No hay ganancia en la milpa: the agrarian question, food sovereignty, and the on-farm conservation of agrobiodiversity in the Guatemalan highlands

Figures & data

Table 1. Economic activities for different landholding groups, 2002.

Quintile groups by size of arable landholdings	Milpa	Livestock	Wage labour	Petty commodity production	Transnational migration	Crop sales	Total
Bottom quintile (N = 24)
% of HHs participating	83.3	62.5	62.5	79.2	12.5	12.5
% of economic production	1.4	0.2	36.8	53.3	8.2	0.0	100.0
Average value ($USD)	29	5	774	1,122	173	1	2,104
Avg. land size: 0.86 Cuerdas*
Lower-middle quintile (N = 24)
% of HHs participating	100.0	87.5	75.0	91.7	4.2	37.5
% of economic production	4.8	0.4	46.6	42.9	4.1	1.1	100.0
Average value ($USD)	86	7	831	766	74	19	1,785
Avg. land size: 2.55 Cuerdas
Middle quintile (N = 24)
% of HHs participating	100.0	79.2	62.5	75.0	8.3	20.8
% of economic production	4.5	0.1	58.6	32.0	4.6	0.1	100.0
Average value ($USD)	122	3	1,576	861	123	2	2,690
Avg. land size: 4.54 Cuerdas
Upper-middle quintile (N = 24)
% of HHs participating	100.0	91.7	83.3	91.7	33.3	41.7
% of economic production	4.9	0.1	64.2	18.9	11.3	0.5	100.0
Average value ($USD)	196	5	2,578	759	453	19	4,016
Avg. land size: 7.16 Cuerdas
Top quintile (N = 23)
% of HHs participating	100.0	95.7	78.3	87.0	21.7	78.3
% of economic production	5.9	0.4	57.1	21.6	2.5	11.7	100.0
Average value ($USD)	234	17	2,257	853	99	462	3,952
Avg. land size: 16.57 Cuerdas
Total sample (N = 119)
% of HHs participating	96.7	83.2	72.3	84.9	16.0	37.8
% of economic production	8.5	0.3	53.0	28.9	6.1	3.2	100.0
Average value ($USD)	251	7	1,557	850	180	95	2,941
Avg. land size: 6.24 Cuerdas
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.
Notes: *Average size of arable landholdings for each group; a cuerda is a local unit of measurement, equaling approximately 24 square meters or 0.112 hectares.

Table 2. Off-farm income and degree of multi-activity for different landholding groups.

Size of arable landholdings (quintile groups)	Off-farm income as share of total economic activity (percent)	Average number of economic activities*
Bottom quintile	98.6	3.13
Lower-middle quintile	94.3	3.96
Middle quintile	94.8	3.46
Upper-middle quintile	94.9	4.42
Top quintile	81.6	4.61
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.
Notes: *In total, six economic activities were considered: milpa agriculture, livestock, wage labour, petty commodity production, agricultural sales, and remittances from transnational migrants.

Table 3. Daily returns from select economic activities.

	Average daily returns ($USD)
	Overall	Men	Women
Wage employment
All sectors	4.99	5.19	4.25
Agricultural sector	3.90	3.90	3.85
Manufacturing sector	4.69	4.86	3.69
Commerce/marketing sector	8.59	8.23	12.53
Service sector	5.59	7.56	4.25
Urban	6.01	6.43	4.09
Rural	4.64	4.73	4.30
Petty commodity production
Woven goods	5.52	5.52	n/a
Sewn goods	5.52	5.52	n/a
Shoes	4.49	4.49	n/a
Wood or clay goods	3.59	3.59	3.59
Embroidery by machine	3.85	n/a	3.85
Embroidery by hand	1.92	n/a	1.92
Amarradores	1.56	n/a	1.56
Maize agriculture*	3.59	3.59	3.59
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.
Notes: *The returns to maize agriculture only account for the value of the grain produced. These figures do not account for the value of other milpa crops (e.g. legumes, squash, medicinal herbs) that are often tended to during maize farming. Nor do they account for the non-grain use values of maize plants, such as the husks that are used for wrapping tamales, the cobs that are used for fuel, and stalks which are used as fodder and fencing.

Table 4. Agricultural production for households with arable land, 2002.

