Moving Out of Poverty

Understanding Growth and Freedom from the Bottom Up

Mexico Country Study

Authors:

Trine Lunde (tlunde@jhu.edu) Vicente Garcia Moreno (vgarciamoreno@worldbank.org)

Alejandro Ramirez (aramirez@cinepolis.com.mx)

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3

A. Purpose and Scope of the Study ........................................................................................... 3 B. Main Findings........................................................................................................................ 3

I. Background and Methodology..................................................................................................... 5 A. Background............................................................................................................................ 5

i. National Conditions and Trends.......................................................................................... 5 ii. Key Policies Related to Growth, Ethnicity and Poverty Reduction................................... 8 iii. Differences between Policymakers’ and Community Timelines .................................... 11

B. Methodology........................................................................................................................ 12 i. Sampling Framework ........................................................................................................ 12 ii. Data Collection Tools and Methods................................................................................. 15 iii. Poverty and Mobility Measures ...................................................................................... 17

II. People’s Perceptions of Community Prosperity and Household Mobility .............................. 20 A. Perceptions of Community Prosperity and Household Mobility......................................... 20 B. Processes behind Community Prosperity and Community Mobility Profiles ..................... 24

i. Changes in Sources of Livelihoods in the Past Ten Years ................................................ 24 ii. Changes in Inequality in the Past Ten Years..................................................................... 28 iii. What Helped and Hindered Community Prosperity in the Past Ten Years .................... 30

C. Household Mobility ............................................................................................................. 31 i. Levels of Wellbeing – The steps of the Ladder.................................................................. 31 ii. Factors of Mobility – Moving Up and Down the Ladder................................................. 35 iii. Economic Activity: Regional and Gender Differences.................................................... 42

III. Migration to the US................................................................................................................ 46 A. Migration in Perspective...................................................................................................... 46 B. Migratory Profiles of Study Communities: The Different Stages of Migration .................. 50 C. The Costs and Gains of Migration to the Household........................................................... 55

IV. Education................................................................................................................................ 61 A. Education in Study Communities .................................................................................. 63 B. Education as a Mechanism of Upward Mobility ........................................................... 68

i. Increased Assistance, more Facilities and Changing Attitudes towards Education .......... 70 ii. The Effect of US Migration on Education in Oaxaca ...................................................... 73

C. Continued Constraints in Access to Upper--Secondary School and Beyond ...................... 77 V. Social Capital and Local Government..................................................................................... 83

A. How does Social Capital and Local Governance Affect Mobility?..................................... 83 B. Social Capital and Local Governance in Oaxaca and Yucatan............................................ 87 C. A Closer Look at Study Communities ................................................................................. 91 D. Trust and Transition Categories .......................................................................................... 97 E. Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 101

VI. Conclusions and Policy Implications ................................................................................... 103 A. Create Economic Opportunity within Communities ......................................................... 105 B. Improve Access to and Returns from Outside Economic Opportunities ........................... 108

3

Introduction

A. Purpose and Scope of the Study This report is part of the World Bank’s Moving out of Poverty: Understanding Growth and Freedom from the Bottom Up research project which is a global 15-country study to explore how people move out of poverty permanently over 10-15 years or remain trapped in chronic poverty, from the perspectives of the men, women and youth who have lived through these experiences. The research project seeks to understand from the bottom-up factors that unleash poor people’s economic potential and support their transitions out of poverty. The global breadth of the study enables the exploration of factors that help and hinder movements out of poverty across diverse environments. A leading principle in the study approach is to build on existing data sets to better understand poverty dynamics over time. In particular, the Moving out of Poverty study examines mechanisms at the local level that facilitate or hinder poor people’s access to economic opportunity, assets, services and markets that in turn support their movement out of (or cause others to fall into) poverty. Mexico is an upper-middle income country that has achieved a lot of progress over the past ten year: The economy has stabilized since the 1994 crisis; social spending has become increasingly progressive; and new, innovative and more effective poverty reduction programs have been launched. As a result, poverty rates have fallen considerably. There is however one segment of the population for whom these positive trends have not fully reached– the indigenous population. Poverty in indigenous communities is higher and more severe than for the population at large, while poverty rates have fallen much more slowly than the national trend. The result is a widening income gap between the indigenous and non-indigenous populations in Mexico. While indigenous peoples have on average not seen much progress in terms of growth in incomes in the past 10-15 years, this study focuses on communities that have been successful in expanding economic opportunity. The definition of an “economically successful” indigenous community is based on growth in the share of the population that earns more than 2 minimum wages in the period 1990-2000. As such, the study focuses on positive outliers, with a hope to identify ‘what is different’ about these communities, both in terms of community level factors as well as household and individual level factors. The questions asked are: What characterizes economically successful indigenous communities? And, how and why have some households within these communities moved out of poverty?

B. Main Findings Indigenous communities are defined as communities where more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous. These are typically small, rural communities, often located in remote areas with little access to economic markets. Agriculture is the main source of income and the majority engages in subsistence farming. This is also very much the case in the ‘successful’ communities studied. Overall, we found no internal ‘sources of growth’ that could explain why incomes in these communities have grown in the past 10-15 years. However, in the successful communities studied, a high and increasing share of community members leave to find employment elsewhere. Mechanisms of upward mobility are, in other words, those that link individuals to economic opportunities outside their community of origin.

4

If the communities themselves offer no mechanisms of mobility, the options available to an individual who wants to move ahead are: (i) to commute to nearby cities or business centers; (ii) to move to nearby cities or business centers (urbanization), (iii) to migrate to other parts of the country; or (iv) to migrate to the US. When we compare the strategies chosen in Yucatán and Oaxaca – our two study regions - two different stories emerge: In Oaxaca, leaving the community manifests itself primarily in permanent or temporal migration to other parts of Mexico and to the US. In Yucatán, it is seen in patterns of urbanization or people commuting to nearby cities (Merida and Cancun). The strategies chosen in Yucatán often imply a shift from farm to off-farm employment. In Oaxaca on the other hand, migrants typically (although not always) continue to work in agriculture be it in Northern Mexico or California. Human capital – skills and education – is a key factor if the chosen mechanism of upward mobility is to commute to nearby business centers and find off-farm employment. Lacking formal education becomes a key constraint. Factors that affect decisions to migrate are somewhat different. Migration carry great costs: crossing the US border can be dangerous and is expensive, while finding both housing and a job in a new country is a challenge. These costs are mitigated however by the flow of information back to the communities from earlier migrants as well as by the existence of social networks of migrants at the place of destination. In other words, the migratory experience of the community (or nearby communities) matters. For a potential migrant, social networks and community migratory experience may be as important in terms of lowering constraints, as the individual’s initial stock of human capital. Social capital and local Governance matters for community prosperity, while its effects on individual mobility are less clear. Local governance and social capital are closely related in half of our study communities. Due to the norms and values embedded in the traditional form of local governance in place in Oaxaca, it is not surprising that intra-community trust and expectations of people’s willingness to help is higher in Oaxaca. Also, the number of days spent on communal work is higher in Oaxaca than in Yucatan. Qualitative data suggest that partisan conflict in the more orthodox democratic system of local governance in place in Yucatan create rifts in the social fabric of communities there. Trust in and the perceived ability to influence local government were also higher in Oaxaca than in Yucatan and these regional differences are not driven by a few high-scoring communities in Oaxaca or by a few low-scoring communities in Yucatan, but generalizable to the entire sample of 12 study communities. In terms of local government, the findings suggests that not only the system of local governance (Usos y Costumbres vs. orthodox multi-party system), but also the community’s administrative level affects perceptions of trust and influence in local government. Communities that were not the municipal center have less trust and a lesser perception of influence than those that were. This finding holds across both regions, and points to governance problems at the sub-municipal level. In terms of individual households, findings show that while the chronic poor have higher levels of trust in fellow villagers than others in both regions, chronic poor also trust other peoples’ willingness to help more than others in Oaxaca, while the opposite is true for Yucatan. This again, might be a reflection of the values, especially its focus on equality, embedded in Usos y Costumbres. People in Oaxaca who have moved ahead also seem to take a more active part in their communities, while successful members in Yucatan do not.

5

I. Background and Methodology

A. Background This section gives an overview of the national conditions; public policies and trends in poverty and inequality, as well as of the study methodology including a section on regions, communities and households were sampled.

i. National Conditions and Trends About 17 percent of Mexico’s population lived in extreme poverty in 2004 using the official poverty line in Mexico. Using the internationally standardized poverty line of one dollar a day (at 1993 purchasing power parity), the World Bank (2004) estimate that 4-9 percent of Mexico’s population lived in poverty in 2002. This measure is used in countries far poorer than Mexico and represents a deep level of deprivation in a Mexican context. Using the two dollars a day poverty line, about 20 percent of the country’s population were poor in 2002. Overall, poverty rates recovered to pre 1994-95 crisis levels by 2002. Since then, extreme poverty has continued to decrease, despite economic stagnation. In the 1990s, poverty reduction in Mexico has followed macroeconomic cycles and the 1994-95 economic crisis resulted in a ‘massive setback’ as extreme poverty rising to 37 percent in 1996 from 21 percent at the outset of the crisis in 1994 (World Bank 2004). As recovery kicked in, the extreme poverty rate declined and by 2002 it was back at 20 percent. More recently, there has been a shift in the relationship between macroeconomic trends and poverty reduction: In the period 2000-04, the extreme poverty rate continued to decline significantly, despite stagnating average incomes, due to income growth in rural areas combined with a decrease in inequality in both rural and urban areas. The extreme poverty rate fell to 17.3 percent in 2004, down from 24.5 percent in 2000. Income growth for the rural poor are fuelled by off-farm employment and transfers – both private (remittances) and public. In the period 2000-2002, the World Bank identifies two key factors at play in rural areas: First, rural unskilled wages grew by over 20 percent. Second, public transfers from the government programs Procampo and Oportunidades - contributed substantially to the growth in incomes of the rural poor. Procampo is an agricultural subsidy while Oportunidades is a conditional cash transfer program. This trend was reinforced by large flows of remittances to rural areas. Finally, inequality rose sharply in rural areas throughout the last half of the 1990s, followed by a slight decrease in 2000-02.

Box 1: National Key Informants: Poverty Reduction and Public Policies in Mexico Informants highlighted how poverty reduction in the 1990s was characterized by economic crisis and recovery. The macroeconomic stability that Mexico has enjoyed since recovering from the 1994 crisis was seen across the board as the most important support for recovery and poverty reduction in the country. Slowing growth since 2000 and the failure of NAFTA and economic liberalization to deliver growth as promised was seen as a key obstacle to further progress. Several positive trends were identified as having affected public policies to combat poverty over the past 15 years. The removal of regressive subsidies that began under President Salinas (1988-1994), coupled with improved targeting of social policy interventions by the following administration of President Zedillo

6

89.7

68.5

46.7

14.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Poor Extremely Poor

Pove

rty

Rat

es (

per

centa

ge)

Indigenous Non indigenous

(1994–2000), made for an increasingly progressive social spending in Mexico. In addition to the removal of regressive subsidies, programs aiming at universal access (e.g. basic education, public health programs and water supply) naturally became more progressive as coverage expanded and reached the poorer segments of the population. All key informants pointed to the pivotal role of Progresa (now Oportunidades) both in changing the nature of social policies in Mexico and as an effective intervention per se. The 1994 crisis, which revealed severe gaps in the country’s social protection system, spurred the creation Progresa - a targeted, conditional cash-transfer program. It has since become a flagship social assistance program emulated worldwide. Informants also noted how the program moved the focus of social assistance interventions from the community to the individual, and from infrastructure to human capital development (education, health, nutrition). Not only inventive in its design, the program was subjected to external, independent evaluations. This helped address long-standing problems of paternalism and clientelism of social programs, by introducing and formalizing the monitoring and evaluation of social assistance programs. Increasingly progressive social spending, reduced paternalism and clientelism of social spending, and better impact evaluation, are trends that have been consolidated and strengthened under the current Fox administration (2000-2006). Growth in social spending has also been kept up despite stagnating economic growth. Most informants commended this administration above all for strengthening and expanding Progresa, which was renamed Oportunidades and for bringing continuity to sound social policy changes of the former administration and continuing the focus on monitoring and evaluation of programs. Finally, migration and remittances was mentioned as an increasingly important factor in the past ten years. US migration is a very tangible option for the poor, sometimes the only, and the rapid growth in remittances from the US in the past ten years has had great effects, especially on incomes in poor, rural areas. Source: Key informant interviews conducted with representatives from national academia, government and the private sector for this study (see Methodology Annex)

Ethnicity matters in the generation and reproduction of poverty and inequality and income levels fall as concentration of indigenous in a community increases. Ramirez (2006) combines census data and survey data to compare average monthly income per person according to the concentration of indigenous population in municipalities. His study shows that income levels fall as the concentration of indigenous population in a municipality increases: In 2002, an individual in a municipality where more than 40 percent of the population is indigenous had an income equivalent to only 26 percent of that of a person in a non-indigenous municipality. Furthermore, while only 15 percent of the population in non-indigenous municipalities was extremely poor (using the official poverty line), the share of the population living in extreme poverty rose to 69 percent in municipalities where more than 40 percent of the population was indigenous. Indigenous groups also typically suffer higher levels of deprivation in terms access to basic services as well as education and health status (World Bank 2004, UNDP 2005, Ramirez 2006). Figure 1 shows poverty rates in indigenous and non-indigenous municipalities.

Fig. 1: Poverty Rates in Indigenous and Non-indigenous Municipalities, 2002

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Ext

erem

e Po

vert

y Rate

19922002

-3 percent

-20 percent

Source: Ramirez (2006) Indigenous municipalities here refers to municipalities where more than 40 percent of the population is indigenous Welfare indicators (access to basic services, health and education) point to advances for the indigenous over the past 15 years, especially in terms of primary education where there has been a noticeable narrowing of the school enrollment gap between indigenous and non-indigenous populations. Quality of both health services and education however remains a concern: indigenous schools systematically scores lower on standardized tests indicating problems of educational quality. Poverty is no only higher, deeper and more severe in indigenous communities, but poverty rates are falling more slowly than in non-indigenous communities which has lead to a widening of the income gap between indigenous and non-indigenous. Due to slower income growth for indigenous groups, the poverty gap between indigenous and non-indigenous increased in the period 1992-2002. The remainder of this section reports findings from Ramirez (2006) unless otherwise stated. As shown below (Figure 2), the incidence of extreme poverty in predominantly indigenous municipalities fell from 71 percent in 1992 to 69 percent in 2002. Over the same period, extreme poverty in non-indigenous municipalities was reduced from 19 percent to 15 percent in 2002. This means that in relative terms, poverty fell by only 3 percent for indigenous groups compared to 20 percent for the non-indigenous. As a result, the indigenous/non-indigenous gap widened considerably: In 1992, the incidence of extreme poverty was 4 times higher in indigenous than in non-indigenous municipalities. By 2002, extreme poverty had become 5 times higher in indigenous than in non-indigenous municipalities.

Fig. 2: Extreme Poverty Rates by Concentration of Indigenous Population, 1992 and 2002

Source: Ramirez (2006), ENIGH 1992 and 2002 Indigenous: Municipalities where more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous Non-indigenous: Municipalities where less than 10 percent of the population is indigenous Indigenous poverty trends in the past decade followed – as for the population at large – macroeconomic cycles, and was marked by crisis and recovery. As a result of the 1994-95 crisis extreme poverty reached 84 percent for indigenous groups. The increase of poverty in non-indigenous municipalities was higher than the increase of indigenous poverty: non-indigenous extreme poverty rose by 56 percent following the crisis, compared to 7 percent for indigenous. This, however, can be explained by the already high levels of indigenous poverty and may also reflect how indigenous incomes depend on local markets that are to some extent isolated from the national economy.

8

0

47%

65%

86%

26%

56%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Born 1933 Born 1957 Born 1972

Non-indigenous males Indigenous males

81%

67%

43%

16%

2%0%0

20

40

60

80

100

Born 1933 Born 1957 Born 1972

Non-indigenous females Indigenous females

Indigenous people systematically score lower on other indicators of economic and social wellbeing, including health, ownership of physical assets, coverage of public social protection programs and access to basic services. The indigenous have poorer health indicators and less access to health care and social protection programs such as pensions and health insurance. Public social insurance programs in Mexico are intrinsically linked to formal labor market participation and as the indigenous population is predominantly employed in the informal sector, coverage remains low. Finally, access to basic services and physical living conditions are systematically worse in indigenous households than non-indigenous ones, while indigenous own less physical assets such as houses, cars and computers. Ranking Mexican municipalities by their Human Development Index (HDI), the UNDP finds a clear inverse relationship between percentage of indigenous population and human development: The less indigenous the population in a municipality is, the higher is its HDI (UNDP 2005).

Despite important progress in terms of closing the gap in education, indigenous communities are still lagging. In terms of educational attainment, the indigenous population is catching up, but still lagging. Non-indigenous youth (ages 7-14) have 8 percent more years of schooling than indigenous youth; however the differential grows with age as indigenous children drop out of school at an earlier age. The indigenous/non-indigenous differential is maintained even among the poor: the non-indigenous poor have between 1-2 years more schooling on average than indigenous poor.1 Figure 3 shows how the education gap has closed over the past decades, as the percentage of indigenous men who have completed primary school rose from 0 percent for the generation born in 1933 to 56 percent for the generation born in 1972. There is still a considerable education gap, especially for indigenous women: Of the 1972 cohort, only 16 percent of the indigenous completed primary school compared to 81 percent for the non-indigenous. Using the 2000 Census, The World Bank (2004) shows that enrollment levels beyond primary school falls dramatically for indigenous groups, with enrollment rates of only 35 percent in lower secondary for indigenous groups compared to 60 percent nationally.

Fig. 3: Percent of Population with Primary School Completed, by Year of Birth and Gender Source: Garcia and Patrinos, (forthcoming), based on ENEZI 1997

ii. Key Policies Related to Growth, Ethnicity and Poverty Reduction

While few large-scale social programs explicitly target the indigenous, the recent increase in poverty-targeted social spending, especially following the introduction and expansion of the 1 Based on estimates of mean years of schooling for the adult population (15 years and older)

9

program Oportunidades, benefits indigenous peoples who are over-represented in the poorer strata of the population. Oportunidades in particular has a heavy presence among the indigenous. Nearly 70 percent of the poorest quintile in indigenous municipalities receives Oportunidades, compared to only 42 percent in non-indigenous ones (see table 1). Another program introduced in the past 15 years – Procampo – is also reaching the indigenous and coverage is consistently higher in indigenous municipalities. Other general assistance from across ministries also reaches indigenous municipalities. These include programs focused on nutrition and food consumption (Diconsa and Liconsa), scholarship programs beyond Oportunidades (Conafe), public works program (PET), and the government program for local development (Microregiones), to name but a few.

Table 1: Coverage of Oportunidades and Procampo across Population Groups, 2002 Income Quintile Percent of population that receives indicated

support 1 2 3 4 5

Program Oportunidades: All people 42.3 23.1 13.5 4.1 1.1

Indigenous municipality 68.0 61.4 42.4 22.6 8.0

Non-indigenous municipality 33.3 19.3 12.2 3.6 1.1

Program Procampo, All people 42.3 23.1 13.5 4.1 1.1

Indigenous municipality 30.1 21.1 20.7 15.2 2.1

Non-indigenous municipality 12.3 7.7 5.2 2.0 1.7

Source: Ramirez (2006), ENIGH 2002 Indigenous municipality refers to municipalities where more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous In education, there is a program of bilingual education, which has been developed for indigenous schools. The Ministry of Education offers a bilingual curriculum, and distributes books and learning material in 33 indigenous languages to students and bilingual teachers. In addition, the telesecundaria2 is an important component of the educational infrastructure in indigenous communities and key in delivering lower-secondary education to remote areas in Mexico. In terms of programs and assistance directly targeting indigenous peoples, the National Council for the Development of Indigenous Peoples (CDI) coordinates three key programs: (i) Programa de Infraestructura Básica which invests in potable water, electricity and roads in indigenous communities; (ii) Albergues Escolares Indígenas, which offers temporary food and housing for children that travel from remote areas to centers of education; and (iii) Fondos Regionales Indígenas, which offers financial and technical support to groups of indigenous producers and artisans/handcrafters. A new policy initiation for the poorest municipalities in Mexico is also set to benefit indigenous peoples. Following a recent publication by the UNDP that ranked municipalities in Mexico by their Human Development Index, a special program is being designed to assist the 50 municipalities with the lowest HDI index in the country. 92.4 percent of the population in these 50 municipalities is indigenous. The program will increase both the magnitude and the 2 A distance learning mode, which consists of lectures delivered via satellite TV. Distance secondary schools have one teacher per grade to facilitate lectures, assist students with their schoolwork, and answer questions.

10

coordination of federal assistance to the municipalities, with an aim to: create productive activities locally and assist in the commercialization of these; improve housing conditions; reduce illiteracy and increase access to and quality of education; increase the coverage of services in health and nutrition; and improve basic infrastructure (CDI 2005).

Box 2: Key National Informants: Public Policy and Mechanisms for Upward Mobility

Informants first pointed to the pitfall of viewing poverty among the indigenous as something special or different than poverty tout court, above all when thinking in terms of public policy. As mechanisms of mobility were believed to be the same for indigenous and non-indigenous – effective policies are also the same. One informant noted that people have many identities, and being indigenous is only one of many. As such, focusing on this one identity may result in a narrow, one-dimensional view. Others emphasized the need to provide the indigenous with the right to be different, however these views were followed by a stress on the importance of choice and freedom, and the need to provide tangible, and equal opportunities. Says one informant: “As for all poor, our goal should be to increase options and the ability to choose. There must be choices and options, not restrictions”. The Zapatista uprising in Chiapas in 1994 was seen as an important turning point for public policies, as it placed the question of indigenous poverty on the table for national debate. According to one key informant is also affected public opinion by giving every Mexican “a reminder that we live in a poor country.”

Concrete areas where interventions should be prioritized were: bilingual education, access to economic markets, support for productive activities, and health, in particular maternal and infantile health. It was noted that indigenous communities have poor health indicators - abysmal ones for maternal health. Lacking access to credit and capital was also noted and the need to bring formal financial systems to lower income strata and to create a popular savings sector. One informant referred to the ongoing ‘democratization of the financial sector” however all noted that advances in this area have been modest to date. Important actors are Bansefi (National Savings and Financial Services bank) and micro-finance companies such as Compartamos.

Most informants felt that formal mechanisms out of poverty is lacking in Mexico today. While Oportunidades has been an effective program with tangible results in health, nutrition and education, youth are left with few options once they graduate from the program. That the poor often perceive few legitimate ways to improve their conditions is a key problem. One reaction – especially for youth with a strong will to move ahead – is to engage in unlawful activities, such as petty crime or illegal migration. Increasing migration to the US was seen as clear sign of lacking mechanisms for upward mobility within the country. Commenting on the phenomenon of Mexican women crossing the border to give birth so that their child gains American citizenship, one key informant says: “Many Mexicans seem to feel that the best inheritance they can leave their children is a foreign nationality and with it, the opportunity to leave the country.”

All informants mentioned education as the most important formal mechanism for upward mobility, however many questioned the quality of the current public education system. One informant pointed to continued problems of corporatism that have contributed to a public education system flawed to a degree where it performs poorly as a mechanism of upward mobility. Poor quality of education, especially for the indigenous, was seen as a key obstacle and a key area for policy interventions in the future. Finally, it was noted that indigenous poverty is closely linked to spatial aspects of poverty and therefore intertwined with the bigger question of “what to do with the poor Southern states?” Increased regional inequality and the slow poverty reduction in indigenous and/or marginalized areas was a concern raised by all, and many mentioned the need to improve regional development plans. States such as Oaxaca and Chiapas with large indigenous populations and disperse settlements in remote and marginalized areas need to be given more attention.

Source: Key informant interviews with representatives from national academia, government and the private sector

11

iii. Differences between Policymakers’ and Community Timelines

National key informants highlighted macroeconomic stability, improved social spending, the launch of a new and innovative poverty reduction program, Oportunidades (formerly Progresa) and migration as the key events to have affected poverty trends in Mexico over the past ten years (see box 1 and 2 above). At the same time many noted that formal or legal mechanisms for upward mobility were scarce or lacking in today’s Mexico. Local perspectives in the 12 study communities, as outlined in community timelines, seem to confirm the overall idea of increased social spending. This is noted above all in the rate of improvement in social infrastructure such as schools and health centers. As shown in the table below, 10 out of 12 communities had seen the addition of schools or other educational facilities over the past 15 years. The two communities that didn’t list improved educational infrastructure as a key event still noted improved access to schools. This was due to the building of a new road in the case of Concepcion Carrizal, and due to the relocation of the community next to the main road in the case of Yosoyuxi. Both communities are located in Oaxaca. Likewise, health centers were built in 8 out of 12 communities. These additions to the communities’ social infrastructure may have been linked to the introduction of the program Oportunidades, which is given contingent on the existence of schools and health centers nearby. The program Oportunidades benefit families in all 12 study communities and was invariably noted as a key event by all.

