. As a result, Rice suggests that the huskmarket in Nayarit has encouraged farmers to invest inimproved seed where they might not have otherwise.Similarly, Long and Villareal (1998) note that in Jalisco itis common practice for the owners of husk packingplants to encourage farmers to use a certain variety ofmaize or to provision a particular kind of seed,suggesting that the larger maize production operationsbecome, the more likely it is that farmers will lose theincentive to grow a wide range of their own criollovarieties.

Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region 37

While the impact of market incentives on productionof criollo varieties in the Zona Totonaca has generallybeen positive, the impact on maize diversity in the regionis not as clear. Because of the variable climate andtopography and the diverse indigenous populations in thearea the Zona Totonaca continues to have a great diver-sity of criollo varieties, including maız arroz, anchoblanco, olote delgado, media semilla blanco, chiquitoblanco, olotillo blanco, argentino blanco, amarillo, ne-gro, and pinto (Flores, unpubl. data). The varieties mostcommonly used for the production of maize husks aremaız arroz and maız argentino (a creolized hybrid vari-ety), which are thought by farmers in the municipality ofCoyutla to have the best combination of grain yield andhusk quality. While the area planted to these varieties isextensive, further research is required to determinewhether they are supplanting other farmer varieties.Nevertheless, because farmers in the Zona Totonacacontinue to produce a wide range of varieties for specificuses it is unlikely that maize husk production alone willcontribute to local genetic erosion.

Another impact of the new market for maize husks arechanges in the selection practices that farmers use toreplenish the following season�s seed supply. While mostfarmers in the region base their selection on the size ofthe cob and the cleanness and size of the kernels, somefarmers have developed a new practice in which theyselect ears based on the quality of the husk. According tofarmers in Coyutla and Espinal, desirable characteristicsto look for in selecting ears include a punta aguda, ora sharp point that is generated by long husks (seeFigure 3). This is indicative of longer maize husks aswell as maize ears that are suave (i.e., the soft feelingproduced when squeezing slender ears with thick leafproduction). Because the use of these selection criteriamay lead to the production of smaller ears with morehusk cover, over the long run, farmers run the risk ofreduced grain yields.7

In addition to selection practices, the growing impor-tance of maize husk has also affected the storage prac-tices for maize grain. Most farmers in the low-lying areasof Veracruz store maize on the cob in an intact ear; inother words, with its husk cover still in place. Accordingto one CIMMYT researcher, this is due to the fact thatremoving the husk from harvested maize potentially in-creases post-harvest grain losses due to insect damage.With the increasing market importance of the husk,farmers will occasionally have to remove the husk fromtheir grain before they are actually ready to use it,increasing the risk of insect damage.

The fact that potential grain losses from selection andstorage practices do not deter farmers in the ZonaTotonaca from the production of maize husks emphasizesthe fact that husks, rather than grain, are taking onprimary economic importance as a cash crop in the local

household economy. If husk production continues to bean important source of income for households, adding tothe importance of maize as a food staple, it will furtherreduce the chances that maize production by small-scalefarmers will disappear.

Conclusion

The persistence of maize production in rain-fed regionsin Mexico suggests the market price for maize grain doesnot reflect the activity�s worth to farmers. The differencebetween the market price of maize grain and the value ofmaize agriculture to farmers is its shadow price, the valueof the non-marketable goods and services that maizeprovides those who grow it. In the Zona Totonaca, foodsecurity, risk insurance, employment for family mem-bers, and cultural values are all non-market services thatlocal maize varieties supply. In addition to the shadowvalues of local maize varieties, the research presentedhere suggests that in the Zona Totonaca, farmers arecontinuing to produce local maize varieties because theyare obtaining additional market value from the maizehusk. The creation of international markets for maizehusks provides an additional and complementary incen-tive for farmers to continue growing their local maizevarieties. In the communities of Coyutla and Espinal,Veracruz, the cash income supplied by maize husk hastaken on more importance than regional sales of grain,and the latter has been relegated primarily to householdconsumption. Although the ecological effects have notbeen quantified, the added incentive to produce criollo

Figure 3. Two ears belonging to a farmer in Espinal, Vera-cruz, Mexico. The cob on the left shows the traditional char-acteristics, namely size, that make it desirable for seed. The cobon the right demonstrates a punte aguda, or a sharp point, thatmakes it desirable for husk production.

38 Amanda King

maize varieties may be an important factor in preventingthe continued loss of local varieties in this area.

Trade liberalization under NAFTA has already hadextensive social impacts, such as exacerbating socialstratification and encouraging migration out of ruralareas. Markets for agricultural goods are unpredictable,and international markets are extremely so. Thoughmany farmers are currently pursuing husk productionfor export it may only be a temporary solution topoverty alleviation, and over-saturation of the marketcould potentially lead to a price collapse. The CoffeeCrisis of 1989 is a recent example of a phenomenonthat has been repeated throughout the history of thecommercial production of primary commodities. Manyfarmers in the Zona Totonaca are currently attemptingto invest in value-added strategies, in order to obtainbetter prices for their goods and to distinguish themfrom other market suppliers. In addition, farmers haveemployed strategies ranging from participation infarmer cooperatives, integration into supermarkets,development of niche markets, and diversification ofproduction strategies to protect themselves from marketfluctuations.

