Peripheralization, Ejidos and Agricultural Livelihoods in Intermediate Mexican Cities: The Importance of Collective Agency to Reduce Vulnerabilities

Abstract

This paper focuses on the interactions between peripheralization, vulnerabilities of agricultural livelihoods, and local collective agency in the creation of new capabilities in intermediate cities. It discusses the theoretical implications of a study conducted in the municipality of Tarímbaro, part of the intermediate city of Morelia, Mexico; it expands on results already published in preliminary form. The unit of analysis was the ejido, since this type of social land tenure, granted to landless peasants in 1917 after the Mexican Revolution, is one of the most important forms of social organization in rural Mexico. About one-half of the Mexican territory comprises >30,000 community-based land tenures (mainly ejidos), and a high proportion of the land now occupied by urban centers was ejido land. This paper uses the example of 15 ejidos, notably affected by the expansion of Morelia city, to illustrate how local (rural) organizations can foster collective agency to reduce differential vulnerabilities in peri-urban agricultural livelihoods in intermediate cities. In 2015, a semi-structured interview was undertaken with the president of each ejido, followed by a survey of 61 individuals from 11 of the 15 ejidos. The peripheralization of Morelia has produced inequalities in the adjacent municipality of Tarímbaro. Differential vulnerabilities in peri-urban agricultural livelihoods were found in the participant ejidos. Not all the ejidos have been successful in addressing vulnerabilities associated with urbanization of agricultural land, but those who have achieved some success have certain characteristics that reinforce common values and motivations to establish common goals to sustain local livelihoods. This paper highlights the importance of functional (rural) organizations in regulating access to, and distribution of, resources in the peripheries of intermediate cities.

A Geospatial Model of Periurbanization—The Case of Three Intermediate-Sized and Subregional Cities in Chile

“…The outer periurban is the area contiguous or adjacent to the urban limit of the Metropolitan Regulatory Plan of This research observed a process of periurbanization in the cases of the cities of Buin, Melipilla, and Talagante over the past decades. As pointed out by Sereno et al [30], this phenomenon also occurs in intermediate-sized or medium-sized cities [70]. This is the case for the three selected examples.…”

“…Daga et al [90] analyzed the environmental implications and the need for a typological classification for the evaluation of sustainability. Lorda [91] studied the socioeconomic dynamics and its vulnerability [70], whereas Pola et al [92] examined access to periurban land through the purchase and sale of properties.…”

Geografía y segregación socioespacial urbana. Una mirada desde Iberoamérica

“…Es así que mientras en algunos sitios hay inversiones de capital (público y privado) acompañadas de apoyo político, muchos otros son invisibilizados por los censos, los mapas oficiales, los instrumentos de planeación (como los planes de desarrollo urbano y territorial o los planes de desarrollo rural) y por consecuencia sus habitantes no tienen acceso a muchos de los programas y acciones de beneficio social (da Gama, 2011; Rojas y Pino, 2013; Méndez-Lemus, Vieyra y Poncela, 2017). Lo anterior amplía las brechas de desigualdades socioambientales en el sentido que se favorece por ejemplo la precarización de la vida, la vivienda y el trabajo, la segregación socio-residencial, la falta de acceso a infraestructura y servicios funcionales y de calidad, la pérdida de la capacidad asociativa y de negociación, y la exposición diferenciada a amenazas físicas, sociales, químicas e infecciosas (Ávila, 2009;da Gama, 2011;Rojas y Pino, 2013;Méndez-Lemus, et al 2022).…”

“…Es decir, se construye una identidad colectiva al tiempo que se producen ciertas formas de ciudadanía que se forjan a partir de nuevos discursos, de abrir espacios de experimentación, de defender derechos básicos y de proponer nuevas prácticas y formas de gobierno (Lombard, 2013;Caldeira, 2017). Estos regímenes que se crean, utilizan y legitiman en torno a la lucha y la resistencia como formas propias de gobierno, son reflejo de la diversidad de actores que llegan a vivir a estas periferias (hibridación cultural), de las relaciones desiguales de poder, de sus privaciones y por qué no, de sus imaginarios (Brenner y San German, 2012;Lombard, 2013;Caldeira, 2017;Méndez-Lemus, 2022, et al).…”