Table 2: Social Infrastructure Improvements in Study Communities School built in the

past 15 years Health Center built in the past 15 years

Water and sanitation improvements

Yucatan communities 6 out of 6 4 out of 6 3 out of 6 Oaxacan communities 4 out of 6 4 out of 6 4 out of 6 All communities 10 out of 12 8 out of 12 7 out of 12 Macroeconomic stability is obviously a less tangent concept and not easily recorded as a single event in community timelines. However, the macroeconomic crisis of 1994-95 did not show up as a major issue in any of the focus group discussions either. This may simply be a reflection of the economic isolation of indigenous communities, which depend on highly local markets. Regional differences are however noticeable as structural reform in the 1990s affected communities in Yucatan more severely. Here, the restructuring of agricultural credit and subsidies in effect pushed communities from subsidized agricultural production on communal lands (ejidos), to a situation where the majority of community members were forced to migrate to urban centers in search of jobs in construction, domestic services or other service industries. The impact of this shift is further discussed in section II. Migration was as noted by key informants a significant trend, especially in Oaxacan communities, and showed up as such in community timelines, focus group discussion and individual interviews. It is clearly the most widespread mechanism of upward mobility in this state. In the Yucatan, migration to the US is only just beginning but is clearly a budding trend, which many identified as the way ahead in the future. While key informants recognized the pivotal role of education as a mechanism of upward mobility they had doubts about the educational system and the quality of education in indigenous areas. The communities themselves showed no doubt in education, and were – across the board – extremely positive in their evaluation of schooling as a way ahead. Complaints of continued lack of access were raised, in particular at the level beyond lower-secondary schooling (secundaria).

12

Despite this, communities and key informants in the communities did not doubt education as a mechanism for upward ability if available.

B. Methodology This section explains and discusses sampling framework, data collection tools and poverty and mobility measures used for this study.

i. Sampling Framework The indigenous population in Mexico is estimated at 12.7 million by the National Population Council (CONAPO) who defines as indigenous any individual who speaks an indigenous language or who belongs to an indigenous ethnic group.3 Other estimates based on language show that about 11 percent of Mexico’s population lives in households where the head of the household speaks an indigenous language. The indigenous population is highly diverse and there are 62 different indigenous language groups. Geographically, the indigenous population is concentrated in the South, and the states Oaxaca, Chiapas, Guerrero, Veracruz and Yucatán account for over 60 percent of indigenous language speakers. The most important ethnic groups are the Náhuatl, Maya, Zapoteco, Mixteco, Otomí and Tzotzil (INI 2002). This report is based on fieldwork carried out in 12 indigenous communities in Yucatán and Oaxaca and the majority of the communities surveyed belonged to one of the main ethnic groups. Our community sample includes: six Mayan communities, two Zapotec communities, two Mixtec communities, and two Triqui communities located in a predominantly Mixtec municipality. The Triqui is a minority ethnic group in Oaxaca. Study Regions The 12 study communities are located in two Southern states - Yucatán and Oaxaca. Yucatán and Oaxaca have the highest percentages of indigenous population of all Mexican states: In Yucatán, 59 percent of the population is indigenous, and in Oaxaca 48 percent of the population is indigenous (INI, CONAPO and UNDP, 2002). Together, the two states account for one-fourth of the country’s indigenous population. Both states have a high presence of indigenous populations, and they are both located in the poorer Southern region of the country. Yet, Oaxaca and Yucatán differ greatly, first and foremost in terms of the local economy, economic growth and income levels. Yucatán has higher levels of income, has experienced high growth in the past ten years and has a more modern economic structure. Oaxaca is one of the poorest states in Mexico and has had lower growth than the national average in the past ten years. Indigenous municipalities in Oaxaca operate under their own traditional system of local elections and government (Usos y Costumbres), which in many ways contrasts the orthodox democratic system that governs municipalities in Yucatán. For a more in-dept discussion of the local government system in Oaxaca see box 22 in Chapter 5. Infrastructure, ethnic composition, and topography also differ. Finally, social development indicators vary greatly between the two states, as shown in the example of access to education and health in the table below (table 3). Yucatán ranks 19th out of a total of 32 Mexican states in terms of its Human Development Index, while Oaxaca ranks 31st, with only Chiapas having a lower score (UNDP 2003).

3 CONAPO website, www.conapo.gob.mx

13

Table 3: Study Regions – A Comparative Framework

YUCATÁN OAXACA Economy Per capita income above regional

average, and economic growth above national average.

One of the lowest per capita income in Mexico and low/ stagnating rates of economic growth rates

Local government and institutions

Orthodox democratic institutions, electoral system and party politics

An institutionalized form of indigenous self-government, usos y costumbres: non-partisan and based on collective decision making (majority vote)

Location, topography, and infrastructure

Easy access everywhere: Yucatán is flat and has a highly developed transportation network

Difficult access to remote areas where most predominantly indigenous communities are located, due to extremely difficult topography and low quality infrastructure

Ethnic composition

Homogenous indigenous population (Mayan)

Heterogeneous indigenous population: 26 different indigenous languages spoken

Social and human development indicators*

Education: 11 percent of the adult population has no formal education, while 16 percent finished high school. About 15 percent of adult women is illiterate Health: 43 percent of the population did not have access to health services in 2000

Education: More than 20 percent of the adult population has no formal education, while about 10 percent finished high school. 27 percent of adult women is illiterate Health: 71 percent of the population did not have access to health services in 2000

*Census 2000 (INEGI website) The Mexican economy has undergone great structural changes in the past twenty years due to increased economic liberalization and a growing insertion into the world economy, a process that intensified with the signing of the free trade agreement NAFTA in 1994. These structural changes played out differently across states and regions. Economic liberalization spurred growth mainly in the Northern states, in particular in those located on the US border. However, a few states in the South also experienced an economic boost. In 2003, Yucatán had the second highest concentration of maquila employment of a non-US border state (Aroca et al. 2005). Together with Puebla, Yucatán is the only state in the South with significant employment in manufacturing for exports. In 2004, per capita income in Yucatán at USD 5,229 was about twice the level of Oaxaca at USD 2,641. Both state averages are below the national average of USD 6,419 (Bancomer 2005). There are also major differences between the two states in terms of the shares of the active labor force employed in different economic sectors. In 2004, in Oaxaca, 40.5 percent of the working population was employed in agriculture and other primary activities, compared to only 12.7 percent in Yucatán (Table 4). Employment in agriculture in Yucatán is below the national average. Furthermore, 21.1 percent of Yucatán’s labor force was employed in manufacturing – almost twice as much as in Oaxaca and above the national average. Employment in commerce, hotels and restaurants, as well as services, was also higher in Yucatán than in Oaxaca.

14

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Yucatan Oaxaca National

Table 4: GDP Per Capita and Employment Across Economic Sectors, 2004 Sectors of economic activity, percentage of active labor force employed in:

Agriculture and other primary

sectors

Manu- facturing

Construction Commerce, restaurants and hotels

Communication and transport

Public Sector

Services

Mexico 16.2% 17.0% 6.2% 25.0% 4.6% 4.4% 25.4%

Yucatán 12.7% 21.1% 6.3% 23.5% 4.7% 4.9% 26.4% Oaxaca 40.5% 11.9% 6.1% 18.6% 2.5% 3.5% 16.6% Source: Bancomer (2005), based on INEGI Economic expansion has consistently been lower in the Southern region than all other regions. However, Yucatán is a Southern exception. In terms of economic growth in the period 1994-2004, we see that Oaxaca has consistently experienced lower growth rates than both national averages and Yucatán (see Fig. 4). The average growth rate for Yucatán over this period (1994-2004) was 3.75 percent, slightly above the national average of 3.17 percent, while Oaxaca experienced an average growth rate over the same period of only 1.63 percent.

Fig. 4: Annual Growth Rates: Yucatán, Oaxaca and National, 1994 - 2004

Source: Bancomer (2005), based on INEGI

Study Communities The 12 study communities are located in predominantly indigenous municipalities, that is, municipalities where more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous. There are 481 such municipalities in Mexico and they together account for more than 60 percent of the entire indigenous population. Over two-thirds of these municipalities are located in Yucatán and Oaxaca. Key characteristics of indigenous municipalities are that they are small in size and located in rural, often remote, areas. The municipalities in the sample were selected based on growth in income in the time period 1990-2000, measured as change in the share of the population that has an income of more than two minimum wages. Indigenous municipalities in Yucatán and Oaxaca were ranked, based on this measure of economic progress, and 10 communities were selected from top of the ranking in each state. In addition, 2 communities were selected from the bottom half of the ranking. The final selection is shown in table 5 below.

15

Table 5: Study Communities

Marginalization Incomerank rank

Indigenous 0.68 2,870Med. indigenous 0.74 4,447Scarsely indigenous 0.76 4,908Sahcaba 0.66 2,401 19 4 MayanSanta Rosa 0.70 2,963 17 3 MayanChan Chochola 0.70 2,963 17 3 MayanSanahcat 0.67 2,246 80 6 MayanQuintana Roo 0.70 3,481 37 1 MayanSan Simon 0.66 2,300 76 82 MayanIndigenous 0.63 1937Med. indigenous 0.68 3091Scarsely indigenous 0.73 4449San Pablo Macuiltiangui 0.69 2505 245 10 ZapotecAbejones 0.65 1487 85 4 ZapotecConcepcion Carrizal 0.65 2822 21 2 TriquiYosoyuxi 0.65 2822 21 2 TriquiGuadalupe de Morelos 0.62 1640 136 1 MixtecSan Mateo Peñasco 0.60 1427 15 229 Mixtec

Human Development

Index

Income per capita (2000)

Progress 1990 - 2000 Language/ ethnicity

Out of 82:

Out of 246:

OA

XA

CA

Stud

y C

omm

unity

Stat

e av

erag

eSt

ate

aver

age

Stud

y C

omm

unity

YU

CA

TA

N

Sources: CONAPO (2005), Indice de Marginacion Indigenous: more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous; Med. Indigenous: more than 40 but less than 70 percent of the population is indigenous; Scarcely indigenous: less than 10 percent of the population is indigenous Study Households Finally, 25-30 households in each community were selected for the household survey, which leads to a sample size of 350 households. We also over-sampled ‘successful’ households, as we want to assure enough information about a particular group of households, i.e. those that were perceived by the community as having moved out of poverty in the past 10 years. Table 6: All households and Sample Households, by Transition Group and Poverty Status [fill in]

All households ranked Household survey sample Number Percentage Number Percentage Never Poor (non-poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 154 15.9 Fallers (non-poor 1995, poor 2005) 7 0.7 Movers (poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 401 41.5 Chronic poor (poor 1995, poor 2000) 405 41.9

Poor 2005 412 42.6 109 31.5 Non-poor 2005 555 57.4 237 68.5

Total 967 100 346 100 Source: MOP Mexico

ii. Data Collection Tools and Methods The report is based on fieldwork that combined both quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative data comes from existing national-level data sets, as well as a household survey conducted in 12 indigenous communities in two different regions of the country (Oaxaca and Yucatán). The qualitative methods gathered evidence from the same 12 communities. Both types of data are described in this section.

16

Following the methodological approach proposed by the Moving out of Poverty team, data collection methods for the Mexico Country Study include an integrated package of quantitative and qualitative instruments. The primary tools are household and community questionnaires, focus groups discussions, open-ended household interviews, and key informant interviews with policymakers and community leaders (these tools are also outlined in the annex). A household survey was conducted with 25-30 households in each community, based on a prototype questionnaire adapted to the local context and existing data sets in Mexico. The questionnaires will collect information on demographic factors, asset ownership, sources of income, access to credit, access to employment opportunities, access to services such as education and health, memberships in groups and networks (social capital), empowerment and political participation, access to information, exposure to crime and violence, and aspirations. To complement the household questionnaire and existing quantitative data sets, a range of qualitative instruments were used to gather primary data on the mechanisms that support or obstruct people moving out of poverty. Consequently, the fieldwork involved open-ended discussions designed to understand perceptions at both the household and community levels of mobility, freedom, power, democracy and aspirations, and how these are linked to escaping poverty and to chronic poverty. The key qualitative tools used in the Mexico Country Study include: (i) key informant interviews; (ii) focus group discussions; and (iii) open-ended interviews with individual households (life stories).

17

Table 7: Data Collection Tools

iii. Poverty and Mobility Measures The study works around data limitations (lack of panel data) by using people’s recollection of a household’s status in earlier time periods and will be based on perceptions of status (rank) today and recall of status ten years ago, as given by the community and the households themselves. The transition category of a given household in study communities is identified and verified based on the following:

• Status and change in a household’s position based on the raw ranks assigned to a household today and 10 years ago by community members in Focus Group Discussions. Male and female focus groups rank about 70-100 households in each community

• Status and change in the household’s position based on self-assessment and the raw ranks assigned by the respondent himself/herself today and 10 years ago in a household questionnaire (30 households in each community).

Data Collection Method Types of Informants Total Number of Informants

Key Informant Interview or a Workshop: National Timeline

Academics (2), Civil Society (1), Government officials (2) 5

Community Profile Community authorities, members of local government 12

Key Informant Interview: Community Timeline

Community authorities, members of local government 13

Focus Group Discussion: Ladder of Life

12 Focus groups with men 12 Focus groups with women

24

Focus Group Discussion: Freedom, Power, Democracy and Local Governance

12 Focus groups with men 12 Focus groups with women

24

Focus Group Discussion: The Aspirations of Youth

12 Focus groups with young men 12 Focus groups with young women 24

Two Mini Case Studies: Community-Wide Events and Factors Affecting Mobility

Interviews with key informants 10

Household Questionnaire 25- 30 households per community 344

Open-Ended Interview: Individual Life Stories

12 persons per community 144

18

• The status and change assigned to the household by the community (focus groups) is also discussed and verified in open-ended interviews with a smaller sample of households (12 in each community). Following this verification of assigned status, these interviews focus on the how’s and why’s behind the assigned status, i.e. how and why - in their own opinion – the household became better off in the past ten years, or alternatively, how and why it didn’t.

As mentioned above, the households are then classified into four transition categories depending on their mobility trajectories over a ten-year period: (i) the always or chronic poor, (ii) the never poor; (iii) those who fall into poverty (fallers); and (iv) those that move out of poverty (movers). The status and rank of households are based on people’s subjective perceptions of what determines a household’s wellbeing, and no attempt was made to standardize or in any other way direct how people defined levels of wellbeing. The categories were then drawn based on local people’s definition of what constitutes poverty in their community, using this to draw a community poverty line. Two things are important to note. First, this poverty line measures relative poverty, as local people were comparing households within their communities only. Second, the poverty rate that we get using the Community Poverty Line differ, sometimes substantially, from the poverty rate we would get using a standardized measure such as the official Mexican poverty line. It follows that when a household is referred to as “never poor” or having “moved out of poverty”, it does not necessarily mean that the household is no longer poor according to more conventional ways of measuring poverty. In the household survey, information regarding income and consumption were gathered for 2005. Together with Mexico’s official poverty lines, ‘official’ income measures of poverty were calculated for the year 2005. In other words, we were able to establish both subjective and objective measures of two groups – poor and non-poor – for 2005. Doing this we are able to show the significant differences that may occur between subjective and official measures of poverty. For instance, local people in San Simon said that almost 70 percent of households in their community have moved out of what is perceived as poverty within their community, and that only about 30 percent remain poor today. Official measures of income poverty, however, show that about 90 percent of households in San Simon still live in extreme poverty. Table 8 below compares the community’s perception, the individual’s perception and objective income measures of poverty status. The overall ‘poverty rate’ based on the community’s perception was 31.5 percent, compared to 30.7 percent based on individual perceptions and 35.4 based on income measures of extreme poverty. While these rates do not differ all that much, internal differences are important. For instance, out of the 237 households considered non-poor by their communities, 104 or 43 percent actually self-identified as poor. Furthermore, 126 or 53 percent of the households considered non-poor by the community have an income lower than the official extreme poverty line for rural areas. Likewise, out of the 109 households considered poor by the community, only 46 or 42 percent self-identified as poor, while 69 or 63 percent had incomes below the extreme poverty line.

19

Table 8: Communal and Individual Perceptions of poverty, and Income Poverty, 2005

Individual perception of poverty

Household Survey Income measure of extreme poverty

Household Survey Non-poor Poor Total Non-poor Poor Total

133 104 237 111 126 237

56.1% 43.9% 100.0% 46.8% 53.2% 100.0% Non-poor

67.9% 69.3% 68.5% 73.5% 64.6% 68.5%

63 46 109 40 69 109 57.8% 42.2% 100.0% 36.7% 63.3% 100.0% Poor 32.1% 30.7% 31.5% 26.5% 35.4% 31.5%

196 150 346 151 195 346

56.7% 43.4% 100.0% 43.6% 56.4% 100.0% Com

mun

ity's

perc

eptio

n of

pov

erty

Fo

cus G

roup

Dis

cuss

ions

Total

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: MOP Household Survey Note: Within each square, the first row of percentages summarizes horizontally, while the second row of percentages summarizes vertically When comparing community poverty lines with the communities’ perception of where the official poverty line was drawn, another set of differences appear (see table 9). The step of the ladder of life where the focus groups no longer considered people poor differed in almost all cases from the step where the same focus groups placed the official poverty line. However, few patterns emerge between states or according to gender in terms of whether the community poverty line was placed above or below the official poverty line. In the two ‘unsuccessful’ communities who were noticeably poorer, both men and women placed the official poverty line above their own definition of a poverty line. Using local perceptions of poverty then, will lead to a lower number of poor than if the official poverty line was used. Again, the Ladder of Life exercise essentially asked local people to classify levels of wellbeing and poverty within their community, i.e. a relative measure of poverty, and this result is therefore not surprising in very poor communities.

Table 9: Was the Community Poverty Line above, the same or below Official Poverty Line?

Women's FGD Men's FGD Above Same Below Above Same Below Oaxaca 3 1 2 2 0 4 Yucatan 3 0 3 3 0 3 All 6 1 5 5 0 7 2 poorest communities 0 0 2 0 0 2 Successful communities 6 1 3 5 0 5

Source: Focus Group Discussion, ‘Ladder of Life’ Having looked at the different poverty and mobility measures used in the study, the next section discusses people’s perceptions of prosperity and mobility and how they explained trends in both over the past ten years.

20

II. People’s Perceptions of Community Prosperity and Household Mobility

This section looks at people’s perceptions of community prosperity and household mobility in the 12 study communities. The chapter first discusses the peoples perceptions of prosperity and mobility in their communities, based on the classification of households carried out by community members in the ladder of life exercise. To set these findings into context, section B then looks at general trends in the sources of livelihoods in the communities over the past ten years, as perceived by local people. A third section discusses factors identified by local people as having helped or hindered community prosperity the most in the past ten years. Finally, section D examines people’s perceptions of the different levels of wellbeing within their communities, as well as the factors that determine household mobility between these levels.

A. Perceptions of Community Prosperity and Household Mobility As shown in Table 10, there were marked differences between communities in Yucatán and Oaxaca in terms of how they viewed changes in community prosperity over the past ten years. When we asked focus groups of men and women in each of the communities, all groups in Oaxaca felt that their communities were more prosperous today than ten years ago. In Yucatán however, half the groups felt their communities were worse off, a feeling that was shared across nearly all male focus groups discussions. Communities in Oaxaca also generally viewed their future more optimistically than did communities in Yucatán. Yucatán has experienced higher growth rates than the national average in the past ten to fifteen years. Oaxaca on the other hand, is one of Mexico’s poorest states and has experienced low and stagnating growth rates in the past decade. At first, then, this finding is surprising. However, migration - both nationally and to the US - plays a major role in the study communities in Oaxaca and has brought with it significant changes in the prosperity of communities and households. In addition, farmers in the communities in Yucatán lost steady employment in the ejido, which provided them with both a daily salary and benefits such as social security. This clearly affected how people in Yucatán assessed changes in prosperity over the past ten years and there was a shared feeling of lost economic security, especially among men.

21

Table 10: People’s Perceptions of Prosperity in the Past Ten Years and Aspirations for the Future YUCATÁN OAXACA

Male Female Total Male Female Total

TOTAL

Compared to ten years ago, this community is:

1. More prosperous 17% 83% 50% 100% 100% 100% 75%

2. The same - - - - - - -

3. Less prosperous 83% 17% 50% - - - 25%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Ten years from now, this community will be:

1. More prosperous 60% 83% 73% 100% 100% 100% 87%

2. The same 20% 17% 18% - - - 9%

3. Less prosperous 20% - 9% - - - 4%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Source: 24 Focus Groups Discussions with men and women A key part of the study – the Ladder of Life - is based on local people’s ranking of households in their community according to level of wellbeing, today and ten years ago (see Methodology Annex for more information). Table xx shows the distribution across 4 transition groups in our 12 study communities, using the rank and category assigned to households by the communities they live in and based on subjective poverty lines drawn by focus group participants. On average, about 80 households were discussed and assigned to a transition group by local people in each community. In the smaller communities, all households in the community were ranked in this fashion. What stands out is firstly the small number of fallers, i.e. people who were not poor in 1995 but that became poor over the past ten years. There are two main reasons for this. First, few households in these communities were not poor in 1995, overall about 17 percent. Second, in a context of general progress, stagnation rather than downward movement will characterize households under stress or subject to negative shocks. A review of open-ended interviews with households who were deemed chronic poor and who remained at the same level of wellbeing over the past ten years, commonly revealed factors associated with downward mobility, such as an illness, a disability or other shocks. In the further use of quantitative data in this report, we will drop the category ‘faller’ due to the small number of observations. As shown in the table 11, aggregate estimates show that 34.2 percent of households ranked by communities in the Ladder of Life exercise were perceived to have moved out of poverty over the past ten years, while 42 percent remained in poverty. 24 percent of the households ranked were seen as being non-poor in both 1995 and 2005. Coupled with the fact that almost no households fell into poverty, the poverty rate (based on people’s perceptions or relative poverty in their communities) was nearly halved in the past ten years as it decreased from 83.4 in 1995, to only 42.6 percent in 2005.

22

38.5

27.924.1

17.9

11.5

5.7

76.2

52.050.550.0

43.3

28.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

Guada

lupe

Abejon

es

San Pe

dro

Macuiltian

guis

Carriza

l

Yoso

yuxi

Sana

hcat

Sant

a Ro

sa

Chan

Cho

chola

Sahc

aba

Quint

ana Ro

o

San Simon

Never poor

Chronic poor

Fallers

Movers

Table 11: Aggregated Averages for all Communities, Transitions Groups All households ranked Number Percentage Never Poor (non-poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 231 24.0 Fallers (non-poor 1995, poor 2005) 5 0.5 Movers (poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 330 34.2 Chronic poor (poor 1995, poor 2000) 398 41.3 Poor 1995 728 75.5 Poor 2005 403 41.8

Source: Focus group Discussion, Ladder of Life Fig. 5 shows transition groups, as defined by focus groups in each individual community. These are calculated as an average of the results from male and female focus group discussions. The first 6 communities from the left are from Oaxaca, and the last 6 communities are from Yucatan. The figure also gives the percentage of movers in each community. It shows that on average, a higher share of households moved out of poverty in communities in Oaxaca – the low growth study region –than in communities in Yucatan. There is a positive relationship between a community’s number of initially poor households and its number of movers which is not surprising given that a community with more poor in 1995 also had more potential movers in 1995. For instance, Yosoyuxi in Oaxaca has the highest number of movers (76 percent) and the second highest number of initially poor (91 percent). Sanahcat in Yucatan on the other hand has the lowest number of both movers (6 percent) and initially poor households (42 percent). More formally, a look at correlations show that as the percentage of the population that is chronic poor increases across communities the fraction of those poor able to cross the CPL increases (Correlation -0.86, R-squared = .64).

Fig. 5: Transition Groups Across Communities Table 11 shows the average size of transition groups and poor households in the two study regions. Due to a higher number of movers in Oaxaca coupled with very few fallers in both regions, the number of households in poverty in Oaxaca went from being 13 percentage points higher than Yucatan in 1995, to being 12 percentage points lower in 2005. In other words, while

23

mobility seems high in Mexico when compared to other study countries, the story coming out of Oaxaca is even more impressive: 50 percent of households were perceived to have moved out of poverty over the past ten years, resulting in the community’s poverty rate falling from 85 percent to 36 percent.

Table 11: Study Region Averages, Transition Groups and Poverty Study Region Averages Oaxaca Yucatan Never Poor (non-poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 14.4% 31.3% Fallers (non-poor 1995, poor 2005) 0.3% 0.7% Movers (poor 1995, non-poor 2005) 50.0% 20.9% Chronic poor (poor 1995, poor 2000) 35.3% 47.1% Poor 1995 85.3% 68.0% Poor 2005 35.6% 47.8%

In order to compare mobility patterns across communities, a series of summary statistics were calculated for each. Table 12 shows averages of these statistics for study communities. The Net Prosperity Index tells us that on average, for every 2 households moving down on the Ladder of Life, 8 moved up. The index for churning, shows that 60% of the population has moved up or down at least one step in the last 10 years. As already mentioned, 40% of the poor were able to climb out of poverty while 41% of people were poor 10 years ago and remain poor today. This is uniquely high when compared to other countries in the Moving out of Poverty study. It is however important to note that the majority of communities included in the Mexico study were sampled based on a particularly high growth in incomes over the past ten years.