In light of the volatility of international agriculturalmarkets, it is essential that more attention be given to thedevelopment and support of national strategies to reducethe vulnerability of small-scale farmers. In addition todeveloping social safety net programs government poli-cymakers, donors, and non-governmental organizationsinterested in supporting the livelihoods of small farmersshould help farmers develop the capacity, resources, andnetworks that enable them to take advantage of newopportunities.

There are many concerns that the increasing influenceof international markets and the expanding reach of newtrade patterns will produce a process of culturalhomogenization leading to the loss of local food culturesand related crop resources. This is certainly occurring insome areas of the world, and Mexico has seen an increasein foreign restaurant chains and the influence of fast foodculture in the last ten years. However, it is important tonote that Mexico is not a passive victim, nor is a one-wayonslaught of cultural colonization taking place. Thegrowing role of Mexican and Mexican-American culturalinfluences within US culture demonstrates the extent towhich the countries have mutually influenced each other.Moreover, the market for totomoxtle provides an exam-ple of the integration of a particular food product intointernational trade helping a locally produced resourcetake on new value. An important future question forthose promoting trade liberalization as a solution topoverty is how long farmers will be able to capitalize onthis value to support their livelihoods in the context ofeconomic change.

Acknowledgements

A previous version of this work was presented at the 9thInternational Congress of Ethnobiology in University ofKent, Canterbury, UK, June 17, 2004. The author�sthanks go to CIMMYT and the Congressional HungerCenter, Washington, DC for sponsoring the research; toMichael Morris for his supervision of the project; and toMauricio Bellon who managed the Geneflow Survey. Mygreatest appreciation goes to Dagoberto Flores andAlejandro Ramirez, who besides bringing to my attentionthe significance of totomoxtle and its growing domesticand international market, gave me invaluable supportduring field work and helped me with data analysis andthe development of the production costs table. Finalthanks go to Ingeniero Alejandro Colorado in Coyutla,Veracruz for his assistance with fieldwork and to all thefarmers who generously gave of their time and infor-mation. I am also grateful to Valerie Imbruce for herencouragement and to Nathaniel Gerhart, Pablo Eyzag-uirre, and the editor, Dr. Laura B. DeLind, and anony-mous reviewers of Agriculture and Human Values fortheir comments on earlier versions of this paper.

Notes

1. Criollo varieties are improved varieties, exposed to farmermanagement, seed selection, and hybridization with land-races (Bellon and Risopoulos, 2001).

2. Landraces are varieties that are named by farmers and rec-ognized for specific traits (Bellon, 1996). These varieties areconstantly in flux as farmers incorporate new geneticmaterials.

3. Nixtamal is the mixture of maize grain, lime, and salt that ismilled to make the dough used for homemade tortillas.

4. Information about the CIMMYT-led survey on geneflow cancurrently be found at the following internet site: http://www.cimmyt.org/english/docs/ann_report/2004/fieldmarket/geneflow.htm.

5. All of these prices were noted in early 2004. The prices areseasonal and, according to wholesalers and retailers in theCentral de Abastos in Mexico City, have gradually risenover the last ten years.

6. Those individuals who work in the ovens are repeatedlyexposed to the sulfuric gas, which burns the eyes, nose, andthroat, and over long periods may cause more lasting healthproblems.

7. Husk cover is a quantitative trait, meaning that several genesare involved in its inheritance. Husk cover can be improvedthrough breeding provided maize plants are grown underlow density to allow the expression of protruding ears(Bergvinson, personal communication). It should be notedhowever that many farmers in the area are selecting for grainyield and husk cover at the same time. Farmers in focusgroups expressed their preference for the varieties Maiz

Livelihood strategies in the Totonacan region 39

arroz and Maiz argentino precisely because they have bothgood grain yields and desirable husk characteristics.

References

del Angel-Perez, A. L. and M. A. Mendoza (2004). ‘‘Totonachomegardens and natural resources in Veracruz, Mexico.’’Agriculture and Human Values 21: 329–346.

Appendini, K. (1992). De La Milpa a los Tortibonos: La Re-structuracion de la Polıtica Alimentaria en Mexico. Distrito,Federal, Mexico: Colegio de Mexico (From the milpa to foodvouchers: The restructuring of food policy in Mexico).

Audley, J., D. Papademetriou, S. Polaski, and S. Vaughan(2003). NAFTA�s Promise and Reality: Lessons from Mexicofor the Hemisphere. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowmentfor International Peace.

Bellon, M. R. (1996). ‘‘The dynamics of crop infraspecificdiversity: A conceptual framework at the farmer level.’’Economic Botany 50(1): 26–39.

Bellon, M. R., M. Smale, A. Aguirre, S. Taba, F. Aragon,and J. Dıaz (2003). ‘‘Participatory landrace selection foron-farm conservation: An example from the Central Valleysof Oaxaca, Mexico.’’ Genetic Resources and Crop Evolu-tion 50(4): 401–416.