Crop	Percentage of households that cultivate crop*	Percentage of cultivating households that market crop	Percentage of harvest marketed	Percentage of agricultural production (market value)	Percentage of total agricultural sales	Cash crop**
Maize	100.0	18.3	15.3	56.7	20.4
Scarlet R. Beans	46.1	5.7	6.3	2.3	0.3
Broad beans	39.1	15.6	36.3	3.2	2.7
Peas***	20.0	13.0	64.2	2.0	3.0
Hard squash	16.5	5.3	3.2	0.3	0.0
Chayote	14.8	29.4	50.1	0.6	0.7
Fig leaf squash	10.4	8.3	29.8	0.4	0.3
Nabo culix	9.6	36.4	3.4	0.2	0.0
Black beans	8.7	10.0	5.9	0.5	0.7
Zucchini	5.2	33.3	56.7	0.3	0.4
Cilantro	5.2	50.0	85.9	0.1	0.2	Y
Potato	5.2	83.3	57.5	2.9	3.9	Y
Onion	3.5	75.0	91.3	3.2	6.8	Y
Cauliflower	3.5	100.0	95.6	2.2	5.0	Y
Cabbage	3.5	100.0	91.2	2.5	5.4	Y
Tomato	3.5	100.0	92.6	9.8	21.2	Y
Broccoli	2.6	100.0	91.7	1.1	2.4	Y
Bell pepper	2.6	66.7	77.3	3.4	6.2	Y
Flowers	2.6	66.7	90.3	1.7	3.5	Y
Beets	2.6	100.0	87.3	0.6	1.2	Y
Carrots	2.6	100.0	94.6	1.0	2.3	Y
Chard	1.7	100.0	93.3	1.1	2.4	Y
Snow peas***	1.7	100.0	96.6	0.7	1.6	Y
Strawberries	1.7	50.0	58.3	0.7	1.0	Y
Mint	1.7	50.0	33.3	0.0	0.0
Chamomile	1.7	50.0	60.0	0.0	0.0	Y
Radish	1.7	100.0	77.8	0.0	0.1	Y
Celery	1.7	50.0	89.1	0.5	1.0	Y
Chile	0.9	100.0	75.0	0.0	0.0	Y
Green beans	0.9	100.0	85.0	0.5	1.0	Y
Spinach	0.9	100.0	83.3	1.2	2.3	Y
Parsley	0.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Cassava	0.9	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.
Notes: *Excluding the four households lacking arable land. **Cash crops are here defined as crops where at least 50 percent of the output of that crop is sold in the market and at least 50 percent of the households that grow the crop sell it in the market. *** Some households may have reported the cultivation (and sales) of snow peas (which were classified as a separate crop) as peas. Thus, the statistics for peas may be over-represented and those for snow peas under-represented.

Table 5. Cash crops and irrigation, 2002.

	Percentage of households cultivating	Percentage of crop grown on irrigated land
Cilantro	5.2	33.3
Potato	5.2	42.9
Onion	3.5	100.0
Cauliflower	3.5	100.0
Cabbage	3.5	100.0
Tomato	3.5	100.0
Broccoli	2.6	100.0
Bell pepper	2.6	100.0
Flowers	2.6	50.0
Beets	2.6	100.0
Carrots	2.6	100.0
Chard	1.7	100.0
Snow peas	1.7	100.0
Strawberries	1.7	100.0
Chamomile	1.7	0.0
Radish	1.7	100.0
Celery	1.7	0.0
Chile	0.9	0.0
Green beans	0.9	100.0
Spinach	0.9	100.0
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.

Table 6. Correlation of market activities with milpa agriculture (household level).

	Proportion of land allocated to maize	Proportion of maize purchased	Value of ag. production consumed per unit of land
Wage labour (Hours of wage labour per adult HH member)	0.05	0.00	0.09
Petty commodity production (Income share of petty commodity production)	−0.05	0.08	0.07
Transnational migration (Proportion of adult HH members working as migrant labourers)	−0.15**	−0.04	−0.16
Cash cropping (Value of agricultural production sold per unit of land)	−0.57***	−0.01	−0.01
Source: Survey data collected by author, 2003.
Notes: *** Significant at 1 percent level. ** Significant at 5 percent level.