Table 12: Summary Indices for Selected Communities

Index (see Appendix) Mean Median Net Prosperity (risers – fallers)/total 0.57 0.59 Churning (risers + fallers)/total 0.60 0.59 Moving Out of Poverty Movers / initially poor 0.42 0.46 Net Prosperity of the Poor (poor risers – poor fallers)/initially poor 0.67 0.74 Net Prosperity of the Rich (rich risers – rich fallers)/initially rich 0.31 0.26

The above shows not only high levels of upward mobility and movements out of poverty but also higher mobility at the lower (poorer) tail of the welfare distribution than in the upper tail. Net Prosperity Index of Poor, tells us that for every 2 poor households that moved down, 9 moved up, while the net Prosperity Index of Rich, shows that for every rich household that moved down, 2 moved up. Also, as Net Prosperity rises across communities, the Net Prosperity of the Poor (Correlation .92, R-squared = .65) and the Moving Out of Poverty (Correlation .53, R-squared = .39) indices rise as well. The below table provides the ranking of communities for a selected number of indices. Communities are ranked from 1-12 based on information from the female focus groups, 1 being the highest, and from 1 to 10 based on information from the male focus groups. Again the data indicates stronger perceptions of mobility in Oaxaca, especially in terms of movements out of poverty. As mentioned earlier and as will be discussed in more detail below, while Oaxaca as a

24

region offers less economic opportunity, US migration plays a pivotal role in Oaxaca, and provides a fast way ahead for a great number of households.

Table 13: Mobility Indices by Community

Source: Focus Group Discussions, ‘Ladder of Life’

B. Processes behind Community Prosperity and Community Mobility Profiles How people view changes in livelihoods and inequality in the past ten years can help put the above analysis of mobility profiles and indices into context. Coupled with a look at events deemed particularly important for community prosperity over the past ten years, this section also begins to explain why regional differences play out differently than one might expect. In other words, it may shed further light on why perceptions of prosperity and mobility are so much stronger in communities located in the poorer, low growth region Oaxaca.

i. Changes in Sources of Livelihoods in the Past Ten Years In the 5 successful communities in Oaxaca, both men and women noted how people are forced to leave their communities due to the lack of jobs and economic opportunity. Agriculture has traditionally been the main source of livelihood, however today this activity consists mainly of subsistence farming. Remittances are rapidly replacing agriculture as the main source of income in all communities, as more and more people migrate to find jobs elsewhere in Mexico or in the US. Women in Abejones describe how this trend has changed their community in the past ten years: “The husbands always go to the US to work in the harvests there. Earlier they did not leave, or only to go to other states in Mexico, but now they are going to the United State” (woman, 42).“Here there is no longer anyone who works in agriculture, everybody leaves to the North [the US]”, (woman, 35). The 5 communities are at different stages of US migration. Macuiltiangius has experienced mass migration to the US for the past twenty years while the two Triqui communities - Carrizal and Yosoyuxi - are only now beginning to experience international migration. In Abejones and Guadalupe de Morelos, mass-migration occurred over the past ten years. A more detailed review of the migratory experience of communities in Oaxaca, and how the effects of migration evolve over time, will be given in chapter 3. Local people felt that the main reason for out migration was the lack of economic opportunity and that their local sources of employment and livelihood (agriculture) are poor and insecure. Says a woman (42) from Abejones: “Sometimes the harvest does not turn out well, there is no rain, and

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female MaleCarrizal 2 na. 2 na. 5 na. 1 na. 9 na.Yosoyuxi 3 na. 3 na. 2 na. 4 na. 10 na.Guadalupe 4 6 4 6 10 5 6 5 12 2Macuiltianguis 5 3 5 4 3 1 3 1 3 1Abejones 7 1 7 1 8 3 7 2 5 7San Pedro 1 9 1 9 1 10 1 9 1 6San Simon 6 2 6 2 4 6 8 8 4 10Sahcaba 8 5 8 5 7 7 5 3 2 3Quintana 9 4 9 3 9 4 10 6 11 9Chan Chochola 11 7 10 8 12 8 12 7 8 4Santa Rosa 10 8 11 7 11 2 11 4 7 5Sanahcat 12 10 12 10 6 9 9 10 6 8

Oaxaca

'low

' gro

wth

COMMUNITY

Prosperity Index[risers/total]

Net Prosperity Index[(risers-fallers)/total]

Shared Mobility Index[mobility of poor - mobilty

of non-poor]

Mobility of the Poor[initially poor risers/

initially poor]MOP Index

[movers/initially poor]

25

men do better if they go to work in the United States”. A woman (31) from Carrizal agrees: “There are no jobs here, they [the migrants] leave to get some money, the lands are not fertile and we don’t have enough food during the year.” In Yosoyuxi, migration was also seen as having replaced agriculture as the most important economic activity in the past ten year: As one man (61) says: “Most of us leave the community to work to Culiacán, Ensenada, and the United States. It is difficult to go over there [the US] but it is better because there is more money there. Here we have nothing.” The difference in wages between Mexico and the US was noted in all communities, as stated by a man (55) from Carrizal: “Over there [in the US], they earn well, not like here”. People in Guadalupe de Morelos felt the US is their only option, a necessity, if you want to move ahead: “They [the migrants] are forced to migrate; it is not out of free will” (woman, 49). “If you want to get anything here in life, you have to leave” (man, 43). Even in Macuiltianguis, the only community in Oaxaca that offers sources of employment beyond the traditional agricultural activity, people complained about the lack of jobs. The community owns a sawmill located in the community itself as well as a factory in Tuxtepec: “Here there are no factories to work in, and in Tuxtepec they are already saturated with people. Here there is nothing to work in” (man, 70). One woman (39) explains why her husband was forced to leave for the US, even though he held a job at the communal enterprise: “My husband had to migrate to the US. Earlier he worked in the forestry enterprise and he did the work that the ejido authorities assigned to him, but the children keep growing and their needs increase, and this forced him to leave. Only by leaving the community could he save more and send money so that we can build a bigger house. By working here you can’t do that because what you earn is minimal.” Finally, education is another reason why people migrate. Community members with higher education have to leave their communities to find appropriate employment. In such cases, people migrate mainly to other Mexican cities, be it Oaxaca City or Mexico City. As one man (33) from Macuiltianguis says: “You finish your education, but here they can’t find a job and they can’t maintain themselves and they have to move to the city”. In the five successful communities in Yucatán, agriculture still remains a key source of income. However, as witnessed in Oaxaca, more and more people leave their communities to find employment. Important structural changes occurred in all 5 communities in the past 20 years as a result of the slow down in henequen4 production as state-owned enterprises finally buckled under the falling world prices for the commodity. These companies employed ejido members in the study communities, who used to receive a daily salary as well as social security coverage. When the companies closed down, the national agricultural bank – Banrural – filled the void until the early 1990s. Following this, farming became a more insecure source of income and more and more people moved or began commuting to nearby cities such as Cancun and Merida. Also, in the late 1990s, Yucatán attracted export-oriented textile factories (maquiladoras), which offered another source of employment for people willing to commute. As in Oaxaca, it is the lack of economic opportunity within the communities themselves that forces people to leave. Says a young woman (31) from Quintana Roo: “Those that leave the community are forced to leave because there are no jobs here.” She continues: “There are no

4 The henequen plant is an agave used to produce a fiber suitable for rope or twine. It was known as the ‘green gold’ (oro verde) in Yucatan due to the wealth is lavished upon hacienda owners during the boom years in the early 1900s, however from the 1920s onwards, market prices and demand for henequen began to fall due to new entrants into the global market and synthetic substitutes (nylon), In 1993, after three decades of massive subsidies to support a collapsing industry, the Mexican government withdrew support. This left 38,000 farmers and workers – most of them Mayan – without a job.

26

jobs here. And the government only helps with Procampo and Oportunidades for economic improvement. They don’t provide us with other jobs.” Focus group participants in other communities repeated this general story, exemplified in this statement from a woman (38) in Chan Cochola: “There are no jobs here, the majority of the people go to Merida” (woman, 38). People in Quintana Roo noted that while agriculture remains an important economic activity, there are more and better job opportunities in Cancun or Merida. “There are no sources of steady jobs but if you leave the community to try your luck in places such as Merida and Cancun, things improve a little as there are more diverse employment opportunities there” (man 60). Many commented on the differences in the wages you can earn in the city compared to in the community: Says one man (46) from Chan Chochola: “The people who leave the community to work can earn up to 140 pesos a day” (man 46). Another man (50) adds: “Here there is never enough money, only a few times can you earn about 80 pesos a day in agriculture.” Men in Santa Rosa focused on the lack of credit and support for agriculture, which has made this a less viable income source. “The lack of money has not allowed people to dedicate themselves to agriculture and it has made people leave their community to look for work” (man, 39). Women in Santa Rosa discussed the shift away from henequen production in more detail noting that ten years ago almost everyone worked in henequen. They remember the closing of the henequen production as a time of crisis for the community. Some got pensions and others got a severance pay however not all: “Many were left out and have no support and some of them are now 60 years old. They had to go to Merida to work in construction” (woman, 52). They also noted that age is an obstacle to accessing opportunities outside the community, as many employers, above all the textile factories, do not hire people above 40 years of age. “If you were younger you could work in whatever” (woman, 52). Other obstacles to finding a job outside the community mentioned in this and other communities were lacking education and the cost of commuting (bus fares and food expenses). Box 3 shows how people in Sanahcat experienced these changes in the past ten years.

Box 3: Changes in Livelihoods in the Past Ten Years as Experiences by People in Sanahcat

The story told by people in Sanahcat exemplifies the general changes that occurred in the study communities in Yucatán. Locals estimate that people began leaving in larger numbers in the early 1990s following the fall in henequen production and the end of steady employment in the ejido. Today, only farmers and housewives stay behind. “Now, people leave the community to find jobs in construction, agriculture, to sell firewood or to work as an agricultural day laborer. Many go to Merida to work. The only ones that stay are the ones who work in the milpa and the women in their houses” (man, 50). “There are those that leave to work in Merida. There are more that leave now than ten years ago” (woman 39). When we ask men in the community how many have jobs outside the village, their estimates ran from just about everyone to about one third. They all agree however that the numbers have increased greatly in the past ten years.

People in Sanahcat identify the lack of employment, and end of henequen in particular, as the key detonator of current trends towards urbanization and commuting to nearby cities. One man (50) says: “15 years ago, henequen was the only livelihood here. When this ended, many people went to other places to look for jobs.” “The henequen crisis made people leave for Merida and Cancun” (man, 41). Women in the community echoed these views, as this woman (49): “The men leave because there are no jobs here. Earlier we made our living in henequen.” People also note that farming has become less productive in the past years, which forces men to look for work elsewhere: “They leave because many of them work in agriculture and there are no harvests any longer” (woman 49).

The women did not distinguish between men that engage in short-term migration to nearby cities and return every weekend, and those that bring their family and move permanently. They also note that often it is just

27

a question of time before one leads to the other. Many commute daily and women have also started to work in the city. A woman (56) tells us her experience: “I am a single mother with 2 daughters and I go to Merida Monday through Saturday to work” (woman 56).

They all agree that those that find a job outside the community and outside agriculture are a little better off. “Those who leave have a little more than those who stay” (woman 49). “There are people who stay in the village and they earn nothing. Others leave daily” (woman, 37). Source: Focus group discussions with men and women in Sanahcat While US migration was not widespread in any of the study communities we visited in Yucatán, it is clearly an emerging option. Says one man (50) from Quintana Roo: “There is still not much migration to the US here. We are not like Centillo which has already established contacts over there” (man, 50). It is important to note that Quintana Roo is located between Tunkas and Cenotillo two of the top-ranked municipalities in Yucatán in terms of level of US migration. The signal effects from neighboring communities were evident, as local people know that wealthier households there derive their income from US migration and remittances. Returning migrants is another source of information. A member of the municipal presidency tells us that: “The number of people leaving for the US is increasing as people get more information from those that already left.” Younger community members already see international migration as one of their best options: “Now, the US is our source of employment” (woman, 27). Isolated cases of US migration were referred to also in Sanahcat and it was noticed how households with US migrants were already relatively better off. Says a man (40) from Sanahcat: “Those that work in the US live better”. Adds another man (63) “Those that go to the US are the smart ones and we are the doomed ones” (man 63). Interestingly, US migration has also begun from the poorest community in Yucatán, San Simon, where the first four migrants left for the US 3 years ago. At the same time, very few people commute to nearby cities, a strategy so common in successful communities. The latter can be explained by the community’s location too far from Merida for a daily commute. Signal effects from other communities within the same municipality also play a role as US migration has been on the rise here for the past ten years. The general lack of economic opportunity within the community itself described in both Yucatán and Oaxaca, also characterizes the two ‘non-successful’ communities in our sample. A key difference however is the smaller numbers of people from these communities that are able to leave. The obstacles faced by individuals in these two communities were higher mainly due to low levels of human capital (education and language skills) and a lack of information. In the poorest community in Oaxaca, San Pedro el Alto, people tell us their main source of income is weaving hats of palm. A man tells us that no matter how able of a weaver you are, one person can produce maximum 3 hats in a day. By weaving 2 or 3 hats a day they earn about 6 or 7 pesos – less than a dollar a day and not enough to live on. “The income from the sombreros is small and not enough to eat well” (woman, 49), Households also farm for self-consumption, however the land is arid and there is no irrigation so harvests are temporal. Also here, people are being forced to leave, however leaving the community to work is a recent phenomenon and few venture beyond the municipal center and the regional head town, Tlaxiaco. “2 years ago people began to leave to work close to San Mateo or Tlaxiaco. They have a little more money, but not much - about 20 or 30 pesos a day. If they work in construction they can earn more but it is difficult to get jobs because not everyone speaks Spanish” (woman, 40). “Two years ago people began to go to other communities to look for work. They leave out of necessity and also because more people can speak Spanish now” (woman, 40). The men confirm that leaving the community to work is a recent phenomenon: “There are no employment opportunities. People are just now beginning to come from outside the community to offer temporal jobs” (man, 33). It was also noted by women

28

that speaking Spanish is the determining factor for who leaves and who doesn’t. Says one woman (40): “If people don’t speak Spanish, they are too scared to leave the village” In the poorest community in Yucatán, San Simon, agriculture remains the main activity and there are no other sources of income in the village itself. Says one woman (46) “Here there are no jobs. Here there are only farmers. We are poor and it is a small village. Here there are no people with money that will pay you to work.” A young woman (29) sums up the general view of people in her community when she says: “Here, people have very few opportunities to make money” (woman, 29). Families in San Simon grow mainly corn and sometimes beans, and most of it is for self-consumption. Men insisted on the low returns to farming which they link back to the lack of irrigation systems and bad weather which leads to poor or lost harvests. Says one man (40) “The last couple of years have been total losses […] If it is not because of a draught, it’s a cyclone or a hurricane.” Another man (34) adds: “Many of these crops are temporal. We need water in order to obtain a full-year production.” People in San Simon noted that sources of livelihoods have changed in the past ten years, mainly because people now leave the community to work: “Now people leave for Uxmal and Merida. Before people did not leave” (woman, 46). When they leave, people from San Simon work in different activities, however it is all unskilled work. Says one man: “Today, men here are construction workers or gardeners at the hotels. Earlier we were just corn farmers” (man, 40). Other men commented that men from San Simon only work as helpers to construction workers, and that very few work as actual construction workers. The women noted that lack of skills and experience outside of agriculture is a key obstacle. Says one woman (57): “They don’t know any other type of work, this is what they know how to do, although some work as helpers on construction sites.” Adds another (42): “We won’t prosper unless we work outside agriculture, and as we are farmers we don’t know how to do anything else.”

ii. Changes in Inequality in the Past Ten Years Section A showed that upward mobility was seen as far more common across communities than downward mobility – albeit to a varying degree. This section asks how this progress was distributed. Did inequality increase or decrease in the past ten years? From the comparison of indices measuring mobility among poorer households (see table 13), we noted that Oaxaca generally scored higher than Yucatan. A look at what people expressed in focus group discussions brings a more nuanced view. In successful communities in Oaxaca, where the number of people who leave the community for the US has increased rapidly in the past ten years, community members in general felt that inequality in their communities has increased. Women in Guadalupe de Morelos said that the gap between the top and bottom steps has increased because those at the top have a little more today than they did ten years ago. They felt this was mainly because members of households at the top have spent more time working in the US. Both men and women related increased inequality back to migration: As one man from Guadalupe (43) notes: “Only after people began leaving for the US did we begin to have things such as the rich, the poor and the half-rich.” Participants in Focus Groups Discussions held in other communities in Oaxaca also felt that inequality has increased in the past ten years due to US migration. The general pattern described is one of moving from a situation where everyone is poor to a situation where some have a little more than others. For instance, women in Abejones noted how those who migrate are able to have nicer thing, things that weren’t seen in the village ten years ago. Says one woman (48): “Now one can see better things in the community such as houses or cars”. Men in Carrizal felt inequality has increased because people today have more opportunity and money, while “ten years ago we all were the same, we were all poor” (man, 37).

29

The women in Carrizal described a slightly different situation. Increased community union and the fact that people now help each other more, together with improved access to electricity and a highway, have led to more equality and less differences between families. Yet even in this group a woman (39) note the differences created by migration: “Ten years ago, people felt more equal economically because there was not that much migration. Everybody lived in similar conditions” Interestingly, Macuiltianguis – the village with the longest experience with mass migration to the US – show a different pattern. Here, both men and women felt that the gap between the better off and the worst off has decreased in the past ten years. Men said this was because today more people have the same opportunities to move ahead and to move out the poverty. Women agreed and explained that ten years ago only a few had become better off, while most people were still poor. Says one woman from Macuiltianguis: “Inequality was stronger ten years ago because there were just a few people who lived well and everybody else were very poor.” In Macuiltianguis, ‘living well’ was linked to US migration also ten years ago. As will be discussed further in chapter 3, other studies on migration in Mexico have shown that international remittances tend to initially increase inequality within communities, however this negative effect is reduced as more and more people migrate. Also, the poverty reduction effect of remittances increases as the intensity of migration in a community increases. A first look at people’s perceptions of inequality in Macuiltianguis and other Oaxacan communities seems to confirm this. Macuiltianguis also ranks among the top 1 or 2 communities in terms of shared growth indices (see table 13). People in successful communities in Yucatán were more split in terms of how they viewed changes in inequality over the past ten years. Many felt inequality has increased, mainly because more people leave the community to work. Women in Quintana Roo explain: “Now there are more rich people as people are getting education, they leave the community or they get jobs in government” (woman, 44). The men in this community agreed, saying that while many of the poorest live in the same conditions as ten years ago, those who live best live better. Women in Sanahcat see the same thing happening in their community: there are more people at the upper levels today and the upper levels are ‘higher’ in terms of wellbeing. One woman also noted that a strong generational shift had taken place in the past ten years which has caused differences to grow “Because now there are more youth who leave the community to work, people when they get married have less children and they can have a little more” (woman, 37). Increased generational differences were noted in many communities as people felt older adults have a harder time finding jobs outside their communities: They have less formal education and in addition, some employers operate with upper age limit and will not hire anyone above 40 years of age. Men from Sahcaba felt that everybody are generally better off today, however they are no longer equals due to levels of education and types of jobs you can get: ”We all have improved but we don’t live in the same conditions”(man, 62). People in Santa Rosa also feel that there are more differences between people today. Says one woman (32): “Earlier it wasn’t noticeable. There weren’t a lot of differences between people, but now you can notice it a little bit. There are some who dress and eat better.” Others felt that the differences were too small to talk about: “The difference is small because most people are poor” (woman, 46). The men in this community felt the gap between the top and bottom has stayed the same, and blames this on the lack of jobs. Women in Chan Chochola also say that those who leave earn a little more than people used to ten years ago, however they feel that due to the cost of transportation and living expenses in the cities, there is no difference in the end. They conclude that the gap has not changed. The men in Chan Chochola felt inequality has diminished because there is no longer anyone who receives a steady salary from the ejido. Says one man (48): “The

30

communal land ended, and the former president Carlos Salinas gave a symbolic severance pay. Before this there were a few jobs with weekly or biweekly salaries, but now there is no support.” In Sahcaba, women noted that differences between families have fallen, mainly because of a federal housing project after Hurricane Isidoro, which benefited many families who used to live in poor housing. In the non-successful communities in both states, focus groups concluded that there was little inequality to talk about. Says one woman (40) from San Pedro el Alto, Oaxaca: “There is no economic inequality. Here everyone is poor.” Some women still felt that inequality had increased over the last ten years, because more people are leaving the community to work. Says a young woman (28) “Those that leave change.” Another woman (35) adds: “The only differences there are, are between those that sell hats and those that sometimes leave the community to work”. The weaving of hats is the traditional economic activity in the community. Some of the difference manifests itself in how people dress, especially in those that return form the US: “There is some differences between the people today because ten years ago everybody dressed the same” (woman, 42). One woman (37) however noted that at the same time the poorest in the community live better today: “The poor are better than before, few continue to live in palm houses and they now wear shoes.” The picture painted in San Simon, Yucatán, was similar, but more static. The women didn’t like to talk about differences but in the end agreed that the gap has grown slightly “It has increased [the gap] but only a little bit. Here we are all equal” (woman, 39). They insisted, however that these differences are not very noticeable. People at the top of the ladder are those who own small grocery stores according to the women, however these are few, and they don’t earn much more money than others in the community. The men felt that nothing has changed as everybody is poor and has always been poor in their community. A woman (53) sums up the general feeling in the community this way: “Here, we are all equal: we are all poor.”

Table 14: People’s Perceptions of Changes in Inequality in the Past Ten Years

YUCATÁN OAXACA

Male Female Total Male Female Total

TOTAL

Over the past ten years, the gap between the top and the bottom step has:

1. Increased 33% 67% 50% 83% 67% 75% 63%

2. Stayed the same 50% 17% 33% - - - 17%

3. Decreased 17% 17% 17% 17% 33% 25% 21%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

iii. What Helped and Hindered Community Prosperity in the Past Ten Years Focus groups in all communities were asked to debate which factors have helped and hindered community prosperity the most over the past ten years and the below table (table 9) summarizes the conclusions from these discussions. Overall, improved access to and support for education was perceived by people as one of the most positive events of the past ten years. Migration was clearly seen as one of the factors that have affected communities in Oaxaca the most, having had both positive and negative effects. In addition, infrastructure was seen as an important help for community prosperity when improved, and as an important hindrance when not. The importance given to infrastructure relates back to the difficult topography of the state and the remote location of many of the communities. Communities in Yucatán also mentioned lacking infrastructure as a

31

hindrance. Yucatán is prone to hurricanes and hurricane Isidoro (2002) was listed by most groups as one of the most damaging events in the past ten years. Table 15: Local People’s Perceptions of Factors behind Changes in Community Prosperity over the

Past 10 years, Successful Communities All Oaxaca Yucatán Positive factors and events

The government’s cash transfer program Oportunidades

Improved educational opportunity (both in terms of facilities and ‘attitudes’)

Improved infrastructure

Migration

Improved infrastructure

Migration

Social unity and the local government model Usos y Costumbres

Improved educational opportunity

Oportunidades

Improved educational opportunity

The federal Natural Disaster Relief Fund, FONDEN

PROCAMPO – agricultural subsidy

Negative factors and events

Natural disasters (hurricanes)

Lack of economic opportunity and employment

Lacking infrastructure and basic services

Migration

Lacking basic services and infrastructure

Migration

Language barriers (not speaking Spanish very well)

Violence and conflict

Natural disasters

Lack of economic opportunity and employment

Lacking infrastructure

Local politics and local government

Source: 20 Ladder of Life Focus Group Discussions Interestingly, local government and social unity came up as a key driver of community prosperity in Oaxaca, while in Yucatán, local politics and political division was seen as something that hindered communities to prosper. As mentioned earlier, the communities in the two states operate under different forms of local government (see box 22 for more information on the system in place in Oaxaca). In Oaxaca, the system of local government Usos y Costumbres is an institution built on and supported by strong (village-based) social capital and communal unity. Local government and officials are seen as positive actors for community prosperity acting with the common good in mind. In Yucatán, party politics frequently leads to political division, which is seen to hamper community prosperity. Issues of local government and social capital are discussed in chapter 5.

C. Household Mobility

i. Levels of Wellbeing – The steps of the Ladder This section looks at characteristics assigned by local people to the different levels of wellbeing in their communities as represented in the Ladder of Life. This was done in the course of 24 focus group discussions held with men and women separately. In each focus group, participants drew a ‘Ladder of Life’ depicting levels of wellbeing within their communities and the ways households climb and fall (or stagnate) at the different levels. Figure 6 at the end of this chapter, replicates the Ladder of Life drawn in one of the communities in Oaxaca. Looking across the findings from all communities we find many commonalities and some important differences.

Households that follow the above-mentioned trends in sources of livelihoods and that engage in new sectors of employment or income generation have higher levels of wellbeing. The strongest employment pattern across ladders in both states is that in households no longer considered poor, one or more family members work outside the community. In Yucatán, people

32

commute to nearby cities (Merida and Cancun), to tourist centers (Uxmal and Chichen-itzá) and places where textile factories (maquiladoras) are located. In Oaxaca, working outside the community involves migrating to Mexico City, to agricultural states in Northern Mexico or to the US. This finding concords with the discussions in sources of livelihoods described above. While working outside the community involves a shift from farm of off-farm employment in Yucatán, this switch in sector of economic activity is less pronounced in Oaxaca and overshadowed by national and international migration. Many of those who go to work in Northern Mexico and the US continue working in the agricultural sector. In Oaxaca, type and length of migration affect a family’s level of wellbeing: Households with US migrants, legal US migrants and US migrants who have stayed abroad for longer periods of time rank highest on most ladders. For both states, lower levels of wellbeing tend to be associated with a higher dependency on agriculture.