Bellon, M. R. and J. Risopoulos (2001). ‘‘Small-scale farmersexpand the benefits of improved maize germplasm: A casestudy from Chiapas, Mexico.’’ World Development 29(5):799–811.

Dyer-Leal, G. and J. E. Taylor (2002). Rethinking the supplyresponse to market reforms in agriculture: Household het-erogeneity in village general equilibrium analysis fromMexico. Working Paper. Department of Agriculture andResource Economics. University of California, Davis.

INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadıstica Geografıa e Informa-tica) (1998). National Survey on Household Income andExpenditures. Accessed on March 15, 2004 at http://www.inegi.gob.mx/est/contenidos/espanol/proyectos/metadatos/encuestas/enigh_211.asp?c = 1448.

de Ita, A. (2003). Los Impactos Socioeconomicos y Ambientalesde la Liberalizacion Comercial de los Granos Basicos en elContexto del TLCAN: El Caso de Sinaloa. (The Socioeco-nomic and Environmental Impacts of Trade Liberation onBasic Grains in the Context of NAFTA: The Case of Sin-aloa). Montreal, Canada: North American Commission forEnvironmental Cooperation. Accessed on November 25,2005 at http://www.cec.org/files/pdf/ECONOMY/Impactos-liberalizacion-comercial-Sinaloa_en.pdf.

King, A. (2006). Ten Years with NAFTA: A Review of the Lit-erature and an Analysis of Farmer Responses in Sonora andVeracruz, Mexico. Mexico City, Mexico: CIMMYT SpecialReport 06–01. Mexico, Distrito Federal, Mexico: CIMMYT/Congressional Hunger Center.

Lederman, D., W. F. Maloney, and L. Serven (2003). Lessonsfrom NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean. ASummary of Research Findings. Washington DC: World Bank.Accessed on November 25, 2005 at http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/LAC/LAC.nsf/ECADocbyUnid/32E02C48D1A7695685256CBB0060CA65?Opendocument.

Levy, S. and S. Wijnbergen (1994). ‘‘Labor markets, migrationand welfare: Agriculture in the North American Free TradeAgreement.’’ Journal of Development Economics 43: 263–278.

Long, N. and M. Villareal (1998). ‘‘Small product, big issues:Value contestations and cultural identities in cross-bordercommodity networks.’’ Development and Change 29:725–750.

Nadal, A. (2000). The Environmental and Social Impacts ofEconomic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico.London, UK: A Study Commissioned by Oxfam GB andWWF International.

Nadal, A. (2002). Corn in NAFTA, Eight Years After. Montreal,Canada: North American Commission for EnvironmentalCooperation.

Nadal, A. and T. Wise (2004). The environmental costs ofagricultural trade liberalization: Mexico-US maize tradeunder NAFTA. Discussion Paper No. 4, Working Group onDevelopment and Environment in the Americas. Tufts Uni-versity. Accessed on June 30, 2004 at http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/DP04NadalWISE July04.pdf.

Poder Ejecutivo Federal (2001). Primer Informe de Gobierno deMexico. Accessed on August 4, 2006 at http://primer.in-forme.presidencia.gob.mx.

Rice, E. (2004). Conservation in a changing world: In situconservation of the giant maize of Jala. Unpublished man-uscript. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

Sanchez, J. J., M. M. Goodman, and C. W. Stuber (2000).‘‘Isozymatic and morphological diversity in the races ofmaize in Mexico.’’ Economic Botany 54(1): 43–59.

SEDARPA (2003). La Agricultura en Veracruz, PrincipalesCultivos. Xalapa, Veracruz: SEDARPA(Agriculture in Vera-cruz, Principal Crops).

Taylor, J. and G. Dyer. (2003). NAFTA, Trade and Migration.Prepared for the Migration Policy Institute Project NA-FTA@10. University of California, Davis: Agricultural andResource Economics Department.

Yunez-Naude, A. and F. Bareceinas Paredes. (2002). Lessonsfrom Nafta: The Case of Mexico�s Agricultural Sector. Reportto the World Bank. Washington DC: World Bank. Accessedon September 5, 2003 at http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/lac/lacinfoclient.nsf/1daa46103229123885256831005ce0eb/2e11a4d12a57e2ee85256c4d006d9b66/$FILE/Yunez%20Text%20Final.pdf.

Wise, T. and H. L. Salazar Carlsen (eds.) (2003). ConfrontingGlobalization: Economic Integration and Popular Resistancein Mexico. Bloomfield, Connecticut: Kumarian Press.

Zahniser, S. and J. Link (eds) (2002). Effects of North AmericanFree Trade Agreement on Agriculture and the Rural Econ-omy. Agriculture and Trade Report. Washington DC: ERS/USDA.

Address for correspondence: Almanda King, P.O. Box 77,Ripton VT, 05766, USAPhone: +802-388-4082;E-mail: bakingmoo@hotmail.com

40 Amanda King