Table 16: Perceived Characteristics of Different Levels of Wellbeing, Employment and Income Bottom 2 steps Step where households are no

longer considered poor Top 1-2 steps

Employment and sources of income

Unemployed or unable to work Farm for own food if able to Head of HH work as agricultural day laborer Head of HH does not migrate Head of HH does not work outside the community Families makes and sell handicrafts

Head of HH works outside the community in temporary jobs in agriculture and construction, or Head of HH has a steady job with benefits ( teachers, factory workers) Oaxaca: HH members have migrated to Mexico City, Northern Mexico or the US Family still farms for own food and also sell their produce Women contribute economically (make handicrafts, wash clothes or sell tortilla and other food) Yucatán: women may have salaried work Many own small grocery stores and/or raise animals

Teachers w/steady salary and benefits Families often have grocery store, bakery or tortilla shops in the community Many still farm on the side or raise and sell animals More than one member of the HH works and wife typically contribute by selling other produce or services Oaxaca: migrants, above all legal US migrants with steady jobs Yucatán: Off-farm employment outside the community, wife may have salaried employment

Human capital – formal education and language skills– was another factor used by local people to describe the different levels of wellbeing within their communities (see table 17). Characteristics of the poorest households include low education levels with poor knowledge of Spanish. Adults in these households often do not know how to read and write and they speak only an indigenous language or speak Spanish very poorly. Poor language skills at the bottom steps are particularly pronounced in the two non-successful communities. It was also more often mentioned in Oaxaca than in Yucatán. At the level where households are no longer considered poor, members of the households are bilingual. In Oaxaca, an interesting phenomenon occurs at the top steps: some adults are trilingual as they speak both English and Spanish in addition to their indigenous language. In terms of formal education, differences are most commonly seen in the younger generations. Few children and youth below the upper levels of wellbeing are able to graduate from high school. Chapter 4 takes a closer look at the how’s and why’s of education as a mechanism for upward mobility.

33

Table 17: Perceived Characteristics of Different Levels of Wellbeing, Language and Education Bottom 2 steps Step where households are

no longer considered poor Top 1-2 steps

Language In Oaxaca, adults often don’t speak Spanish or speak it badly In Yucatán, most speak Spanish, or at least understand it Exception: ‘non-successful’ community in Yucatán where adults are monolingual and do not speak Spanish

Bilingual Bilingual Migrant head of HH or other members are often trilingual (Indigenous language, Spanish, English)

Education Maximum primary school Adults of the households are often illiterate and have no schooling

Parents have primary while children finish secondary Sometimes, children go to high school

Children finish secondary at least More graduate high school and in some cases continue onto university and college

Source: FGD Ladder of Life in 12 communities Characteristics related to demographics – in particular dependency ratios – emerge across all communities (see table 18). Bottom steps contain households made up of elderly and families with many small children. Moving up the ladder, there are fewer children or older children – while the head of household is at a working age. Families where the head of the household is a woman, single mothers and widows, are also placed at the bottom of the ladder. Table 18: Perceived Characteristics of Different Levels of Wellbeing, Household Demographics

Bottom 2 steps Step above CPL Top 1-2 steps Many children (5-10) Elderly Widows or single mothers Disabled

Less children than bottom steps, but more than top ones In some communities, households still have children in school age, while in others, children are grown and work

Fewer children (1-3) Children are grown and often work Oaxaca: One or more family member live and work in the US

Source: FGD Ladder of Life in 12 communities

Finally, households differ in terms of the type and magnitude of support or transfers they receive (see table 19). When the government program Oportunidades is not present at bottom step, it is used as a characteristic of the poorest. In most communities, households at the level where they are no longer considered poor by their community also receive Oportunidades, however only in very few communities do households at top steps. Households at the bottom of the ladder do not have social security coverage, which is only found in households where one or more members have formal employment (located above the community poverty line). In terms of private transfers, one of the key characteristics in many communities of the lowest levels of wellbeing is that they receive no financial support from other family members. Moving up the ladder, support from children becomes more frequent and in Oaxaca in particular, remittances from relatives in other parts of the country or in the US increase. At the top steps, remittances are largely international. Factors related to working outside the community are much more pronounced in successful than non-successful communities. As a result of this, private transfers are not mentioned as a characteristic that affects a household’s rank in the poorer communities.

34

Table 19: Perceived Characteristics of Different Levels of Wellbeing, Government and other Support

Bottom 2 steps Step above CPL Top 1-2 steps

Those who own or have access to land receive Procampo Some receive Oportunidades, yet in a few communities, not receiving Oportunidades characterizes the bottom steps (especially if elderly) No social security and no family support May receive help from local government or charity

Oportunidades and Procampo In a few cases, social security Children help out financially Households in Oaxaca begin to receive national and international (US) remittances

Those with formal jobs have social security Children help out financially Land owners receive Procampo Only a few receive Oportunidades Households receive more remittances and in Oaxaca these are predominantly from the US

Source: FGD Ladder of Life in 12 communities In conclusion then, people typically identify households at the bottom steps as working in agriculture, having lower levels of human capital, having higher dependency ratios and receiving less public and private transfers. These perceptions are mirror images of findings from econometric analysis of determinants of poverty in Mexico. Given that the 12 communities are predominantly indigenous, people’s perceptions do not capture important differences between indigenous and non-indigenous populations. As discussed in box 4, ethnicity and location are also important determinants of poverty.

Box 4: Determinants of Poverty in Mexico Ramirez (2006) uses logistic regression analysis to examine the probability of being poor for the population 18 years and above. The factors that affect the probability according to this analysis can be classified into three groups: (i) factors related to employment; (ii) factors related to education and (iii) factors related to household demographics.

The clearest result in terms of factors related to employment, is that the probability of being poor increases when the head of household is employed in the agricultural sector. Farm employment is one of the factors with the greatest negative marginal effect on the probability of being poor. Working in agriculture increases an individual’s probability of being extremely poor by 6 percent and moderately poor by 14 percent. On the other hand, off-farm employment, excepting employment in construction, decreases an individual’s probability of being poor. Working in service or manufacturing decreases the probability of being moderately poor by 9 and extremely poor by 7 percent. When the head of household is unemployed, the probability of being poor also increases.

In terms of education, years of schooling reduces the probability of being poor, have a large impact and reduces the probability of being poor. The regression results show that with an average level of schooling (7,59 years of schooling), the probability of being moderately poor, is reduced by 39 percent and the probability of being extremely poor by 11 percent.

An individual living in households with a higher number of dependents will have a higher probability of being poor. The presence of children – in particular small children –increases the probability of being poor and every additional child below 6 years of age raises the probability of being moderately poor by 20 percent. Presence of adolescence and elderly also affects the probability of being poor positively. The gender of head of households also matters, as the probability of being poor increases if head of HH is a woman.

Finally, Ramirez’ study also shows that factors related to ethnicity and location are strong determinants of poverty: living in an indigenous municipality, and in rural areas increases an individual’s probability of being poor.

For all factors the probabilities differ between indigenous and non-indigenous. An indigenous individual working in the agricultural sector has a 72 percent probability of being poor, compared to only

35

34 percent for a non-indigenous worker in the agricultural sector. At any given level of education, the probability of being poor is higher for indigenous individuals than for non-indigenous. In other words, even with similar education levels, indigenous people have a much higher probability of being poor than do non-indigenous people. Adding to this, the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous probabilities increases with level of education. The probability of an indigenous individual with incomplete secondary schooling being extremely poor is five times higher than for a non-indigenous. It is almost ten times higher with secondary schooling completed. Source: Ramirez (2006)

ii. Factors of Mobility – Moving Up and Down the Ladder What this study adds to our understanding of poverty is a more in-depth inquiry into the how’s and why’s of mobility. Having first given their view of the characteristics that define a household’s placement on the Ladder of Life, local people discussed how households moved up and down between levels of welfare in the past ten years. Looking across the Ladders of Life drawn in all 12 communities, we asked local people: which factors do local people think are causing households to climb, stagnate or fall? As is to be expected, these factors relate strongly to the different characteristics of the steps as outlined above. Again, key groups of factors include employment, education, life cycle factors or demographics and public and private transfers. In addition, idiosyncratic shocks (illness, old age, etc) and systematic shocks (natural disasters) were seen to cause stagnation and/or downward movement. Annex 1 provides an overview of these factors. Finding employment outside the community help people climb at all levels of the ladder. In Yucatán this typically refers to commuting to nearby towns and cities to find off-farm employment, while in Oaxaca it refers to migration to other parts of Mexico or to the US. In Yucatán, working outside the community is tightly linked with moving from farm to off-farm employment. As such, formal education becomes a key factor as it allows people to employment in sectors other than agriculture. In Oaxaca, finding a job outside the community primarily means migrating, either to Mexico City, Northern Mexico or the US. Across communities in Oaxaca, US migration was seen as key to upward mobility, and the fastest way out of poverty. What people note is that place and length of migration matter as you move further if you go to the US and if you stay longer or make several trips. In communities where US migration is just starting it was noted that only the better off households were able to migrate due to the high costs. In communities where mass migration has been going on for decades, households originally at the bottom of the ladder have also engaged in US migration. In other words, temporal aspects of migration as well as the community’s migratory experience are important. Finally, continued US migration was seen as necessary to maintain your place at the top of the ladder. Says one man (47) from Macuiltianguis who identified himself as belonging to the top step: “If we don’t cross the border, we can’t maintain our families at this level” (Man, 47, Macuiltianguis). The role of migration will be discussed in more depth in chapter 3. Also related to employment, people move up the ladder as more members of the household join the labor force. Many communities mentioned that when more family members join the work force, the household’s welfare increases. One group of women felt that one of the main reasons for stagnation for some households has been “that the women don’t work” (woman, 60, Yosoyuxi). This is echoed in Yucatán where households were seen as being able to move up only “If the husband and the wife work. They both have to work” (woman, 29, Santa Rosa)

36

Education and language skills are perceived as both mechanisms for upward mobility and as a factor that can cause stagnation. At the lower levels of the ladder, lacking knowledge of Spanish is often a key obstacle to upward mobility: “There are a few who don’t speak Spanish and they can’t leave the community to look for better jobs because nobody understand them” (Man, 30, Abejones). Women in Abejones also felt that people at the lower levels often are not able to invest in education which then become the major obstacle to moving ahead: Says one woman (32): “If we do not invest in the education of our children we can’t move ahead” This view was echoed in all communities. Women also note that not having received education prevents them in helping their children do well at school: “When the children have homework we can’t help them because we do not know how to. If we had gone to school it would have been different” (woman, 29, Macuiltianguis). While households at the lower levels move ahead by learning Spanish and learning to read and write, households further up on the ladder move ahead by providing their children with higher levels of education. A woman (29) from Macuiltianguis sums the general view up this way: “We can move up through our children, the adults who encouraged and supported their children to study already live better because their children now support them.” Most communities noted supporting your children beyond lower-secondary schooling is where it gets difficult, mainly due to the lack of schools. Lifecycle factors cause mobility and/or stagnation. Most importantly old age is seen as an impediment to upward mobility or a cause for downward movement. As people grow old they are less able to work, and without any support from younger family members old age pushes households into, or further into, poverty. As a man (63) from Sanahcat puts it: “We can’t improve because we can’t work”. Overall, young people are expected to climb the ladder, elderly are expected to fall or stagnate: “Here there are people who are just starting their lives and they have the probability of climbing. And the old people of falling” (man 39, Santa Rosa) The number and age of children in a household also matter. Having many children is seen as an obstacle to moving ahead not only because it is costly but also because you can’t afford to give them all that they need to move ahead, in particular in terms of education.”Having many children is sometimes a problem because there is not enough money to give them everything they need” (man, 31, Macuiltianguis). When children grow up, finish school and begin to contribute economically, households tend to climb the ladder. If children for some reason do not support their parents, these stagnate or might even fall: “If tomorrow none of your children give you anything, how will you be?” (woman, 54, Sanahcat). Another man (33) from Santa Rosa notes that having aging parents can be a cause for downward mobility: “The obstacles have been […] my parents as they are alone and I am the only one providing for them. My father, Eduardo, is 70 years old and my mother, Maria is 64 years old. I think that if they fall ill, at that very moment, I will fall into poverty.” Savings, sound investments and accumulation of assets are needed to move ahead and to prevent falls back down: Savings matter, not only as a means of upward mobility but also as a safety net: “Those who save are better off, they are safer” (woman, 32, Yosoyuxi). Men in Macuiltianguis discussed how people above the community poverty line needed to invest in a house, a car, or a business in order to climb to the next level and to prevent them from falling back down. “If people start spending all their money instead of investing it in something, well then it is obvious that they will fall” (Man, 33, Macuiltianguis). Savings and investments were typically factors that were at play at the level of the community poverty line and above. Households at lower levels are not able to save. Attitude, hard work and vices (alcohol, drugs, gambling and women) were also commonly mentioned as factors that cause some to rise and others to fall or stagnate. A woman (54) from Santa Rosa felt that the only way to move ahead was to “Work more and gather your

37

money. Work in whatever comes your way and without any rest. Not even taking the time for a siesta”. Other communities and groups agreed: “Hard work is the key to move ahead” (Man, 32, Macuiltianguis). “People who don’t study, and who don’t work hard, who do not work all day, are going to stay as they are because they are lazy” (woman, 37, Macuiltianguis). One group also noted how the poorest sometimes get accustomed to living in poverty and do not show any initiative to move up and out of poverty. “There are those who have adapted to a life in poverty” (man, 55, Sanahcat). Finally, vices and bad habits are other oft-mentioned causes of downward mobility across all communities. In some communities, quitting drinking was seen as a mechanism for upward mobility. Idiosyncratic shocks – above all related to health - together with community-wide shocks such as hurricanes, cause downward movements: In terms of shocks that force people down the ladder or keep them stagnating, none were more often mentioned than illness and health problems: Because of the costs of treatment and medicines, an illness or accident can change a households welfare a lot. “Due to costs and not being able to work, everything starts going downhill” (woman, 46, Guadalupe de Morelos). Women in Macuiltianguis, Oaxaca agree that the most detrimental shock a family can receive is “When the husband falls ill and all the savings and all the money is spent buying medicines” (woman, 65, Macuiltianguis). Men in Abejones, Oaxaca also discuss the loss of income, especially if it is the head of the households that falls ill: “If the head of the household gets sick it becomes a problem because then there is no one who brings home any money. The women don’t work” (man, 61). The death of the head of the household also throws people down the ladder: “If the head of household dies, at any step you fall in the same way” (Woman, 51, Macuiltianguis). Finally natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods and droughts hit at all steps of the ladder. Those that depend most on agriculture, i.e. the lower steps, are hurt the most. Speaking of some of the poorest households in her community one woman (44) from Quintana Roo, says: “They lose all their money when the rain does not fall”. The woman also point out that land is becoming also less fertile which leads to households stagnating as you can’t produce more. “The land is tired. We work and work but it no longer offers much.” While the above findings has been based on people’s perceptions as given during focus group discussions, quantitative analysis based on the information gathered in the household survey corroborates some of these. Table 22 gives the results from an OLS regression estimating the effects on total income of individual and occupational characteristics and of transfers in the 12 study communities. In terms of human capital, each year of schooling increases income by 7 percent, while there is no significant effect for work experience. The results for sectors of employment show that being an employer is the factor that affects incomes the most, as witnessed by a 174 percent increase in income. Transfers also significantly increase incomes. Receiving remittances from the US increases income by 96 percent (in other words, having relatives working in the US nearly doubles a family’s income). Remittances from within Mexico increase incomes by about 20 percent, while public transfers increase incomes by 32 percent. The sample consists of individuals from two poor low-performing communities. Living in one of these communities reduces incomes by 54 percent. Finally, the state dummy tells us that living in Oaxaca as opposed to Yucatán increases incomes by 13 percent. Again, this result might seem counter-intuitive at first given that Oaxaca is one of the poorer states in Mexico, while incomes and income growth are higher than the national averages in Yucatán. This finding can be assumed to be a result of US migration, which is practically non-existent in the study communities in Yucatán but is widespread in the Oaxacan study communities.

38

Table 22: Ordinary Least Squares Regression Results for Total Income

Coeff. S.E. % Dummy

Average schooling of members 12 and holder 0.07 (0.02)*Experience of the head of the household 0.01 (0.017)Experience square -0.0001 (0.0002)Number of household 0.07 (0.025)*

Occupation 1 Worker or day laborer 0.20 (0.152) 20.52% Employer 1.04 (0.25)* 174.60% Sector 2 Head of the household works in agriculture 0.07 (0.136) 6.50% Transfers Remittances Mex (=1) 0.19 (0.15) 19.49% Remittances US (=1) 0.69 (0.18)* 96.35% Public Transfer (=1) 0.28 (0.134)** 31.69% Poor community (=1) -0.78 (0.15)* -54.46% Oaxaca 0.14 (0.14) 13.38% Constant 6.36 (0.45)*N 309 R 2 0.2475

Ordinary Least Squares Regression Results for Total IncomeEstimated effect on the log of the total income (Mincerian Form)

After discussing factors of mobility and stagnation, the focus groups answered a series of questions related to mobility at different levels of the ladder, as we asked: which steps on the ladder are the hardest and the easiest to climb up from? And, which are the easiest and the hardest to fall back down from? Below is a summary of what local people perceived to be the easiest and most difficult step to move out of as well as the easiest and most difficult to fall back down from. It is hardest to move out of the bottom steps of the ladder because (i) households are made up of elderly (or disabled) who receive no support and cant work or families with many small children; (ii) households depend on agriculture which is an insecure source of income; and (iii) because many adults in these households have little education and often a don’t speak Spanish. In almost all 24 focus groups that discussed household mobility, the lowest step was seen as the one most difficult to climb out of. Across communities, households made up of poor elderly with no support were located at the bottom step and these were seen as stuck in poverty with no exit. As one elderly man (78) from Quintana Roo put it: “In the life of the poor there are no exits.” There was overwhelming agreement across communities that poor elderly with no support are the poorest in their communities, and the ones with least opportunity to improve their lot: “The people here [at this step] are already old and they have no support. Sometimes they can’t even work” (woman, 29, Santa Rosa). “Because if you are already old and in addition disabled, what can you do? There’s no help from government” (man, 60, Sanahcat). Men in Quintana Roo also discuss the effect of age on your ability to work: Explains one elderly man (76): “When you turn 76 years old the quality of your work is not the same as when you were young.” The fact that very few elderly receive any kind of social protection programs, apart from those who benefit from Oportunidades makes it even more likely to fall or get stuck due to old age. In short, there are no pensions for the poor: “Here for the elderly, there are no pensions. The only social security you have is six feet under” (man, 40, San Simon). In addition to households made up of elderly, young households are also often at the bottom and they have their own set of problems that hinder them in moving ahead: “Because they have many children and no work, their only hope to move ahead is if the children are able to help” (woman, 33, Chan Chochola).

39

Across communities, households at the bottom of the ladder also depend on agriculture to a higher degree than others. This was seen as an insecure source of income that brings back less and less benefit to the families: Women in Quintana Roo think people at the bottom of the ladder face the most obstacles “because they are farmers and depend on their harvests which are not sure to succeed” (woman, 32) and because “the land no longer produces. The corn grows smaller today” (woman, 63). In many communities they pointed to lacking education and lacking Spanish skills as key constraints for poorer households. In some communities, above all in the non-successful ones, not speaking Spanish is the key obstacle. In San Pedro el Alto, Oaxaca, the men explain why the lowest level is the hardest to climb out of in this way: “They don’t know any trade, they don’t speak Spanish and they don’t leave the community to look for jobs” (man, 45, San Pedro el Alto). A group of women from Yucatán first split down the middle when asked which step offered the least opportunity to move ahead: Half the group said that the lowest step was the hardest to climb out of due to obstacles such as having many children and being old, while the other half felt that households are poor because they don’t work hard. They said that many families stay at the bottom of the ladder because the husband is lazy and that “Those that only scratch their belly won’t gain anything” (woman 53, Sanahcat). In many communities there were one or two similar comments before discussions centered on what was perceived as true obstacles to the upward mobility of the poorest households. After much debate the women in Sanahcat also agreed on this and that households at the bottom actually do have it tougher “because they have a lot of children and when they are little it is difficult to provide for them. Also because they don’t have a job and the government does not help them. In addition these people don’t go to Merida [to work]” (woman, 53, Sanahcat). The steps of the ladder that offer more opportunity for moving ahead were those right above the community poverty line, and in a few cases also the step just below it. Main reasons for this being the easier steps to move up from were: (i) better education and knowledge of Spanish; and (ii) the ability and opportunity to find work outside the community, either by commuting or migrating. Education and job opportunity were seen as tightly linked. In addition, households living above the community poverty line were also seen as having a more secure foundation on which to grow from, mainly due to better, steadier employment. When asked why households at these steps find it easier to climb, one woman answered: “Because people look for work outside the community and find secure work that helps them to a have a bit more money” (woman, 35, Chan Chochola). In Yucatán, family members of households above the CPL often work in sectors other than agriculture. In some of these sectors, e.g. manufacturing, employment is formal which brings many benefits in addition to the salary. The men in Chan Chochola noted that people with formal employment are given more opportunities, because your employer may offer things such as a small loan. It was then seen as easy to move up the ladder for these households, because “the company where they work lends them money to invest in a grocery store or to enable them to continue farming in your free time” (man, 30, Chan Chochola). In Santa Rosa, it was not only the fact of having a steady job that helped these households advance, but also not being Catholic which to the men meant that money would be spent more wisely, above all because the men don’t drink: “They receive a fixed salary, they work in textile factories and they are evangelists. Because of this they use their salaries wisely” (man 49, Santa Rosa). In another community it was noted that at this level of the ladder, women begin working alongside their husbands and there are more opportunity for moving ahead: “Now that a lot of people leave to work in other places and both the husband as well as the wife work, this is how they can make more money” (woman, 54,

40

Santa Rosa). Also, children now help out economically: “At this level everybody have relatives that leave the community to work. Children grow up and go to Merida. The youth are already looking for their own way ahead and they also help their parents” (man 60, Sanahcat). In San Simon, the men also pointed out that at the step just above the CPL there is for the first time the ability to save some of your money. With the savings, the family can invest in something productive, such as animals, which are raised and sold. The men also noted that saving and investing in this way still requires a lot of effort: “There are opportunities to save if you limit what you eat in order to feed the pigs instead”, (man, 40, San Simon). Oaxaca is slightly different due to the role of migration, above all US migration. In Carrizal, it was also the steps above CPL that offered the most opportunity to move ahead. Both men and women mentioned higher access to education at these levels and also the opportunities offered by US migration. At lower levels it was noticed that kids were pulled out of school earlier to help earn money or work in the fields. Migration and higher levels of education was mentioned across communities as reasons why households at the upper steps have more opportunity to move ahead. In Abejones it was also noted that while members where more likely to go to the US, they were also more likely to stay for longer periods which translates into higher levels of remittances flowing back home. Women in Guadalupe noted that it was difficult to move up from any of the steps without help from migrants. The men agreed and noted that households send migrants to the US from all levels, except the bottom two. Women in Macuiltianguis noted that people at the upper steps earn more because they depend on US migrants. Says one woman (39) at this level: “We are better thanks to migration, life is easier, children go to the school and we have more money.” In the poorest community in Oaxaca, the main reasons given by local people for why households living above the community poverty line had better opportunity for upward mobility were savings and language skills: “It is easier to move ahead when they speak Spanish and save” (man, 45, San Pedro el Alto). In general, the top steps were seen as those most difficult to fall down from. The men in Chan Chochola also thought that the step just above the CPL was the hardest to fall back into poverty from as once you have secured a full-time, steady job outside the community you are secure. “You have employment and a stable salary. With this nothing bad can happen to you” (man 50, Chan Chochola). In general, however, the steps of the ladder from which it is the hardest to fall were the top ones. In Quintana Roo, women pointed to how having a formal, steady job and having your own business secured these households’ a steady income. In addition, children are grown up and might be helping out economically. When asked why the top steps offered more security, one woman (53) from Sanahcat answered: “Because by now they have a stable job, a paycheck every two weeks and the children help out and there are not so many children that need to be supported”. Other groups however, felt no step was safer than others “because everybody can fall ill, everybody gets old one day and everybody can lose their job” (woman, 46, Santa Rosa). “No one is safe from what could happen to you. We can all run into problems” (man 63, Sanahcat). Despite more security at the top of the ladder, households at all steps are at risk of falling. Interestingly, most FGDs did not point to a step as more vulnerable to downward movement, and concluded that households can fall from any given step. According to local people, no family can be safe from illness, death, abandonment of head of households, vices such as alcohol, and natural disasters. “Because all can suffer from a sickness and a hurricane will affect us all equally” (woman, 49, Chan Chochola). Old age also inevitable catches up with you and in theory all can fall into the bottom steps, i.e. elderly poor with no support, unless they secure the support of family or employer/government: “As everyone grow older each day and children are growing up, we can all fall into this situation [that of the poor elderly]” (woman, 54, Santa Rosa). The

41

men from Santa Rosa however disagreed noting that shocks such as death and health problems that bring with them expenses are particularly hard on poorer households because they have no extra money to draw on. They gave the example of a death in the family and how many families at the lower steps end up with debts from paying the funeral services. “Because of the death of a family member they take on debts in order to hold the service and they don’t advance, their situation only gets worse” (man, 37, Santa Rosa). Other men added alcoholism to the factors that can strike households at all levels, noting also how factors such as alcoholism and health problems can lead to a depletion of assets as things are sold to face medical bills or to support a vice. Households may fall “because of alcoholism and the death or illness of a family member - all of which force people to sell something they own” (man, 44, San Pedro el Alto). Box 5. Tells the story of a household stagnated at the bottom of the ladder, and the constraints it faces in terms of health shocks. In 1992, Juan’s wellbeing plummeted as he fell ill, and his story illustrates how an illness can spur downward movement. It also shows that once at the bottom, bad health becomes a factor of stagnation and a constraint to upward mobility.

Box 5: The Life History of Juan, 50, Santa Rosa, Yucatán Juan fell ill in 1992, which he thinks explains why things have gotten worse for him over the past ten years. His household was classified by focus groups in his community as always poor. “The situation of my home and for me personally has worsened because for the past 13 years I have been sick…Since that day I only go from the hammock to the chair and from the chair back into the hammock.” The illness has made Juan and his wife 100 percent dependent on his children, in particular one son who works in Merida. They receive no support from government or from other members of the community. Occupational History

Juan never went to school and began working at a very young age, making charcoal that his father sold. At the age of 14 he began working in the ejido. “Everybody worked in henequen and we always had work...You didn’t need education, anybody could begin to work there.” He thinks this period was a good one because both the work and the salary were steady. “We didn’t have to worry about anything. We were more or less well off because we received a secure salary and we didn’t have to go look for jobs”.

In 1993, henequen production shut down and he was laid off as everyone else in the village. “The problem came when the henequen was over because we were laid off. Some got pensions but I didn’t because I was very young and I had only worked there for about 17 years and because of this I didn’t receive a pension.” Juan instead began cultivating chili habanero. “After they laid us off I looked for work cultivating chili habanero because it sold quickly and for a good price… With the money they gave in severance pay I bought my water pump, fertilizers and herbicides. I built a well and everything else I needed. My children were little and they worked with me.” He received government sponsored training and technical assistance alongside other chili farmers in the community. Then, in 1992, he falls ill and can no longer work. Economic History

Economically, Juan felt the safest when he worked in henequen and received a steady salary. However, with his severance pay, he felt he was able to invest for the first time in his life. “Only when I got laid off could I buy some things to grow chili habanero. They gave me 4,200 pesos and with this I could buy a few things in order to grow chili habanero. I bought herbicides, fertilizers, water pumps and motorbike that cost me 1,650 pesos and other things.”

Economically, Juan’s situation plummeted when he fell ill, as he could no longer work and was forced to sell all his assets. “Everything I had, I sold it at bad prices 13 years ago when I fell ill. I sold the motorbike for 700 pesos and lost almost half of its value. The water pumps had cost me 500 pesos and I sold them for 250 pesos and this way I lost everything because of my illness.” Before the illness, Juan was able to save, but now he can’t. He has even stopped taking medicines. “Earlier, yes I would save and because of this I could buy all of this, but since I got this illness I don’t even have enough money for medicines. Because of

42

this I don’t take any.” Since the illness, Juan’s children have supported him. “My son has been working for 12 years in Merida. He was 15 years old when he left. He is the one that helps me the most even if he has his own family” Social, Psychological and Cultural History

Juan can’t lift one of his arms, his body is weak and he can’t stand up on his own. When he fell ill, Juan tells us that the doctors could not tell what was wrong with him. He no longer takes medicines and does not see a doctor: “It’s been 10 years since I last saw a doctor. Sometimes when I have diarrhea, I don’t eat or drink in order not to become worse. I don’t go to the hospital because I need someone to help me to stand up”

Despite his troubles today, Juan feels lucky that he fell ill after his children were already grown up. “I thank the Lord that my children were already grown up when I fell ill. Then they began working and they help me because now not even my own father visits me.” He tells us that when his mother was still alive, his parents would help him with a little money, but since she died, Juan’s father stopped coming to see him. His father receives money both from a pension and from Procampo. When we ask what he would do if he has to face an emergency he answers: “If I had a problem now with my children, or if I fell ill, I don’t have anywhere to seek support. Only from my children who work, but they have their own children and it would hurt them.”

Juan says that he receives no support from the government and that they even took Oportunidades away from his daughter in law. He wishes he did receive some support. “I have never had any support from the government…Only the authorities have helped us sometimes with transportation…It would help me if I received some support from the government, but I don’t have it. I wish I received something.” Juan has talked to and been promised many times, but so far nothing has happened. He also feels there is no support from the community: “Here in the community people don’t help.”

The only support available from outside the family has come from the Hotel Hacienda Santa Rosa, which operates several social programs in the community (the old Hacienda located in the village was recently turned into a five-star luxury hotel). Juan tells us how the hotel offers free transportation to people in the village in the case of an illness or emergency – a service everybody can access. “Earlier we would hire trucks from Santo Domingo to Merida and they charged us 200 pesos. When the hotel came, it helped us because now we have free transportation if someone falls ill. Whether it is day or night there are always cars available and they don’t choose between people.”

Juan finishes his interview by emphasizing that until he fell ill, he had a good life and few worries, especially when working in henequen: “As I already told you, earlier things were good and I was always doing well. I had no problems and I didn’t worry about anything until I fell ill 13 years ago and now every day I am worse.” He also feels that he needs help in order to improve his situation, and that so far all he has received are promises. “If the people who come to see me really helped me I think I would have been better off, but until now it has only been promises and I don’t think I can get back up on my own.” Without his children’s’ help, especially from the son who works in Merida, he would have nothing. Before ending the interview, Juan thanks the interviewer for the visit and notes that he often gets lonely: “Only when someone like you comes by do I get a little distracted because I get to talk. I tell you about my problems. When there’s no one here I feel bad.” Source: Life History: Open-ended Interview

iii. Economic Activity: Regional and Gender Differences While people’s opinions as expressed in focus group discussion seem to distinguish in general between work within the community and work outside the community, Tables 21a and 21b show the multiplicity of income-generating activities. Table 21a reveals that, among those who work, agriculture remains the most important sector/occupation (35 percent), followed by unskilled labor in the private sector –(mainly construction and domestic services), and handicraft

43

production (12 percent). While 66 percent of men in the 12 study communities work, only 28 percent of women do. Men work primarily in agriculture (46 percent) and unskilled labor (14 percent), while 27 percent of working women engage in handicraft production. Table 21b shows, in addition, the activities of people who reported that they did not work. Twelve percent of the women who reported not working, in fact make and/or sell products, while 15 percent of men who do not work labored on the family farm or raised animals.

Table 21a: Economic Activity in 12 Indigenous Communities in Oaxaca and Yucatán

Men Women AllWorked last week 52.4 47.9 48.2

If yes, in which sector/occupationAgriculture 46.3 7.1 34.5Fisheries 4.6 2.4 3.9Handicraft production 5.6 26.5 11.9Industrial production 1.8 2.4 2.0Commerce 4.8 12.9 7.3Private Sector, unskilled work 14.0 10.0 12.8Private Sector, skilled work 3.3 4.7 3.7Public Sector, unskilled work 4.1 5.3 4.4Public Sector, skilled work 1.8 2.9 2.1Other 5.3 14.1 8.0Not specified 8.4 11.8 9.4Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 21b: Economic Activity in 12 Indigenous Communities in Oaxaca and Yucatán

Men Women AllDid not work last week 34.5 71.5 53.0

If you didn't work last week, did you:Help in family business 3.9 4.5 4.3Sell a product 0.8 2.7 2.2Make a product to sell 3.9 9.6 8.0Help on the farm or in raising animals 15.0 6.3 8.7Get paid to do some other activity 1.6 3.9 3.3Not work 55.9 46.6 49.1Not specified 18.9 26.6 24.5Total 100 100 100

Source: Moving Out of Poverty Household Survey 2005, Mexico Country Study Population 12 years and older Looking

Looking at regional differences in occupational patterns, Table 22 shows that, while the proportion of people who work is similar across both regions (with only a slightly higher rate in Yucatán), the activities in which men and women work differ substantially. The majority of men in Oaxaca (50 percent) work in agriculture, while men in Yucatán have a higher participation rate in waged work in the public and private sectors (32 percent compared with 12 percent in Oaxaca). Furthermore, 10 percent of men in Oaxaca engage in handicraft production whereas not even 1 percent of men in Yucatán do. These numbers reflect the differences in regional economic opportunity, as Yucatan offer more opportunity to engage in waged work, due to its urban centers and tourist sites.

44

Male Female All Male Female All

Worked last week 65.5 28.4 46.9 69.3 30.0 49.7

If yes, in which sector/occupationAgriculture 50.3 10.5 38.3 42.9 4.3 31.4Fisheries 2.3 4.0 2.8 6.5 1.1 4.8Handicraft production 11.4 36.9 18.7 0.9 19.2 6.4Industrial production 1.3 0.4 3.2 3.2 3.2Commerce 6.9 11.8 8.4 3.2 13.8 6.4Private Sector, unskilled work 9.1 1.3 6.8 18.0 17.0 17.6Private Sector, skilled work 0.6 1.3 0.8 5.5 7.5 6.1Public Sector, unskilled work 1.1 2.6 1.6 6.5 7.5 6.7Public Sector, skilled work 1.1 2.6 1.6 2.3 3.2 2.6Other 4.0 7.9 5.2 6.5 19.2 10.3Not specified 13.1 19.7 15.1 4.6 4.3 4.5Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

YucatanOaxaca

Table 22: Economic Activity by State

Source: Moving Out of Poverty Household Survey 2005, Mexico Country Study Population 12 years and older What is even more striking however is how the economic activities of women differ across regions (Figure 11). Women in Oaxaca engage above all in activities linked to the home such as agriculture and handicraft production, while a significant proportion of women in Yucatán work in waged employment in both the private and public sectors. See, for instance, the difference between the proportions of women engaged in unskilled work in the private sector between the two areas - 17.0 percent in Yucatán compared with 1.3 percent in Oaxaca. This again reflects the employment opportunities available in nearby cities – for instance in domestic services – as well as in export-oriented textile factories (maquiladoras). It also reflects the different strategies for upward mobility and how they differ in respect to gender. Commuting to nearby cities in the case of Yucatan is an accessible mechanism for women, whereas migrating, often as far as to the US as they do in Oaxaca, is still not as easy for women. Clearly, however, the most important economic activity for women in both states is handicraft production, which occupies nearly 40 percent of all working women in Oaxaca and 19 percent of women in Yucatán

Figure 11: Female Participation Rates across Economic Activities, Oaxaca and Yucatán

10.5

36.9

11.8

1.3 1.3 2.64.3

19.2

13.817.0

7.5 7.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

Agriculture Handicraftproduction

Commerce PrivateSector,

unskilled work

PrivateSector,

skilled work

Public Sector,unskilled work

OaxacaYucatan

Source: MOP Household Survey 2005, Mexico Country Study Population 12 years and older

45

Fig. 6: Ladder of Life, Men FGD, Guadalupe de Morelos (Oaxaca) Upward movement Household Characteristics Downward movement • You have to work night and day

and save to maintain yourself at this level

7. “The richest in the community” • Often returned or ‘retired’ migrants that

came back from the US with large dollar savings

• Very nice houses, sometimes two floors and nicely decorated on the outside

• Own trucks, tractors and other equipment • Have their own businesses • Employ other people in the village

• Start drinking • If they ‘give up’ the

struggle (si dejan de luchar)

• Sickness • Death of head of household

• Very few move higher than this • Only by working night and day

and saving

6. “Families semi-permanently in the US” • Head of household or entire family lives

in the US but return from time to time • Brick houses sometimes with two floors,

often left empty for months at a time as family live in California

[These households are still viewed as part of the community and share the same obligations as other villagers (tequio, cargo etc.)]

• Start drinking • If they ‘give up’ the

struggle • Sickness

• Successful business or store • By sending more migrants to the

US • By receiving more money from

current US migrants • Hard work

5. “Families w/ US migrants” • Living conditions are more or less the

same as the step below • Often able to start a business or a small

shop with the remittances they receive • Once the children finish school they head

for the US

• US migrants stop sending money or send smaller amounts, less frequently (happens when kids start their own families)

• US migrants return • Sickness

• Money sent from migrants in the US (without this you will probably stagnate at this level)

• Money sent from relatives working in other parts of Mexico can also help

• Saving • With help from the community

(i.e. coladas to build your house)

• Hard work

4. “No longer poor” • Families begin constructing brick houses • Own land • Can afford to rent more land than they

own • Receive Procampo for the land they own • Some family members have worked or are

working in Mexico City or in the Northern states of Mexico

• If relatives in other parts of Mexico stop sending money

• Lack of water (irrigation) • Illness

• Sons or other relatives that help (in part. Migrants)

• By saving • With help from the community

(i.e. coladas to build your house)

• Hard work

3. “Moderate poor” • Houses are still made of adobe • Have access to land they can cultivate but

lack equipment • Main source of income is agriculture

• If children abandon their parents when they grow up

• Or if children go to study and not to work

• Lack of water (irrigation) • Illness

• Find a job outside the community

• Sell or rent a piece of land • If sons or other relatives help (in

particular those that migrate) • You can stagnate here without

the help form migrants

2. “The poorest today” • Do not leave the community to work • Often elderly • If not elderly, then probably lazy • They have a house • They have sufficient to eat • They eat mainly tortilla

• Today, this is as bad as it gets in the community – you can’t become worse off

• Work outside the community • With a lot of effort • Charity or help from the

community: the men say they would never let a fellow citizen live in such conditions today

1. “The poorest ten years ago” • Bad housing if any • House made out of card board or palm • Not enough food and no corn • Eat principally flour tortillas and root

vegetables

• You can’t fall further down as no one even lives like this any longer

CP

OPL

46

---

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

III. Migration to the US The review of local people’s perceptions of prosperity and mobility showed that US migration plays a key role in successful study communities in Oaxaca. How much a family received in remittances and from where (US vs. national migration) were key characteristics used to rank a household’s welfare. Households that receive remittances from migrants in the US consistently ranked in the upper levels of wellbeing, and above what is considered poverty. Needless to say, migration was seen as the key mechanism for upward mobility. To varying degrees, migration was also viewed as a way out of poverty and a strategy available to the poor. Looking beyond households to community-level prosperity, US migration was seen as having both negative and positive impacts. While households engage in both international and national migration, this section focuses primarily on US migration As discussed earlier, US migration did not play an important role in study communities in Yucatán, and this section focuses on the six study communities in Oaxaca. However, it is important to note that the Maya from Yucatán also migrate in increasing numbers to the US. International migration was just getting started in some study communities in Yucatán – a trend fuelled by examples set by households that have prospered by sending migrants to the US. These examples were found either in isolated cases of US migration within their community, or in nearby communities with higher levels of US migration.

A. Migration in Perspective In 2004, 32 percent of foreign-born citizens in the US were Mexicans, a total of 11.2 million. The latest estimates from the Mexican statistics bureau (INEGI) show that about 350,000 Mexicans migrate to the US each year –a conservative estimate. Looking beyond magnitudes, what characterizes Mexican migrants is that they are predominantly illegal: In the past years, 80-85 percent of migration from Mexico to the US has been illegal, and in 2004 nearly 57 percent of undocumented immigrants to the US (about 6 million) were Mexicans (Pew Hispanic Center 2005). The most visible and direct impact of the increasing US migration is captured by the amount of money sent back to Mexico by its migrants. Figure 7 shows the increase in remittances in the period 1990-2003.

Fig. 7: US Remittances to Mexico, 1990-2003 (in million USD) Source: Conapo (www.conapo.gob.mx)

47

Traditionally, Mexican migrants have come primarily from states in Central Mexico. Recent years have however seen a diversification in sending states as more and more people migrate from Southern states such as Oaxaca, Guerrero, Puebla and Veracruz. Total remittances received by Oaxacan households in 1995 were 159 million USD, an amount that skyrocketed to USD 658 million in 20035. In comparison, households in Yucatán received USD 52 million in remittances the same year. The number of migrants from Oaxaca living in the US has increased more than threefold in the past 15 years: from about 70,000 migrants in 1990 to 232,000 in 2003 (see figure 8). In the three years from 2000 to 2003 alone, the number of migrants increased by 30 percent.

Fig. 8: Population Born in Oaxaca with Residence in the US, 1990, 2000 and 2003

Source: Conapo (www.conapo.gob.mx) As the trend of US migration pushes south, migrants are also becoming increasingly multi-ethnic. Southern states have higher concentrations of indigenous peoples, and the growing amount of indigenous migrants, shows that this group is partaking in the regional increase in US migration. Some indigenous groups – Mixtecs and Zapotecs included – have migrated to the US since the Bracero Program (1942-64). Until the 1980s, the relative share of indigenous in the Mexican migrant population was low, but in recent years the number of indigenous who migrate to the US has increased significantly (Fox and Rivera-Salgado, 2004). Tendencies to migrate however differ widely across indigenous groups. Why Migration is Important Do remittances reduce poverty? Clearly if migrants come from poorer households and they send money back home, than yes, remittances can reduce poverty. However, migration is costly and due to higher liquidity constraints in poorer households, it might be less accessible for the poorest households. Empirical evidence from recent studies of migration in Mexico shows that whether or not poor people migrate depend heavily on the migratory experience of their home community and the strength of migrant networks. McKenzie (2005) finds that in communities where networks are weak, migrants tend to be relatively well off; while in communities where networks have grown stronger over time, poorer households also send migrants. These findings are explained by how stronger networks provide better information and contacts to first-time migrants, which lowers the cost of migration. Findings form the ENHRUM (Encuesta Nacional a Hogares Rurales de México) shows that both national and international remittances reduce

5 Conapo website, www.conapo.gob.mx

69 574

181 683

231 968

---

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

1990 2000 2003

48

poverty, but the latter more so (Mora and others, 2005). They also find that the poverty reduction effect of remittances is small in areas with low intensity of migration, but that the effect increases with the level of migration. These findings echo studies of the impact of remittances on poverty from other countries (see Adams, 1986 and Adams 2006 for evidence from Egypt and Guatemala). Both studies from Mexico show an inverse U relationship between migration and inequality. At the early stages, international migration tends to increase inequality, however, as migration intensify and poorer households begin to also send migrants, the negative effect of remittances on inequality is reduced. McKenzie (2005) finds that in communities with high levels of migration, inequality is actually negatively affected and that the estimated magnitude of this impact is relatively large. As mentioned in chapter 3, evidence of such a relationship between inequality and migration can be found in people’s perceptions of inequality in study communities in Oaxaca. The only community where people felt inequality had fallen in the past ten years was Macuiltianguis – the community at the most advanced stage of US migration. It is also the community with the lowest poverty rate, using official measures. Do international remittances reach poorer households in our study communities? Table 20 shows that while international remittances are more common among the never poor, it is also heavily present in households that are poor. 20 percent of poor households reported receiving international remittances, as did 28 percent of households that have moved out of poverty in the past ten years (movers). Compared to chronic poor households, movers have a much higher likelihood of receiving international remittances than national ones, which suggests a pivotal role of US migration. Finally, remittances account for a larger share of total income in households that have moved out of poverty than any other group: 60 percent of total income stems from migration in households classified as movers and who receive remittances.

Table 20: Remittances in Study Communities in Oaxaca, Across Transitions Groups, 2005 Percentage of households that receive: Remittances as share of total income

All

Remittances National

Remittances International Remittances

All Households

Households that receive remittances

Never poor 40% 16% 32% 17% 40% Mover 33% 7% 28% 21% 60% Chronic poor 33% 17% 20% 20% 48%

Source: MOP Mexico Household Survey

Focus group discussions confirmed that poorer households engage in international migration, and that US migration has been an important mechanism for moving out of poverty. Chapter 3 reviewed findings from these discussions, and finds that migration was seen as one of the most important ways up and out of poverty in Oaxaca. Says one woman (40) from Abejones: “Those who are the richest today used to be poor. They climbed out by working in the US.” Working in the US is also seen as the fastest, most efficient way to move to higher levels of wellbeing: “Uy! The ones who go North [the US] become rich in a very short time.” The head of one of the highest ranked households in Guadalupe de Morelos, a family where no one have had to migrate due to a prospering family business, explains that incentives are higher for the poor: ”Here the poor do not have access to jobs that employ poor people. The salaries are minimal. Because of this they go to the US… They migrate to the US where people go to suffer and to make some money. Then, they return and build their houses” (Man, 55).

Men from Carrizal explains how the informal organization of US migrants from the community lend money to men and youth who want to migrate. As one man (55) explained: “Migrants who

49

are in the United States lend money to those who want to go over there [to the US]”. The organization of migrants in Carrizal also helps people who want to set up a business in the community. One man (42) tells us how the migrants helped him buy a taxi: “I asked for a little money from our organization of migrants to buy a taxi, and now this is how I make a living”. The role of migrants in terms of providing information on border crossings and helping people get jobs and housing was mentioned time and again, and people noted that the value of networks have grown with time: Says one man (35) from Guadalupe de Morelos: “It is easier to leave today. They already know how to leave and have a lot of people from the village or family that help them on the other side” Of course, as the community’s network of migrants expands, the probability of having relatives across the border also increases. Open-ended interviews with a limited number of migrants in each community, suggests that while community networks matter, especially in term of getting started in the US, loans for the border crossing come primarily from relatives. The story told by this 32-year old migrant from Macuiltianguis exemplifies other migrants’ histories: “My brothers paid the trip for me. I travelled from Oaxaca to Tijuana with a contact known in my community. My brothers helped me leave, as they were already over there, and because of this it was easier to leave – I already had family over there…My brothers helped me to cross the border they paid my trip. They were the ones who looked after me, thanks to them I could move ahead and earn more money. My brother in law helped me to get a job at the dry cleaner’s and there they paid me well.” A recent survey of Mexican migrants in the US shows that finding a job is not a problem for Mexican migrants, mainly due to networks of family and friends. More than 80 percent reported having a relative other than a spouse or child in the US, while 45 percent of respondents cited friends and family as the most common source of information about jobs in the US (Pew Hispanic Center, 2005).

Box 6: What the Life Histories Told us about Migration as a Mechanism for Moving Ahead The individual life stories of 122 respondents also shed some light on migration as a mechanism for moving out of poverty. Again, it is important to note that the people interviewed were sampled from those households or members of households still living in the communities. Needless to say, this gives a biased look at movements out of poverty as many ‘movers’, i.e. people who moved out of what was perceived as poverty ten years ago – did so by moving away from the communities. This is clearly seen in the role of migration as a mechanism for moving ahead, while education works as a way out of poverty primarily because it offers better job opportunities. High-skilled jobs are not found in the communities. The types of migration vary in length. Often people may spend many months out of every year in another city or country (the US). Others move for a period of no more than 10 years and return to the community permanently. Either way, the process of migration serves as the one key juncture that pushes people out of poverty. In Oaxaca, migration is the key story that has moved people out of poverty. Sixteen of the 40 movers interviewed migrated to the US and credit this as a major reason for their success. Also, many cite their husband’s migration, their children’s migration, or migration to other parts of Mexico as critical factors in moving them out of poverty. Twenty-four out of sixty respondents spent time in the US. Abejones was the community with the most people that migrated to the US. Guadalupe de Morelos also had many that migrated. People in Oaxaca are also often migrating to Oaxaca city and Mexico City. People migrate to the US to work in agricultural day labor, construction, small store vending, or in domestic services. Of the total 23 respondents that migrated to the US, only 2 were categorized as chronic poor, while about 14 were classified as movers and 7 were never poor. Of those that did not have any international migration, but did migrate outside of their state, 7 were chronic poor, 9 were never poor, and 21 were movers. National migration appears to have better effects than no migration, but this is not

50

completely clear. However, of the 32 that never migrated, 10 were classified as chronic poor, which is the highest proportion of all the groups, including those that had some intrastate and interstate migration. Migrating to the US shows a clear advantage for moving out of poverty. In Yucatan, it is much more common for people to commute to Merida or work temporarily in Cancun working in construction, or as vendors and maids. Agricultural migration takes people to nearby communities often looking for temporal work. Only two respondents from Yucatan migrated to the US. What facilitates migration – in particular to the US - is above all the person’s social networks. Family loans (particularly for US migration) are used to pay for border crossings. In addition, family, friends, or community members already at the destination also help by providing a place to stay, finding a migrant a job, or teaching them skills to work in a new field. Human capital factors also matters. Language skills - knowing Spanish is helpful for migrating within Mexico and knowing English to work in US. Only two respondents were in fact English speakers. Respondents also noted that how to read and write was also noted as making it easier to migrate and finding jobs. Lack of technical skills rarely seems to be an impediment to migrating or finding work elsewhere, but knowledge of a trade can help to get a better-paid, more stable job. High school degree is usually helpful and university degree is always helpful to find jobs in other places, particularly within Mexico. Finally, age is important. Migration, particularly to the US, is more likely at a young age. Much of the work in US is labor-intensive and the trip alone may be too much for older individuals. No one after the age of 45 migrated to the US in this sample. Remittances are very important to households, particularly in Oaxaca but also in the Yucatan. Wives often care for children and households with only the income from remittances. Parents often depend on children’s remittances when they are older. Remittances coming from the US were seen as more important – a logical outcome of the US higher wages. People seem to return because of obligations to their family – particularly if they come back once a year. In Oaxaca, it is common for people to return to the community to fulfill a political position, forcing them to contribute to the community but also consume much of their savings from the migration since these political jobs are unpaid. Remittances and savings upon return are often used to start new businesses in the community. They also often invest in constructing a house or buying other assets, such as a truck. The money may also fund the education of children or siblings. If the money is consumed and not invested, then a person is more likely to make repeated trips than one or two longer trips. Source: Individual Life Histories

B. Migratory Profiles of Study Communities: The Different Stages of Migration The migratory experience of a community and its migrant networks matter for the costs and returns to households from migration. As costs are lowered due to a stronger migrant network, the opportunity to migrate is extended to poorer households that face tighter liquidity constraints. Also, as households that send migrants move ahead, demonstrated for instance in new and better housing, incentives to migrate for other households increases. This section classifies study communities in Oaxaca according to their migratory experience and discusses how costs and benefits differ accordingly. We see that the six communities are at different stages of migration, which affects the extent and size of remittances as well as the nature of other impacts – positive and negative.

51

As mentioned, indigenous groups have different migratory experiences. The Zapotecs (Macuiltianguis and Abejones) have been migrating to the US since the initiation of the Bracero program in the 1940s and have decade-long experience and networks. Indigenous from the Mixtec region, which is where the other four study communities are located, also participated in the Bracero Program. In addition, contractors from the agro industry in Sinaloa and other Northern Mexican states have been bringing Mixtecs and Triquis to Northern Mexican states for just as long. Farm workers from the Mixteca moved onto Baja California and by the 1980s they arrived in the US. In comparison, and as mentioned earlier, the Maya from Yucatán are just now beginning to head North of the border. The term mass-migration is used loosely to identify periods in which US migration is particularly intense. The study community with the longest history of US migration – Macuiltianguis – has experienced mass-migration since the 1980s. In Guadalupe de Morelos mass-migration is above all a phenomenon of the 1990s, while Abejones saw US migration intensify dramatically in the late-1990s. US migration from Carrizal and Yosoyuxi is a more recent phenomenon but is also intensifying. In the poorest community, a few households have sent migrants to the US, but it is still not common. Table 21 shows how the extent and type of migration differed across the six study communities in the period 1995 to 2000. The percentage of households that received remittances in 2000 were higher than the state average in all successful communities. In Macuiltianguis, it was more than 4 times higher as 17 percent of households reported receiving remittances. In terms of CONAPO’s measure of ‘migration intensity,’ only Abejones ranked ‘very high’. This is above all due to higher levels of out-migration in the last half of the 1990s. More than 23 percent of households in Abejones reported that one or more members had left for the US in the period 1995-2000, which is more than 6 times the state average and nearly 3 times higher than the other two communities that are at later stages of mass migration - Macuiltianguis and Guadalupe. What really sets Abejones apart is the fact that 14 percent of households send circular migrants, while none of the other municipalities noted any significant migration of this type. The unsuccessful community, San Pedro el Alto is characterized by lower than state average scores on all indicators and a ‘very low’ migration intensity index.

Table 21: Migration Intensity in Study Communities, US migration 1995-2000

Source: CONAPO, Índice de Migración, 2000 (www.conapo.gob.mx) 1Households where at least one of its members left for the US in the period 1995-2000 to take up residence 2Households where one or more members left for the US during the period 1995-2000, returning in the same period 3Households where one or more members living in the US in 1995, returned to live in Mexico in the period 1995-2000

As mentioned earlier, whether the poor leave or not is also linked to the community’s migratory experience. Poorer households in communities with stronger networks of migrants have a higher possibility of sending migrants. A youth in Macuiltianguis, the community with the longest

% of HHs that receive

remittances

% of HHs with US migrants

that left 1

% of HHs with circular

migrants2

% of HHs where a migrant

returned3

Oaxaca 4.13 4.76 0.56 0.72 -0.26 High

Abejones 13.67 23.38 14.39 0.36 2.42 Very HighMacuiltianguis 17.19 8.75 0.31 2.19 0.60 MediumSan Jorge Nuchita (Guadalupe de Morelos) 12.93 8.44 0.72 0.72 0.22 MediumSantiago Juxtlahuaca (Carrizal and Yosuyuxi) 4.52 3.34 0.00 0.82 -0.41 LowSan Mateo Penasco (San Pedro el Alto) 0.00 2.68 0.00 0.00 -0.76 Very Low

Migration Intensity Index

52

experience with US migration, says “It is the poorest who migrate because they are the ones with the highest needs” (male youth, 22). In communities at the initial stages of US migration, it was however still seen as a mechanism more frequently available in better-off households, mainly because it is expensive: A woman (40) from Yusuyoxi describe factors of upward mobility at the upper echelons of her community this way: “They have the money to go to the United States”. Positive and negative impacts on community prosperity also differ according to a community’s migratory experience, as shown in table 22. For instance, Abejones is just now experiencing a construction boom as migrants return to build new and better houses. Similar construction booms have slowed down in both of the other two communities at later stages of migration. Poverty is lower in the community at the most advanced stage of US migration. While we cannot establish the causality between migration and lower levels of poverty, these figures are in line with the idea that the poverty reducing effect of migration and remittances increases with the migratory experience of the community.

Table 22: Costs and Benefits from Migration, by Community Abejones Guadalupe de Morelos Macuiltianguis Length and strength of US migration

Mass-migration peeked in the late 1990s High level of circular migration

Mass-migration since early 1990s Families increasingly leave for good

Mass-migration since 1980s Many families have left for good, especially younger ones

Gains Informal communal remittances for public works and purchase of communal assets (tractors and other equipment)

Important and formalized communal remittances to public works in the village, handled by an organizational committee of migrants in California Migrants are sanctioned if they don’t send money for public works

Migrants in the US are organized in two different associations The migrant associations give their opinion on community matters and sometimes send money

Costs Families break apart as mostly husbands and sons go North

Torn families Younger families are beginning to leave together, and the population is aging Mainly elderly, women and young children remain in the village

Key concern of the local population today is “becoming a ghost village” as the community is slowly emptied of its people. Increasingly difficult to fill local government positions

Local Economy

Construction boom In-migration of construction workers from nearby communities Increases in daily wages

Some longer-term migrants are returning and starting up businesses in the home community (tractor rental, cattle farms and grocery stores etc.)

Construction boom over: Well-built, two-storey cement houses are left empty most of the year as families only return to visit

Poverty* Extreme Poverty Rate: 53% Extreme Poverty Rate: 28% Extreme Poverty Rate: 25%

Source: Focus group discussions and key informant interviews in Abejones, Guadalupe de Morelos and Macuiltianguis, *Calculated using official poverty line and income data from MOP Mexico Household Survey The demographic composition of the population is also affected by migration. Guadalupe de Morelos, and Abejones to a lesser extent, are both marked by a lack of men, resulting in a population made up of mostly elderly, women and children. The situation in Macuiltianguis is more severe and the community faces problems caused by the decrease in their population - they have problems filling both schools and local government positions. This lack of people, in particular youth and children, was the main concern raised by local people when discussing the future prosperity of their village (see box 7).

53

San Pedro Macuiltianguis, Population

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1910 1921 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1995 2000

Box 7: Community Prosperity: Lack of People in Macuiltianguis People in Macuiltianguis fear they will become a ghost village as more and more migrants leave permanently, bringing their families with them to the US. Says one man (43) “Migration took the children and the families away, and this will become a ghost village.” Another man (33) explains that while people see increased economic prosperity, they fear the community’s common efforts to prosper might have been in vain as US migration is slowly emptying the village of its people. “Important things have already been done here, which has helped make the village more prosperous. But this doesn’t serve us if our citizens are not here. We can see that the village is richer, but without people this doesn’t do us any good. In ten years this can be a ghost village.” “Yes there is economic prosperity here, but social prosperity is diminished” (man, 32). The lack of young people and children in particular is seen as a threat to the overall future of the community. “Now we do not have enough people here, we don’t have the children who will take over and care for this place in the future. We have a kinder garden, and primary and secondary schools, but there’s not enough children” (man, 28). He continues: “…But we need a certain number of members here, we need support. Who is going to provide continuity to our project if there’s no one here?” To fill their schools, Macuiltiagnuis has developed as an educational center and attract children from poorer communities in the region. The first 30 migrants left Macuiltianguis for the US under the bracero program as early as 1945. In the 1960s, migrant outflow was balanced by the creation of employment in the community, which actually led to an inflow of forestry workers from other states. Then, due to labor conflicts in the 1970s, people again turned to migration, and US migration intensified and has continued to intensify ever since. In the last census (2000) there were 443 inhabitants in Macuilitianguis, which is less than half the population they had only 20 years earlier, in 1980. Source: FGDs in Macuiltianguis, Census data (Archivo Historico de localidades) from INEGHI While population decrease is a key concern in Macuiltianguis, all communities recognized how they have prospered over the past ten years thanks to migration, most importantly due to remittances received by migrant-sending households. Migrants however also send money destined for public works in their home communities, so called ‘communal remittances’. Box 8 shows the organization of migrant investments in Guadalupe de Morelos, where communal remittances are highly formalized and have contributed to a well of public works and projects. Communities had different levels and organization of communal remittances, however it was important across the board. The fact that the indigenous in Oaxaca have their own autonomous form of local government also matters: Under Usos y Costumbres, citizens have an obligation to give their labor to public works in the form of tequios. As migrants can’t physically participate in the tequios, many communities have simply exchanged the obligation to give your man labor to an obligation to contribute financially. In some communities, authorities sanction non-compliance by restricting access to land for family and relatives of the migrant. Land is a communal asset in all study communities.

First US migration

National and US migration intensifies

In-migration from Michoacan

54

Box 8: Community Prosperity: Communal Remittances in Guadalupe de Morelos

Migrants are a key source of financing for public works in the community. When discussing recent progress in the community, people in Guadalupe were quick to point to the pivotal role of migrants and migrant investment: “Today, it is all due to the Northerners [US migrants]” (man, 52). “When people began leaving, the community changed”, (man, 43). Migrants give a lot of financial support to the community and migrant investments are behind most of the works and projects realized by the community in the past 15 years. These include: • 1990: Construction of the new community building (Agencia) • 1992: Construction of the park in the center • 1997: Construction of a secondary school. This was built principally with the financial contributions of

padres de familia: parents in the village contributed with their labor while those that live in the US paid for it, together with government support.

• 1999: Financing to start work on a new road to Huajuapan • 2000: Construction of a Medical Center – also with help of government • 2001: Expansion of electricity to more households (also adding to government resources) • 2003: Construction of a communal house for village fiestas etc. (la Cofradía) • 2004: Purchase of a water pump • 2004: Paving of the roads in the village • 1995-2005: Remodelling and reconstruction of the church • Migrants also pick up the bill for the community’s patron saint celebrations which are held every

December Migrants’ financial support to communal works is an extension of the obligatory communal work (tequio), and migrants who fail to send their share are punished. In this sense, sending money is not entirely voluntary, but more an obligation alongside other citizen obligations inherent in the traditional government system of Usos y Costumbres. “All migrants have to support the community” (key informant, 34). “Working in California I always sent money for public works in the village. That was my obligation as a citizen” (man, 38). The wives of migrants tell us about the potential and real sanctions of non-cooperation: local authorities may take away a piece of communal land assigned to the migrant’s family: “They took a piece of our land, apparently because my husband had not given his share of the cooperation (money)” (woman, 42). “My husband has to come and give his cooperation (money) to the tequios. If he doesn’t, the authorities will take a piece of our land” (woman, 25). Migrant investment is organized and formalized. “The authorities have to send a written petition to the person of most confidence and then call them” (key informant, 34). After authorities send their petitions to a trusted migrant in California, this person becomes responsible for gathering other migrants and informing them of the authorities’ demands. Once they decide which project to support and by how much, this migrant is also responsible for making the money wire. “Once the money is gathered, they send it via a bank and the authorities have to go to Huajuapan to cash it” (key informant, 45). According to community authorities, the migrants do not decide what the money will be used for, rather “they are informed about projects and works in the community that needs financial support” (key informant, 45). A migrant veteran, who has seen the organization of these investments in California, gives a slightly different description: Migrants there have established an Organizational Committee (Comité de Organización) that reviews petitions from the community authorities. Most often, the authorities suggest two or three projects for the migrants to invest in. The final decision on which projects to support is however taken by the migrants at assemblies held in Oxnard, California (the great majority of migrants from Guadalupe de Morelos live in Oxnard and San Bernadino in California). Then, during the annual village fiesta in December, when many migrants return to see their families, the authorities hold an assembly to present the work done during the past year and to give a full account of how the migrants’ dollars have been spent. Source: Focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and open-ended interviews with migrants and their wives

55

C. The Costs and Gains of Migration to the Household Remittances are maybe the most direct measure of how migration affects a household’s economic wellbeing. Table 23 below gives an overview of the extent of these in the study communities. With the exception of the poorest community, San Pedro el Alto, and Carrizal, more households in Oaxacan study communities receive international remittances than national ones. Our household survey did not capture any international remittances in Carrizal however other data collected in this community, reveals that US migration is important also there. In open-ended life stories, people told us that it was not common for migrants from this village to send money from the US. Instead, they bring it back in person as they return, which helps explain this omission. It is possible that this happens in other communities too, which means that measures based on remittances may underestimate the number of households that benefit from migration.

Table 23: Migration in Study Communities, 2005 Households that receive remittances

(Percentage) Average received monthly

(In Mexican pesos) Total National International Total National International Guadalupe de Morelos 59% 10% 55% 1,514 59 1,455 San Pablo Macuiltianguis 43% 18% 36% 936 232 704 Yosoyuxi 38% 8% 31% 776 38 738 Abejones 23% - 23% 827 - 827 San Pedro el Alto* 26% 16% 13% 845 145 700 Concepción Carrizal 14% 14% - 125 125 - Source: MOP Mexico Household Survey Many have questioned migration as a mechanism for development and studies show that in Mexico only a small share of the money sent back home by migrants is used for savings or productive investments or projects. Estimates show that between 80 and 90 percent of remittances are spent on daily consumption and on buying or building a house. Only a small share is saved or invested in productive assets that could help migrants’ families develop their own sources of income on a sustainable basis. Hidden among expenditure on daily consumption are investments in education and local people noted how migrants spend their money not only on housing and home appliances, but also on education. Says a woman (45) from Macuiltianguis: “Better houses have been built thanks to remittances sent by migrants and their savings. Remittances are spent not only on construction of houses, but also for the education of the children.” The impact of migration and remittances on education is further discussed in chapter 5. Migrants themselves noted that saving for daily expenditures is important, especially to finance periods spent back home in the home village. As one man (35) from Abejones says: “Working in the United States is what helped me the most and it allowed me to save money for the family. I bought a television, my stereo, I made improvements to my house and I saved money for the daily expenditures.” Migrants we interviewed were either circular migrants or returned migrants that live off their US savings when they return home. For many, repeated migration to the US was seen as the only way to maintain their family at a certain level of wellbeing. As one man (47) from Macuiltianguis said who identified himself as belonging to the top step: “If we don’t cross the border, we can’t maintain our families at this level.” Wives of migrants mentioned that they also try to save some of the money they received, to have something in case of an emergency. A woman (34) from Yosoyuxi, whose husband has been working in Denver since 1994, tells us how she has been in charge economically at home since he left and that she immediately began saving

56

what she could: “We save to buy some things for us. I use this in case my husband doesn’t send money when we need it, and the rest is in case someone falls ill, or if Julio [husband] dies, I have to be prepared”

As mentioned, other studies have found that the share of remittances spent on savings and investment in productive assets is low. However, in the communities studied here, there were examples of migrants that have ‘retired’ and moved home for good, without any loss to their wellbeing. Saving and investing dollar savings wisely proved key in each of these ‘success stories’, as illustrated in Box 9. In addition, these migrants carry with them from the US a certain change in ‘vision’ brought up in several discussions and interviews. Says one man (55) from Guadalupe de Morelos: “The migrants have seen how people live over there. They return with a different vision… There is less ignorance since people began leaving.”

Box 9: Life History, Carlos, 31, Guadalupe de Morelos People in Guadalupe de Morelos classified Carlos as someone who was never poor in the past ten years. He agrees, and attributes this to US migration and the sound investment of his dollar savings upon his return to the village. “Now, I think that I have been able to maintain myself due to the investments that I made with my savings from my work in the US. This does not mean that I am rich, but I don’t consider myself in a state of poverty”. Carlos feels that he has not only maintained his family out of poverty - he has also moved ahead, thanks to a ten-year period of hard work in California. When he returned to Guadalupe de Morelos in 1998 he used his dollar savings to set up his own business of transporting and selling raw material for construction, exploiting natural resources found in the community. Migratory History

In 1988, Carlos went to California where he worked for ten years in agriculture. He was only 15 years old when he first crossed the border. His parents helped him pay for the travel and the border crossing, however Carlos stresses that it was his own initiative: “No one helped me but no one made it difficult for me either.” Back in 1988 there were a lot fewer community members working in the US than there are today, however most of them kept together in Oxnard, California. This is where Carlos went, and migrants from his village told him about job opportunities and helped him get started.

Carlos returned to Guadalupe de Morelos almost every year for short visits, usually in December when the village holds its Patron Saint Celebrations. On one of his trips back he met Gloria, and in 1994 they married. Gloria and the kids remained in the village throughout the years when Carlos worked in the US.

After going back and forth for ten years, Carlos returned home for good in 1998. He tells us that investing his US savings wisely made moving back home a positive turn of events in economic terms. In addition, being with his family greatly improved personal welfare. When asked if he plans to return to the US, he answers: “I don’t think I will go again. I want to be with my family”

Carlos only finished primary school and although he realizes the importance of knowing how to read and write, he feels his most important learning experience came from his years in the US: “I learned a lot in the US, not only from work but also in terms of how to manage money: to save and invest.” Occupational History

Before going to the US, Carlos worked in the fields with his parents, earning nothing but helping the family make a living. His father taught him what he needed to know to work in agriculture.

Then, Carlos migrated to the US, where he worked primarily as a fruit picker. When asked how he found his jobs, given that he was an illegal immigrant, he pointed again to the network of villagers in Oxnard, California: “I found this job because I met with people from Guadalupe de Morelos once I got to California.” The longer he stayed in the US the more money he was able to save, because his salary kept

57

rising. “I learned the skills of the work over time, and while I began earning 3 dollars an hour I ended up earning 6 dollars an hour. This is how my life improved.”

In 1998 Carlos moves back to Guadalupe de Morelos, primarily to be with his family. Overall, he categorized his ten years working in the US as having had a very positive impact on his economic wellbeing. “The experience of working in the US was a very good one as it helped me reach my economic goals.” Contrary to many other migrants Carlos feels he has continued to improve economically after moving back home. He created his own business in 1998 selling and delivering raw material for construction (materialista). In 2001, he added agricultural machinery rental to the business. Carlos sees the move from agriculture to owning his own business as the clearest sign of his success. It is also something that sets him apart from others in his village: “I am better off, as currently I have my own business while earlier I worked in the fields like everyone else.” Economic History

In California, Carlos was for the first time able to buy things for himself, and he still remembers how he felt wearing new clothes and real shoes for the first time. “The first thing I bought was new clothes and shoes and this turned my life around as before I only wore huaraches (sandals) and old and torn clothes”

After the first period of purchasing for consumption, Carlos began investing his dollars in his house in Guadalupe de Morelos. “Later I fixed my house. I bought bricks and cement. My house used to be of mud bricks but I changed it for better material…Then, I remodeled the house and bought things for the bedroom, the kitchen and the bathroom.”

In 1998, upon his return to Guadalupe de Morelos, Carlos bought a truck, and started his own business. In 2001, he buys a tractor and adds the rental of agricultural machinery to his business. The tractor was paid for in part by savings and in part by a loan. Carlos is still hoping to grow his business by buying more trucks or machinery with savings and credits. He describes how this virtuous cycle of saving and investing in productive assets works for him: “I save. I have put aside money from the daily income of my business and save a decent amount every month. This is to pay what I owe from buying a tractor…When I finish paying this I want to buy another truck and this one I’ll eventually pay off with what I earn from the tractor business.” Government does not enter into Carlos’s equation for moving and staying ahead: “The government doesn’t help me nor does it hinder me in any way. On the contrary: it doesn’t affect me at all”

Carlos feels secure today and concludes that his economic progress has been steady. “Yes, I feel prepared for anything bad that could happen to my family, as I haven’t done so badly with my construction material business…I think I can say I have advanced economically thanks to my work in agriculture in the US…I can’t say that I have had many ups and downs because my life has improved a lot” Social, Psychological and Cultural History

While Carlos focused on migration and occupational and economic factors to explain his success, there are other things that mattered too. First and foremost, his family was important. His parents supported his decision to migrate and since he got married, his wife and kids have been his prime motivation. “Well, as I already told you, the most important relationship is that with my family because they have helped me obtain what I have today. Had I not had them, I would not have had any changes in my life as I would not have gone to work in the US.” Personally, he feels both respected and self-confident and says: “I have a lot of confidence in myself and thanks to this I have obtained a lot.”

Finally, Carlos also feels a strong belonging to his community. “The relations that I have with people here in the community are good and I think I can say that thanks to this I do well, because in certain ways we help each other by giving one other work.” Although Carlos admits that he is better off than many other people in the community, he does not feel that there is any division within the community because of this. “Here there are no divisions based on whether you have cars or not, here we are all equal.” Yet, Carlos hesitates to list anyone outside the family as having had an impact on his personal life. “With my employees I only have a relationship based on respect…There are no other relations that have caused any kind of impact on my life, only my family” Reviewing his story, Carlos identifies two important turning points for his level of wellbeing: (i) migrating to the US in 1988; and (ii) saving and investing in a truck that started his business in 1998. “I have been in

58

an improved situation for 17 years now [since migrating]. The important factors for both economic and general wellbeing have been saving and investing my money in the truck.” Carlos thinks his story is one of continuously improved wellbeing: “I have not had periods of stagnation as I have continued to invest in new things with which to start new businesses, such as the tractor.” He feels that since he returned to Guadalupe de Morelos in 1998, he and his family no longer run the risk of falling into poverty. Source: Open-ended Interview While many studies mention the economic cost of crossing the border as the key constraint to migrating, the non-material costs are also important. Money was rarely mentioned as an obstacle to crossing the border, although the going price for a passage was as high as 20,000 pesos (about USD 1,875). People focused far more on the dangers and hardship of crossing the border and a constant topic of debate in the communities were the border crossings. It was noted by many that crossing is getting harder and more expensive:“There [at the border) you contact the border guides to cross. They used to charge USD 500 to bring one person but now they charge USD 2,000. Besides, each year it gets harder to cross and sometimes you have to try many times before you make it” (man, 35, Abejones). A woman (70) from Macuiltianguis, who went to the US for the first time in 1984, noted how much easier it was back then: “Back in those days it was easy to cross the border. I walked for 2 hours from Tijuana to cross the border, heading for Los Angeles. There were no policemen”.

Returned migrants in Guadalupe de Morelos talked a lot about the risks they run every time they cross the border. One returned migrant (38) with experience from more than 10 illegal border crossings sums up the general view: “It’s a true hell crossing the border to the US.” Another man (29) hopes never to have to go through this again, even if the work and the money are good over there: “I pray to God that I will never have to return to the US. Not for fear of work, but for fear of leaving the family and for fear of the risks you have to take to cross the border… I don’t want to risk myself in that way ever again.” According to the US Border Patrol, more than 430 people died attempting to cross the US-Mexico border in 2005. The main causes of death were heat stroke, dehydration, and hypothermia. This account given by one migrant (33) from Abejones was echoed throughout the communities in Oaxaca: “I crossed the border walking for two days and two nights straight and it is very dangerous because there is no water after Tecate and Mexicali.” While border crossings are dangerous, so are Tijuana and other border cities through which you have to pass: Says one migrant (38) from Guadalupe de Morelos: “Sometimes there is more danger in the border cities then during the actual border crossing”

Women in the communities agreed, and saw these risks as one of the key difficulties to migrating: “It is very difficult to migrate because you risk your life to cross the border” (woman, 51). Wives and mothers endure terrible agony during the days when loved ones attempt the border crossing. When we visited one family in Guadalupe de Morelos, the woman who received us was visibly upset. It turned out that three of her sons were in Tijuana attempting to cross the border. The youngest was going for the first time and she was beside herself with worry because she hadn’t heard from them in nearly a week. She was waiting for a phone call from relatives in California, which is where the boys were heading. “These days between the last phone call from Tijuana and the first phone call from California are very, very hard” (woman, 38). Crossing the border gets easier, or at least less scary, with experience. A man (35) from Abejones, who went to the US for his third time in 1997, explains: “In 1997, the last time I went, is when I did best, because I knew the route and I wasn’t as scared as earlier even if it is still dangerous. But once you learn more things and you know how to work, things are easier.” The costs of migration falls with experience as migrants gain knowledge, know which border guides to trust and fear the crossing less. A migrant’s migratory experience also affects the returns from migrating. In chapter 3 it was noted that those who migrate for longer periods and do

59

more trips, generally do better according to local people. Open-ended interviews also showed how migrants have an easier time finding jobs with time, and how their salaries increase due to the experience they gain and the contacts they make (see box 10).

Box 10: Two Times Lucky, Daniel, 33, Abejones Before going to the US, Daniel had migrated several times to other parts of the country in search of jobs. He went to Oaxaca City with his father to collect garbage when he was only eleven. After his father dies, Daniel has to leave school to work. At the age of 15, he goes alone to Mexico City, where he worked in construction to help maintain the family. Then, at the age of 17, he went to pick cucumbers and tomatoes in Sinaloa, a Northern Mexican state. After he gets married and starts a family of his own, Daniel sees the need to try his luck in the US: “In 1996, I went North [the US] because there was no money left at home and I wanted to build a house and do something” He tells us that his main motivation to go to the US came from his new responsibilities as a family father: “My responsibilities and my wife influenced me in my decision to leave for the United States because I needed more money for the family.” The first time Daniel headed North, he was not very lucky and barely managed to pay back the money he had borrowed to pay the border guides. “I left for seven months but I couldn’t find much work. I went to New Jersey and I only earned enough to pay the money I had borrowed to go, but my family did not have a good time […] This trip was really hard because it took me a long time to cross the border and when I finally made it across I couldn’t find work and I became very disillusioned, because I had thought that I would do much better.” In 1999 Daniel returned to the United States for a second time and this time he did much better. He planned this trip for about a year, organizing it so that it would fall between his cargos. The authorities make migrants return to Abejones when they are assigned a cargo. This time Daniel found a stable job and could even save some money after paying off the debt he had taken on to cross the border. “It went well for me, I earned USD 1,200 a month and I could save some money in addition to paying all the costs. When you leave for the US, you borrow money from people in the community or you sell a plot of land or a car or something. I borrowed money but thank the Lord I have been able to pay it all back”. Source: Open-ended interview As already mentioned, our sample is skewed in that we capture only those migrants who leave their families behind. Typically, the head of the households leaves, while the wife and kids stay behind. For these circular migrants, another important non-material cost of migration is the separation from their families. One woman (42) in Guadalupe, whose children and husband work in the US, summed up feelings expressed by many when she said: “At times I curse and thank the US at the same time because it offers jobs, while at the same time it separates a lot of families.” She continues: “My kids are all grown up now and they don’t live with me. Sometimes I feel lonely. Because I have things that I need to talk to someone about and as I have no one here I talk to myself”. A group of women in Macuiltianguis also discussed the hardships of migrants’ wives and concluded: “It is not the same being alone, just the mother with her children, as when both of them are there” (woman, 65). Another woman (48) adds: “They feel accompanied by their dollars, but not by their husbands.” There’s a fine balance between economic gain and the emotional costs of separation. Says one migrant (29) from Guadalupe de Morelos who returned to be with his family: “Migration splits the family and it is not with money that you can cure the effects [of the separation].”

Lacking family support was mentioned as an obstacle by many youth in communities with a lot of migration, where mothers often raise their children alone, while the father works in the US. This can be tough on youth. One young man (18) from Abejones explained how not having his father around affected him: “I need a father’s love to move ahead because I am not happy this way and I get very affected by it, every time I remember this I get sad” (man, 18, Abejones). Another

60

youth (16) from the same community adds: “My father left to the United States to look for a job and he just sends money, that makes me feel sad, because he is not here with us.” For others, it is not only the absence of the father that hurts, but also the fact that once in the US he easily abandons the family.

Finally, Mexican migrants, and indigenous migrants more than any, find themselves at the lowest social strata in the US. Life is hard in the US most migrants agree. Says one returned migrant (34) from Abejones:“I don’t want my children to suffer like I did. I don’t want the gringos to yell at my children the way they yelled at me…I don’t want them [my children] to get the idea into their heads of going North, because no one knows how you suffer there or the efforts it takes to earn that money.” On a more general note, other migrants complained about the hardships of working and living in the US: “The US is a complicated country – it is difficult on the inside…There is a lot of pressure and I would not like to live this way…Life is not free” (man, 29).

While Americans might look down upon Mexican migrants, indigenous migrants are above all discriminated against by their fellow countrymen. One returned migrant form Guadalupe de Morelos (29) tells us that he saw a lot of discrimination between Mexicans in the US, as those from the central states treat Southerners badly. “People from Michoacan, Guadalajara and Jalisco discriminate on the basis of race and on the basis of being indigenous. They discriminate against those from the Southeast – those that are short and have a dark complexion.” Talking about the wife of one of his Mexican bosses, one man (52) adds: “It was as if she saw me as something ugly, she looked down on me. Maybe because I am not like her - I am indigenous.”

Despite the high costs, US migration was still seen as the fastest, most important way to move ahead in Oaxaca. Yet, many parents still felt a good education offers a viable option for their children – an option often preferred to that of sending children across the border. Chapter 4 focuses on education as a mechanism of upward mobility.

61

IV. Education In Mexico, indigenous people have lower levels of schooling than non-indigenous, and the education they receive is of a lower quality6. This educational gap is however closing, as access to education for the indigenous has improved greatly over the past. Estimates show that the indigenous/non-indigenous differential fell by two-thirds over a 30-year period: a non-indigenous person born in 1939 has more than 120 percent more years of schooling than an indigenous person born in the same period, while a non-indigenous person born between 1969 and 1978 has only 45 percent more years of schooling than an indigenous person in the same age group. Table 24 shows mean years of schooling in rural areas only. In 2000, an indigenous person above 15 years of age had 1.1 years less schooling than the non-indigenous. For youth 7-14 years of age, the difference is only 0.3 as the youngest generations are catching up fast. The closing of the gap holds for primary and lower-secondary schooling however it breaks down at the upper-secondary (high school) level, where indigenous are still disadvantaged in terms of enrollment and completion rates.

Table 24: Mean Years of Schooling in Rural Areas, by Ethnicity, 2000 Indigenous Non-indigenous

Male Female All Male Female All Population 15 and over All individuals 4.4 3.5 3.9 5.1 4.9 5.0 Youth age 7-14 All enrolled 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.6 Source: XII Censo general de población y vivienda (muestra censal-2000), (World Bank, forthcoming) Providing equal opportunity to education for the indigenous is a challenge in Mexico. First, the poorest indigenous groups are often located in remote areas where roads do not enter or can’t be used half of the year. Second, children might not speak Spanish, but one out of the 62 indigenous languages that exists in Mexico. Providing bilingual education and teachers for such a diverse group is a complex task. Given this, the narrowing of the indigenous/non-indigenous gap over the past generation is an admirable achievement. Despite progress in years of schooling, indigenous still perform worse than non-indigenous on other educational indicators. The adult illiteracy rate is higher for the indigenous at 24.6 percent, compared to 6.4 percent for the non-indigenous. Drop-out rates for indigenous school children are also higher, while students in indigenous schools consistently score lower on reading and math tests. In 2002, average math and reading scores for sixth graders in indigenous schools were 14.5 and 8.2 percent lower than the national average and indigenous schools7 perform below all other types of schools on the National Assessments. Returns to schooling, that is, the added income for each year of education, are also lower for the indigenous than for the non-indigenous. While an additional year of schooling results in a 9 percent increase in income for non-indigenous males, it is only 4 percent for indigenous males (World Bank, forthcoming, ENEZI 1997). Lower returns can be can be explained by lower

6 Unless otherwise stated, these findings are from the Mexico Quality of Education Programmatic AAA (World Bank, Forthcoming) 7 Indigenous schools represent 11.3 percent of all schools in Mexico and are predominantly rural: 90 percent of indigenous schools are located in rural areas. Indigenous primary schools have to implement intercultural bilingual education (IBE), which has a linguistic component - the application of a bilingual curriculum, and a cultural component which draws on both mestizo and indigenous cultures

62

quality of the schooling for the indigenous, as evidenced by lower test scores. Indigenous peoples also have lower endowments of complementary assets such as health and physical assets, which may explain lower returns to education. Finally, lower returns to schooling may reflect lacking labor market connections or labor market discrimination. Looking beyond ethnic differences in returns. As already mentioned earlier (box 4) education is one of the key determinants of poverty in Mexico. It is worth noting, however, that at any given level of education, the probability of being poor is higher for indigenous person than for non-indigenous (Ramirez, 2006). In other words, even with similar education levels, indigenous people have a much higher probability of being poor than do non-indigenous people. In addition, the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous probabilities increases with level of education. As shown in table 25, the probability of an indigenous individual with incomplete secondary schooling being extremely poor is five times higher than for a non-indigenous. It is almost ten times higher with secondary schooling completed.

Table 25: Poverty Incidence by Education Level, 2002 Probability of Being: Extreme Poor Poor Indigenous Non-indigenous Gap* Indigenous Non-indigenous Gap* No Education 63.0 30.9 2.0 92.1 67.4 1.3 Incomplete Primary 61.6 24.6 2.5 87.2 61.7 1.4 Complete Primary 57.9 18.5 3.1 86.3 54.1 1.6 Incomplete Secondary 51.3 10.2 5.0 81.3 41.3 1.9 Complete Secondary 34.3 3.6 9.4 67.8 26.1 2.6 Some or Complete University 12.1 2.1 5.6 35.9 13.7 2.6 *Indigenous/Non Indigenous Gap

Source: Ramirez (2006), ENIGH 2002 Before taking a more in-depth look at education as a mechanism for moving out of poverty in our 12 study communities, it is also worth noting that there are regional differences in both the access to and the quality of education (table 26). In Oaxaca, more than 20 percent of the population does not have any formal education, compared to 11 percent in Yucatán. About 16 percent of the population in Yucatán has at least one year of high school or other upper-secondary education, while only 10 percent of Oaxacans do (INEGI 2000).

Table 26: State Differences in Education, 2000

No

education Primary

incomplete Primary complete

Lower-secondary incomplete

Lower-secondary complete

Upper-secondary Tertiary

Mexico 10.3 18.1 19.4 5.3 19.1 16.8 11.0 Men 8.8 17.8 18.5 6.1 19.8 16.3 12.7

Women 11.7 18.5 20.1 4.6 18.4 17.3 9.4 Oaxaca 20.5 25.0 20.9 4.4 13.2 9.9 6.1

Men 15.4 26.2 21.5 5.2 14.4 10.1 7.2 Women 25.0 24.0 20.3 3.6 12.1 9.7 5.3

Yucatán 11.1 25.7 16.7 5.6 15.8 16.0 9.1 Men 9.4 25.0 15.6 6.6 16.9 15.8 10.7

Women 12.7 26.6 17.7 4.7 14.6 16.2 7.5 Source: INEGI XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda, 2000

63

The quality of education also differs between the two states. While students in Yucatán score slightly above the national average in international standardized tests (PISA), Oaxacan students perform worse than students in any other state. Yucatán ranked 13 out of the 29 Mexican states tested, Oaxaca 29th.

A. Education in Study Communities Table 27 shows education in the 12 study communities in Oaxaca and Yucatán. The first thing to note is the sharp increase in years of schooling from the older to the younger age groups. In Yucatán, years of schooling increased by 2.4 years from the age group 26-45 to the age group 15-25. Even more striking is the catch up seen in the non-successful communities in each of the two states. In Oaxaca, years of schooling in San Pedro el Alto rose from 1.2 years of schooling for the age group 26-45 to 6.2 years for the age group 15-30 – an increase of 5 years of schooling over a very short period. As a result, the difference in years of schooling between the successful communities and the non-successful community fell from 3.8 for the age group 26-45, to only 0.5 years for the age group 15-25. A similar catch-up was also seen in Yucatán. Literacy rates however, still differ across communities: Illiteracy is more than twice as high in the non-successful community, where 54 percent of the population can’t read or write. Illiteracy is less of a problem in Yucatán, where the literacy gap between the non-successful community and the successful ones is also smaller.

Table 27: Education, by State and Type of Community, 2005 Oaxaca Yucatán

Successful

Communities Non-successful

community Successful

Communities Non-successful

community Years of schooling Ages 15 – 30 6.7 6.2 7.0 6.6 Ages 26 – 45 5.0 1.2 4.6 2.1 Ages 46 – 60 3.4 0.4 2.8 1.5 > 61 years 1.4 0.4 2.2 1.9 Literacy rate Age 14 and above 79.1% 53.6% 84.1% 78.8% Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico, 2005 Two key trends can be identified. First, younger generations are catching up with state and national averages. Second, the least successful communities have made tremendous advances over the past generation, and intra-group gaps in terms of access to education are closing. A result of both trends is a growing generational divide. The trends also point to a successful expansion of access to primary and lower-secondary education in Mexico. As coverage is getting close to universal, it has reached some of the most disadvantageous indigenous communities. The conditional cash transfer program Oportunidades has played a pivotal role in this, and will be discussed in more detail later. Here, we will only note that the generation for whom years of schooling peek, coincides with the first generation of Oportunidades beneficiaries. To illustrate how recent this progress is, this is how a young woman (25) in the poorest community in Yucatán described her time in school: “For lack of resources, my parents could not pay for my studies. When I had filled my notebook with writings I had to erase everything in order to write in it again because back then we didn’t have the money to buy another. This is why today we want to give the best to our children” (woman, 25).

64

Table 28 shows mean years of schooling by study community and age group. Shown again the incredible advances made by non-successful communities. In San Pedro el Alto, years of schooling went from 1.5 for the age groups 26-45, to 7.9 for the age group 15-25 - an increase of 6.4 years of schooling. A similar trend can be seen in San Simon in Yucatán. Average years of schooling still differ between the communities, although they have evened out for youngest generation. The difference between lowest performing and top performing community in Oaxaca is 6.3 years of schooling for the age group 26-45, while it is only 2 years for the age group 15-25. IN Yucatan, the non-successful community (San Simon) also caught up and while it lags behind other communities by over 5 years for the age group 26-45, it is today at the same level as successful communities, lagging only 2.7 years behind top-performer Sanahcat. Interestingly, one community in Yucatan –Santa Rosa– is not seeing any of the tremendous leaps ahead of newer generations witnessed by other communities. Santa Rosa is also the only community that does not have a lower-secondary school in their community. San Pablo Macuiltianguis in Oaxaca and Sanahcat in Yucatán stand out as communities where education levels have been above average for generations.

Table 28: Mean Years of Schooling, by Age Groups and Study Communities

Mean Years of Schooling Ages 15 – 25 Ages 26 – 45 Ages 46 – 60 > 61 years Oaxaca Abejones 7.5 6.3 4.1 1.5 Concepcion Carrizal 7.0 3.7 1.2 1.5 Guadalupe de Morelos 6.4 5.4 4.2 0.6 San Pablo Macuiltiangis 8.8 7.8 5.8 2.4 San Pedro el Alto* 7.9 1.5 0.4 0.4 Yosoyuxi 6.8 3.2 1.4 0.0 Yucatán Sanahcat 10.3 7.3 4.3 4.2 Chan Chochola 6.0 3.6 2.4 0.5 Quintana Roo 8.7 5.4 2.4 1.8 Sahcaba 7.6 6.0 2.2 2.4 San Simon* 7.6 2.2 1.5 1.9 Santa Rosa 4.7 4.0 3.1 0.4

Source: MOP Mexico Household Survey Fig. 9 below shows years in schooling across age groups in Concepción Carrizal in Oaxaca, and provides a good illustration of changes across generations. In addition, we also see the gender gap closing, which point to even faster progress among indigenous females. While women in the age group 31 to 50 have an average years of schooling of 2.3 years, women between 16 and 30 years of age have an average of 6.1 years. The gap between men and women was 2.5 years for the older group and fell to only 0.2 years for the youngest group.

65

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

16-30 31-50 51 and older

MenWomen

Fig. 9: Years of Schooling in Concepción Carrizal

Source: Community Census 2004, population above 14 years of age While the following will focus on how local people perceive private returns to education, and how these are linked to household mobility, there are also significant social returns to education. In focus group discussions, local people discussed how recent gains in education among today’s youth positively affect the freedom and participation of women as well as local democracy and government in general. Box 11 summarizes some of the discussions among youth and adults regarding social returns to education. Box 11: Social Returns to Education: More Freedom and Better Democracy and Local Government When a group of women in San Simon was asked to discuss the concept freedom, they focused on gender differences and discussed how women have gained a lot of freedom over the past ten years. A young woman (31) described how women in the village used to live in a form of slavery: “There are many different types of freedom. For women for instance, there was slavery before. You were tied up. Now you can even wear what you want”. Another woman (57) in the group stated that the time of this kind of slavery is over: “Today, everybody has freedom. Earlier the husbands beat their wives, but today the women won’t let their husbands beat them, they won’t be manipulated.” When asked what spurred these changes, the women pointed to education as the driving force. Says one woman (57): “The more they [the men] study the more freedom there is for women, because their way of thinking changes.” Progress can however not be generalized and women may still lose freedom if they marry the ‘wrong’ person. One of the younger women (34) explains: “If you marry a bad or strict person, you no longer have freedom. This is connected to violence.” San Simon is the poorest community in Yucatán and has the lowest education levels, the highest incidences of illiteracy and the largest monolingual population of all communities in Yucatán. However, the views of women in this community were echoed in the better-off communities. For instance, in Sanahcat, young women also felt that the unequal standing between men and women was changing thanks to education: “As youth get more education they earn more freedom. Because of this, we already learnt that we are equal to men: when people get more education, progress follows” (woman 24). Another young woman (21) tells us that both her father and brothers now help at home: “My brother sometimes helps to wash clothes. Today they help you but before that was not the case. Before, the men would be out in the street and the women in the house…We need more education throughout the population. I think this is how we would learn that we are all equal” (woman, 21). The young women also note how work relations used to be more unequal and how the poor had less power and were badly treated. This is also changing with education they think: “Earlier there was no education, and because of this lack of education the rich humiliated their workers…The owners of the haciendas humiliated workers. Today, a worker would rather starve to death than be mistreated” (woman 24). Adds another young woman (22): “Now you can no longer force a person to do what he doesn’t want to do. You have to treat people well.”

66

Similar discussions on gender relations took place in Oaxaca. Women here focused less on how education might change men’s attitudes, and more on how education and literacy has made women more aware of their rights and more able to defend themselves: Comparing younger and older generations of women in her community, a 20-year old woman from Abejones explains: “They [older women] did not know where to go if they were beat. We know how to read and we know by now who we should go to see if they beat us.” Discussing changes in democracy in their village over the past ten years, the women also note that women participate much more today then they used to. Says one woman (38): “Education helps in that we women are being taken in account now - that is why we have improved”. Even in the poorest community in Oaxaca, the situation of women is changing. After discussing limits to their freedom, such as having to keep their heads down and eyes low when they walk in the village because husbands are jealous, one woman (49) still felt she is freer today: “I am more free now, free to progress, I have more freedom now than before.” The women noted that the attitude in schools towards women has changed: “Now they take women into account in the school” (woman, 40). They also felt that ever since women were allowed to assist in local government meetings, they value knowledge more. This is a marked change from ten years ago: “Before, all the men participated and the women didn’t know about anything. The men had to explain to them what the meetings were about” (woman, 40) “Earlier it was only the men who made the decisions, but now, men and women are equals” (woman, 49) Local people in other communities also noted how education positively affects local democracy and government. We asked focus groups in all communities how democracy has changed in the past ten years, to which one man (56) from Abejones, Oaxaca answered: “Earlier, there were no schooling for us, and we do not know about this [democracy], but now, the new generation, they know about democracy.” When we ask about the future of democracy, another man (43) answers: “People with more education and knowledge are the ones who will govern, and we will live better.” Youth in the community echoed these views: “In ten years we will be better. There will be more schools, more education, more respect” (man, 17). Women from another community in Oaxaca –Yosoyuxi – also discussed the impact of education on democracy, and one woman (36) noted that: “Now that the leaders are more educated, they worry more about our needs - they even understand more”. Men in Yosoyuxi agreed with the women, and believed that local democracy and government will be better in the future because: “We will have more schools, because education is the most important thing to move ahead” (man 45) and because “More people will learn to speak Spanish” (man 33). Finally, young women in the community related education to the fact that there is less conflict in their community today. Ten years ago, Yosoyuxi was ravaged by violent intra-communal conflict and land disputes with other Triqui communities in the region. A young woman (24) commented: “Thanks to education, we now have more order and democracy here; people don’t fight as much because they are more educated”. Similar views on the link between education and democracy were voiced in Yucatán. Young women in Quintana Roo also noted how increased education will benefit the community and local democracy in the future: “Today, youth focuses more on gaining knowledge and this way democracy and the community will improve little by little. This way we’ll get rid of ignorance” (woman, 25). Source: Focus Group Discussions with youth and adult

In terms of private returns to education, local people perceived education as key to household mobility, and one of the main mechanisms to move out of poverty (see chapter 3). Better-off households give their children more education, sometimes beyond lower-secondary, while poorer households have a hard time supporting their children even through lower-secondary. Investing in children’s education was seen as a way to secure more stable incomes in the future, while failure to invest in children’s education was seen as one reason why some households get ‘stuck’ at the bottom. Table 29 looks at education across the different transition groups in both states. Education correlates positively with level of wellbeing, which confirms that better-off households are able to invest more in education. If we compare the two groups that were poor ten years ago (e.g. the movers and the chronic poor) we see that those who have since moved out of poverty have, on

67

average, more schooling than those who remained poor. Due to data limitations, we do not know if households that moved out of poverty had higher levels of education in 1995, or if improved welfare throughout the period led to higher investment in education. Looking at average years of schooling for heads of households only, we see that these follow the same pattern. Interestingly, non-poor in the age group 46-60 has the highest average years of schooling of all. This result is driven by a hand-full of men with between 10 and 16 years of schooling. Among these are migrants called back to the community to perform their one-year community service (government officials) and teachers. Macuiltianguis is an educational center for its region.

Table 29: Education in Successful Communities, by Transition Group and State Successful Communities Oaxaca Successful Communities Yucatán

Never Poor Movers Chronic Poor Never Poor Movers Chronic Poor Years of schooling Ages 15 - 25 7.6 7.4 7.3 8.0 7.7 6.6 Ages 26 - 45 6.4 4.4 3.3 6.4 4.3 3.6 Ages 46 - 60 9.3 2.5 1.3 3.8 2.4 2.4 > 61 years 2.4 1.0 0.8 1.7 1.9 2.8 Head of households 6.6 4.4 3.2 4.8 3.6 3.0 Literacy rate Age 14 and above 95.2 77.8 70.2 89.7 82.8 80.9 Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

While the poorest households get stuck due to low education or illiteracy, the strongest human capital constraint may still be lacking knowledge of Spanish. One man (50) from Yosoyuxi who only speaks Triqui, captured feelings expressed throughout communities when he explained how not speaking Spanish hindered him in finding jobs outside his village or migrate as so many others did: “How was I supposed to leave when no one understands me outside the community?” Box 12 reviews the extent of the monolingual population across states and types of communities. On average, not speaking Spanish is more common in Oaxaca than in Yucatán. Within both states, the monolingual population is much bigger in the non-successful community than in the successful ones. Finally, gender matters and in Oaxaca in particular, more women than men do not speak Spanish.

Box: 12 Monolingual Populations in Study Communities in Yucatán and Oaxaca

Local people noted that lacking or no knowledge of Spanish is one of the key constraints that keep some of the poorest households in their communities poor. Figure 1 shows the percentage of the population in study communities that only speaks an indigenous language. Not speaking Spanish was more common in Oaxaca than in Yucatán. In both states, there were big differences between successful communities and the non-successful ones, with the percentage of monolingual being much higher in the poorer communities. Finally, gender differences are stark across all communities except San Simon in Yucatán (non-successful). In the non-successful community in Oaxaca, San Pedro el Alto, over 30 percent of women do not speak Spanish, compared to 10 percent of men. In successful communities, 16 percent of women still do not speak Spanish, compared to about 4 percent of men.

68

Fig. 1: Percentage of Monolingual in Study Communities, by State and Gender

16.3

31.2

4.7

16.9

3.8

10.2

0.8

16.4

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

SuccessfulCommunities

Non-successfulcommunity

SuccessfulCommunities

Non-successfulcommunity

Oaxaca Yucatan

WomenMen

Looking across transitions groups in successful communities in Oaxaca (table 1), we see that the population that does not speak Spanish is concentrated in the chronic poor category. This is not the case in Yucatán, where there were actually more monolinguals in the never poor category. However, the share of the population not speaking Spanish is small and predominantly elderly. In both states, the share of monolingual population is much lower in the study communities than state-level averages would predict.

Table 1: Percentage of Monolingual, by Transition Group and State

Monolingual parents interviewed tended to feel very strongly about their children speaking Spanish. A 59-year old woman in Sachaba, who only speaks Maya tells here that the obstacles she faced due to this, is what motivated her to prioritize education for her children: “Education was the one thing they never gave me and I didn’t learn Spanish…I gave schooling to my children so they could live better than me.” Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico 2005 (successful communities only)

B. Education as a Mechanism of Upward Mobility The role of education as a mechanism for moving out of poverty needs to be contextualized within a setting where people perceive little or no economic opportunity within their villages. In the 12 study communities, not leaving the village to work was perceived as the least attractive

Successful communities Oaxaca Successful communities Yucatán

Never Poor Movers

Chronic Poor

Oaxaca State

average Never Poor Movers

Chronic Poor

Yucatán State

average Women 4.2 14.7 25.4 24.1 4.6 4.4 3.4 10.6 Men 0.0 3.8 6.7 15.2 1.7 0.0 1.1 7.1 Total 1.8 8.9 17.6 19.8 3.2 2.3 2.2 8.8

69

option. When leaving the community, community members find jobs locally or nationally, or they may go to the US. A recent study migration to the US from rural Mexico, shows that the relationship between schooling and migration differs according to destination and sector choice (Mora and Taylor, 2005). The study finds that years of schooling have no effect on an individual’s probability of migrating internationally irrespective of sector choice (farm or non-farm). The authors does not find this surprising since international migration from rural Mexico is predominantly illegal and entails employment in low-skill jobs where few US employers ask about schooling levels. In terms of internal migration, the effects of schooling are sector specific: education has a positive effect on internal migration for non-farm jobs where the economic returns are likely to be high. It has a negative effect on internal migration for farm jobs. Relating this back to our study regions, according to these findings, education is not a determinant for accessing jobs in the US – the mechanism most commonly referred to in Oaxaca, while it does affect those who travel for non-farm employment internally – the way ahead in Yucatán according to local perceptions. Looking at the study communities, two key educational trends are noted. First, people perceive very strongly that public assistance for education has improved over the past ten years, above all via the cash transfer program Oportunidades. Communities in Yucatán focused more strongly on this than did their Oaxacan counterparts. Second, the attitudes of parents and youth toward education have changed and schooling is given a higher priority. While these two trends can be seen in all communities, two different stories emerge: In Oaxaca, the effects of US migration are complex, as people noted both positive and negative impacts of migration on education. At the same time, parents in Oaxaca value their children’s education above all as an alternative to illegal US migration. Education may allow youth to access good jobs and economic opportunities in Mexico – jobs that do not carry the risks and emotional costs as US migration. In Yucatán, the most common way to move ahead is for adults or grown children to find employment outside of the community. In most cases this means commuting to nearby cities in search of off-farm employment for which formal education is crucial.

Box 13: Findings from the Life Stories Related to Education as a Mechanism for Moving Ahead

A closer look at the 122 individual open-ended interviews conducted sheds a more detailed look at how education affects mobility. It is important to note however that the people interviewed were sampled from those households or members of households still living in the communities. Needless to say, this gives a biased look at movements out of poverty as many ‘movers’, i.e. people who moved out of what was perceived as poverty ten years ago – did so by moving away from the communities. Education works as a way out of poverty primarily because it offers better job opportunities, however to access these, the more educated members are forced to leave their communities. Respondents with Limited or No Schooling saw this either as an obstacle or did not view education as of importance. The majority of the respondents had no schooling or some primary education and many older respondents cite the lack of schools or teachers when growing up as main reason for no schooling. Those without schooling or limited schooling regret not knowing how to read and write and feel this has constrained them, while those with a little more schooling cite the importance of knowing how to read and write, but do not mention much else gained from schooling. Respondents with Higher Education, that is beyond lower secondary schooling, did see education as important in their ability to move ahead. Of the 12 people in the sample that have had some education beyond lower secondary, all eight of the movers credit their education to some degree for their move. Most are working outside of agriculture and outside of the community. There are clear links between education and migration: Those with higher education, particularly with a university degree, have difficulty obtaining a professional job within their community. These individuals

70

have varying reasons for staying in the community. Three of the respondents that had education beyond lower secondary live in the Yucatan. One is residing in the community and commuting to Merida to work as a teacher. The other two are residing in their town for political reasons – one has aspirations to be more involved in politics with his wife and the other has been appointed municipal coordinator by his uncle. The respondent with the political aspirations spent a total of about 16 years in Cancun while his wife stayed in the community. In Oaxaca, the nine individuals with higher education still living in the community did so for varying reasons. One respondent completed his high school in the US and worked there for many years and was able to get legal papers. He returned to the community because his wife wanted to and with the money he accumulated in the US he bought a ranch and cattle. Three respondents cited having to return to fulfill political posts. Neither was upset about these positions and seemed glad to be able to contribute to their community. This seems to indicate that communities are choosing citizens to fulfill political posts that have greater education. Another individual owns a real estate business in Oaxaca and commutes there. Another teaches in the community and, therefore, also contributes to the community. All had to travel outside of community to go to any schooling beyond lower secondary. Some comment that better educational opportunities within the community may prevent the need for migration for better opportunities. Remittances, often from the US from siblings or a husband, often fund this education. Younger siblings often have better chance of getting higher education because of help from older siblings. Apart from the ability to leave the community to study, other factors listed as helping people access schooling were scholarships, having family living outside the community and having the ability to combine study with work. Three respondents cited receiving scholarships as critical to allowing them to continue studying. Traveling to other cities or towns may have been facilitated with the presence of family in that city or town (network effects). Many worked while they studied. All of these respondents, particularly those with a university degree, demonstrate high self-confidence. Value Perception of education: Frequently people regret not studying more. Often financial constraints (having to work early to support a family) keep people from studying more. Many see a great value in knowing how to read and write and in knowing Spanish as being important for obtaining better jobs. In Sanahcat, some are able to continue school, particularly primary or lower secondary, as an adult. Many see the work-related training, usually informal from family members, as more useful than anything they learned in school. This is not true for those with higher education. This occurs most often with those employed in agriculture and construction. In Oaxaca, greater value seems to be on migration over education as a mechanism to get ahead. Many would like children to study, and believe this will give them a better life. Some are making great sacrifices (including migration) to fund children’s education. Even in Oaxaca where migration is the most common mechanism to earn money, parents still try to encourage and assist their children in their studies. They believe this will help them get better jobs. Many parents also see their children’s education as a major motivating factor for working hard. Source: Individual Life Histories

i. Increased Assistance, more Facilities and Changing Attitudes towards Education

The importance of education as a vehicle for moving ahead, stood out in Yucatán. As mentioned, local people link education to prosperity because people with schooling are able to find better-paid jobs in nearby cities such as Merida and Cancun. Many adults also see education as a long-term investment for themselves as well as for their children or grandchildren. Says one man (66) from Sahcaba: “I am paying for my grandson’s schooling so he can get a better job and help us when we cannot work anymore…I pay his school so that he will be better, so that he can live a better life.” Given this, progress in education was viewed as one of the most positive factors to have affected communities in the past ten years. Accordingly, youth have better chances of moving ahead. Local people pointed to three reasons for why this advance has come about: (i) Oportunidades; (ii) better facilities, in particular due to construction of lower-secondary schools; and (iii) a change in parents’ attitudes and a higher priority given to education within households.

71

A young woman (27) from Quintana Roo sums up the key factors that have affected education in the past ten years this way: “We have scholarships for primary and secondary school from Oportunidades. The schools are already offering free transport to go to high school. In addition, people have more education now because parents today fight for their children to have an education.” People also referred to a growing generational divide as younger generations are acquiring much higher levels of education. In Yucatán, Oportunidades was the type of public support for education most often mentioned when people discussed positive changes in community prosperity over the past ten years. Says one father (46) from Chan Chochola: “With this program we have help to send our children to school at least until the finish lower-secondary school.” Oportunidades was launched in 1997 under the name Progresa, and combines a traditional cash transfer program with financial incentives for families to invest in the human capital of children (health, education and nutrition). To receive the cash transfer, families must obtain preventive health care, participate in growth monitoring and nutrition supplements programs, and attend educational talks about health and hygiene. In 2001, Oportunidades extended education benefits to high school students and the year after urban areas were also included. In the introduction of this report, we showed how Oportunidades has higher participation rates in indigenous communities - a result of the program’s effective targeting of the country’s poorest households and most disadvantaged communities. According to recent evaluations, Oportunidades has helped increase school enrollment rates and lower dropout rates, and it has also had positive affects on health and nutrition (see for instance Behrman et al. 2005; Schultz 2004; Skoufias et al. 2001). These impacts are reflected in the spectacular gains in years of schooling among younger generations in the study communities, and an overall reduction of the indigenous/non-indigenous education gap in terms of primary and lower secondary schooling. Studies have also shown that Oportunidades has helped reduce the likelihood that an indigenous child would work. Bando et al. (2006) show that indigenous children whose family received Oportunidades were less likely to work and more likely to attend school: 3 years into the program, the probability of working fell by 60 percent for indigenous children aged 8-11. This study also found positive effects on the school achievement among monolingual indigenous children. Box 14 recounts Sanahcat’s experience with Oportunidades.

Box 14: Oportunidades and Community Prosperity in Sanahcat Importance for community prosperity: Both men and women in Sanahcat ranked Oportunidades as the single most important factor that has helped the community prosper over the past ten years. The men felt the program has been the only change for good in the past ten years: “Oportunidades is the only thing that has changed Sanahcat. It’s the only difference” (man, 50). The women first mentioned the money that they receive which helps them buy a little additional something every 2 months. They also mention the health talks that they have to attend from which they learnt how to better care for their children. Says one woman (41): “The program helps us more than anything in terms of health issues.” The men agreed, saying that while the money is not much, the program still helps families put their children through school. The men also insisted on the fact that the program benefits those who really needed it, which they think is important: “The only beneficial event in the past ten years was when they began to pay Oportunidades. They included only those that had been most affected by the crisis in henequen” (man, 63). Women in particular noted benefits to come from the program in the future: “Now that the youth have education they can obtain better jobs. In addition, we will be better off because of the help from programs like Oportunidades and because of us women who are now studying” (woman 53). The women in this group also viewed the program as one of the reasons why their community would be better off in the future: “It might change because now the youth is studying” (woman, 39). “Yes, with the help of Oportunidades the youth is studying and they

72

already have more experience than we do”, (woman, 37). “It’s true. And the youth teaches us. We even learn how to speak better Spanish” (woman, 56).

Oportunidades and adult education. An adult education component was added to Oportunidades in 2004 as a means to eradicate illiteracy. The obligation of parents to return to school and finish primary and/or secondary education replaces earlier obligations to attend health talks. In a first round, only families who have been beneficiaries for more than 3 years are included. This assures that parents have already assisted all the 32 health talks that the program offers. If the recipient (usually the mother) has already completed primary and secondary schooling, another member of the family takes her place, in many cases the husband. Both parents can participate if they wish to. Adult education in Sanahcat: Sanahcat is one of 20 municipalities in Yucatán to experience with the new Oportunidades program component. Adult education was already offered in the municipal library, however, since it became an Oportunidades requisite, the number of participants in basic education courses has sky-rocketed. Most men and women in the FGDs viewed this new initiative as something positive: “It has benefited the mothers. There are courses and they can learn and this way help the children with their homework” (woman, 41). They also saw the education as something that benefited them personally: “When I left school I did not know how to divide, now I know” (woman 25). However not all the women were happy with this latest change in the program and thought it was too late for them to try to learn how to read or write. “If I didn’t learn when I was young, there’s even less of a chance that I learn now. I think I will leave the program” (woman 36). While this young woman felt she was too old to learn, 56-year old Raul disagrees and tells us during an open-ended interview how he and his wife now attend school together: “Now, those who receive Oportunidades have to finish secondary school and we are studying together now, me and my wife. We only just started but we have learned a lot. I think that I will finish even if I am old for this. This is why I support my children a lot so that they at least get their high school degree” (man, 56).

Source: Focus Groups Discussions (men and women), open-ended interviews.

Also key to recent expansion of access to education are improvements in educational facilities, in particular, the adding of lower-secondary schools in the communities. Younger men in Chan Chochola noted how the construction of a lower-secondary school 13 years ago, allowed them to get better education, and with it, better jobs: “Yes it helps to at least have a telesecundaria to help find better work and wages” (man 28). Not having a lower-secondary school in the community, turned up as the key constraint to attaining education. In Santa Rosa there is only a primary school (first 6 years of basic education) and lower-secondary schools are located in a nearby community. Local people observed that not all parents let their children leave the village: “As they finish primary school, the parents won’t let their kids go to secondary school in Santo Domingo or in Maxcanu” (woman, 26). “Here there are a lot of kids who don’t go” (woman, 32). The women in Santa Rosa are not comfortable sending their children away to school as the road is dangerous and they fear for other dangers. Young women in the community noted how families were particularly hesitant to let young girls leave. Table 30 shows how years of schooling are higher in communities with lower-secondary schools. School attendance is also slightly higher.

Table 30: Years of Schooling and School Attendance according to Facility Availability

Years of schooling (Ages 12-15)

Years of schooling (Ages 16 and above)

School attendance (Ages 12-15)

Communities with lower secondary 6.6 5.0 66%

Communities without lower secondary* 5.8 3.9 63%

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico 2005 *Communities without lower-secondary are Santa Rosa in Yucatán, and Yosoyuxi and Concepcion Carrizal in Oaxaca

73

Finally, people also perceived great changes in parents’ attitudes towards education. Men in Quintana Roo were particularly vocal about the recent attitudinal changes. Says one man (50): “The community has changed its vision of the future in terms of our children’s education. We fight so that they will have a better schooling level.” Other men in the focus group agreed and one man (60) concluded: “Here, what counts today is education.” These views were echoed by youth in the community, “Today, you look down on people who do not have education; you look down on ignorance” (woman, 17). The youth explained the change in attitude by pointing to how education offers a way to access job opportunities outside the community. One young woman (22) sums up the general opinion of her group when she says: “If you don’t have education in this community you will never move ahead. It is very difficult because in this community there are no opportunities for growth. In order to move ahead, you have to leave the community and look for opportunities elsewhere.”

ii. The Effect of US Migration on Education in Oaxaca

Recent studies have shown potential negative effects on education of international migration in Mexico. Mora and Taylor (2005) suggest that for individuals with a high probability of migrating to areas where wages are high but the returns to schooling are low, i.e. the case of illegal US migrants from rural Mexico, there may be a disincentive to invest in schooling. Another recent study (McKenzie, 2005) reveals that while remittances generally lead to a greater investment in education, rural Mexico is an exception. It finds, for instance, that children aged 16-18 in migrant-sending households had lower schooling levels than households that didn’t send migrants. One explanation may be that children at this age migrate to work and drop out of school. A second explanation offered by the authors is that future returns to schooling are now lower since the children have a high probability of migrating to low skill jobs in the US, and so aspirations are lower. Finally, children may be filling in for absent adults in household work and/or have less supervision. People’s perceptions in Oaxaca, suggests however that the impact of migration on education are more complex, at least in the indigenous communities covered by this study, and there were mixed opinions among local people as to the effect of migration on education. Some parents hoped to send their children to the US as soon as feasible. In Guadalupe de Morelos, many parents were ready to send their kids North as soon as they finish lower-secondary: Says one young mother (25): “When the kids grow up, they can help me economically by working and I’ll send them to the US to work with their father,” and a father (43): “Once they finish lower-secondary I’ll tell them: Get moving and head North!” Some youth also pointed to the influence of friends. A young man from Carrizal (25) notes that back when he wanted to continue his studies, his friends told him not to and convinced him to go to the United States instead, “Because I was immature and because I had no economic resources, I didn’t go to school.” He only finished one year of lower secondary before migrating. His dream is to return to school in order to go to university and he now regrets having left school for the US. “I want to become a famous architect in the region, I want to study again.” While friends and parents may influence children as they decide to leave school for the US, the sheer pull of better-paid jobs is strong enough in and of itself: A key informant in Guadalupe de Morelos noted that most of the youth left for the US after finishing lower-secondary, mainly because there are no jobs in the community while across the border there are plenty. Other parents in the community have tried in vain to influence their children to stay in school: One mother told us that they invested money to put their youngest son through high school, hoping

74

this would prevent him from migrating. All his brothers had already left and she and her husband were hoping that with education they could keep the youngest closer to home. However, the pull of the North was too strong, and in his last year of high school he left for the US: “We have invested money in his education and he was finishing high school. We were hoping for him to continue his studies because he has a liking for it, but one day he told us that he too wanted to go North” (woman, 38). Migration to the US might be perceived as the fastest way up and out of poverty in Oaxaca, however the costs are high. Many parents expressed that they hope their children will not have to migrate in order to succeed. As the mother in Guadalupe de Morelos, they look to education for an alternative that may keep the youth closer to home and away from the dangers of both the border crossings and life in a foreign country. Youth themselves also noted that in the long run, getting education will serve you well. Says a young man (17) from Abejones: “The ones who leave earn money but later there is no security. It is better to study than to leave, even if you suffer more.” As such, investments in education were a priority in the majority of households interviewed in Oaxaca, also in those that receive remittances. Contrary to findings that show how children in remittance-receiving households have less schooling, people’s perceptions in the study communities were that remittances help youth stay in school longer than they would have otherwise. In open-ended interviews with a limited number of migrant-sending households, we found a generally strong priority given to education and remittances are clearly invested in schooling. A woman (39) from Yosoyuxi, whose husband works in the US, says she feels happy and proud because with her remittances, she is now able to give her son a better education: “I am very happy now because my older son already knows how to use a computer. He wants to learn English and wants to become a doctor to help people in the village.” She hopes her husband will be able to save up enough dollars to buy her son a computer and is very clear about why education matters: “You have to give children education so they can move out of poverty” Another wife of a migrant (34) from the same community tells a similar story: “It helped us a lot when my husband started to send money because I could send the children to school. I would like for Angelica to finish school, that the children become more educated so they will be better off than we were.” In Macuiltianguis focus groups noted that families with migrants have done better because they invested their dollars in their children’s education. Says one woman (37):“The families of those who left have done better because the husbands earn more money. Later, with this money they can save and they can send their children off to study more, so that they complete high school or even university.” Finally, some migrants’ children are born in the US, and the value of a US citizenship - in addition to not having to risk your life for a job – is access to better education. Box 15 summarizes the thoughts on education of one returning migrant whose two eldest children are American-born.

Box 15: Saving and Investing in Education: Luis (32) Macuiltianguis

Luis migrated to Los Angeles in 1993 where he met his wife, Paulina. They got married and their two oldest children were born in the US and are American citizens. Luis and his wife value their children’s US citizenship a lot. “It is good first of all because if they decide to migrate it will be easier for them because they can leave without having to walk the mountains and run risks. Also, because they can study in the US and this way earn more dollars than I.”

Luis and his family came back to Macuiltianguis in 2004 after more than 10 years in the US, yet they plan to return soon: “I plan to go back again because we need dollars to maintain the family and also because I want my girls to study over there.” He firmly believes that education is the best thing he can spend his money on: “The education of my daughter is the best investment. So that she will be better off, so that she won’t suffer the way we did…If I did not put them through school, they would have lost out on their

75

education and we don’t want them to fall behind – we want them to move ahead.” He continues: “I want them to have the highest possible education that is within our reach to give them, so that they are not left behind as I was. I want them to finish a university degree, that they get careers and that they become great people. That they can maintain themselves, that they move ahead and that they turn into good human beings…I want them to know a lot, to travel. I want my daughters who are American to study over there where the schools are better, in order for them to be better prepared. It’s the best thing I can leave them.” Luis opened a savings account in 1998, in part to secure his children’s education in the future in case something happens: “It is good to save, first of all because in the case of an emergency I have some money. Second, it’s for the children’s future so that if I am no longer there they are not left unprotected and this way they can still continue school. That is the best thing we can leave them”. There is also a general sense of security: “I feel prepared with these savings. If something happens, there’s money in the bank for Paulina and for the kids.” Source: Open-ended interview As mentioned in chapter 4, migrants also acquire new skills and experience when they migrate. From our limited number of interviews with migrants, there were however few examples of formal education being acquired by migrants themselves while in the US. Roberto from Guadalupe de Morelos (box 16) is an important exception: At the age of 17 he enrolled in public high school in California and after graduating, he attended private evening classes and acquired a wide range of professional certificates. His US education helped him access better jobs.

Box 16: Tapping into the US Education System, Roberto, (38) Guadalupe de Morelos

Roberto migrated illegally to the US at the age of 17 and went to live with his brothers in San Bernadino in California. He immediately enrolled in public high school in California, working part-time jobs to support himself. Before leaving he had started Agricultural College in Mexico City, but since his parents couldn’t support him, and since the city only offered full-time jobs, he had to leave. Entering high school, Roberto didn’t speak a word of English. “The first two months were very difficult as I didn’t speak the language.” The worst thing was not being able to talk to other students, when they approached him to share their food with him or talk to him. However he studied hard from the very beginning. “I immediately gave everything at school.” This way he suffered through the first year and things soon got better. “In the beginning I had no friends, but then I learnt English and felt more confident. Still, the first year was complicated...When I learnt English I liked it a lot. I had a lot of friends. You get to know a lot of people.”

He graduated high school and began working full-time, yet he did not stop educating himself. Roberto now discovered the wide range of professional certificates that you could obtain from private night schools. From 1986 to 1989 he got various professional certificates this way. “It was a different kind of education. These were private schools that charges between 50 and 60 dollars a month. During the 3 years I went there, they gave me certificates to exercise different jobs.” He liked the system as he could work during the day and go to school at night. “I first did a course in mechanics. Later I studied the professions of plumbing, car mechanic, welding, wood carving and carpentry.” Roberto made sure to explain the difference between these courses and a university degree. “These were only certificates. It was not a complete degree.” In the period from 25 to 30 years old (1992 -1997) Roberto also assisted a series of job-related courses and on-the-job trainings. He worked in a Greek restaurant and became a certified chef. “I attended small courses and also received full training as a chef. They gave me a certificate for this.”

Education helps finding better jobs in the US. It was easy for Roberto to find jobs due to references from his brothers, his US high school degree, and his English skills. “It was easy to find a job due to the fact that I had good recommendations and due to the fact that I spoke the language.”

While Roberto clearly values education, he does not think that his sons should continue their studies in Mexico. He would much rather see them go to the US to ‘struggle’ for a while and the best thing would be to do exactly what he did. He feels that the education offered in Mexico is not worth much compared to what you can get in the US: “Mexico does not grow with its people; no one here wants to teach those that

76

don’t know.” While he would have preferred moving the entire family to California, he respects his wife’s wish to remain in the village. Today, Roberto is back in Guadalupe de Morelos for good, where he has invested his savings in a cattle ranch. The ranch is the realization of his childhood dream: “When I was little I always dreamt of having a ranch, but I never thought…well, I never thought it was going to happen. I would prefer to live in California but with my ranch I am happy here”

Source: Open-ended interview

Before closing this section on education in Oaxaca, it is important to note that while US migration was seen as the most efficient way out of poverty and the factor that appears most consistently across individual success stories, some have made it without crossing the border. These success stories are what parents look to when they invest in children’s education in order to spear them the harsh experiences of US migration. Local people often pointed to the fact that with a good education – high school or preferably university – you can find employment that allows you to move ahead without migrating. Box 17 shows how Tomas, an inhabitant of Abejones where US migration is intense, was able to move ahead thanks in great part to his studies.

Box 17: The Story of Tomas, 29 years old, Abejones In a community where mass migration is rampant and ‘everybody’ is scrambling across the border to try their luck in the US, Tomas stands out as a different success story. His success is built on education and local entrepreneurship, not illegal migration. Despite scarce resources, Tomas’s parents managed– with a lot of sacrifices – to provide education for their eight children. At the age of six, Tomas was sent to school in the nearby municipality Macuilitanguis, a better-off community where schools were known to be of a higher quality. Here, he completed primary and lower-secondary top of his class, and won a scholarship to continue onto high school. With the scholarship secured, he went to live with an uncle in Oaxaca City. Finally, at the age of twenty he again secured a scholarship, this time to attend University (Chapingo) in Mexico City to study Agricultural Business Management.

When he graduated in 2002, he went back to Oaxaca City where he started his own real estate business with a loan from a friend, buying plots of land and selling these off again in smaller parcels. “When I was in University I was always thinking about having my own business. I bought a lot of plots this way, I paid off the loan and by now I have more assets”. He says of this period that “I felt very happy about being able to move ahead on my own.” He also emphasizes that he was risking everything in his first business transaction: “I had faith and asked for the loan. It was a lot, but I am very decided in what I do. When I have to take a decision I take it and I’ll never back down” In 2004, with savings from the real estate business, Aquileo invested in a family business of growing and trading tomatoes. This has turned out to be a good business, and he gets to use his university education.

Together with his decisiveness and flair for business, education has clearly been a key factor in Tomas’s progress. He also points to the influence of examples set by members of his family, above all by his father and sister. His parents helped and motivated him in his studies and they “told me that if I want something I have to fight for it. My father is an example because with nothing, he managed to give us education and food. He knew what to give us so that we could satisfy our needs.” His sister, who lives and works in California, is another role model he looks up to: “My sister never liked to depend on my father; she was always looking for ways to become more independent. For instance, she migrated to the US and sometimes she sends money home. She studied in Santa Barbara and she is an example for me”

When we interviewed Tomas, he had just returned to Abejones to live. Having been nominated to a cargo (post) in the municipal government, he had to drop his business for a year, move back to his village and fulfill his obligation as a citizen (Abejones is governed by Usos Y Costumbres). Leaving his new business behind in order to work for free in the village is something Tomas takes philosophically “I am sacrificing myself for the community and I am also learning. But I think I was better off in Oaxaca City.” He continues: “I left because of the service I had to render the community and today my job is as a treasurer under the Usos y Costumbres system. I am learning here, yet I have had to abandon my businesses a bit but it is for the common good of my village. My source of livelihood right now is my savings because my job here is not paid. The impact on my economic wellbeing has been a little negative, but I am learning a lot

77

here. The service helps me to gain knowledge, but it also hinders me in other ways as I have to complete this service for one entire year…and after this they might appoint me as municipal president.” Given his high human capital, Tomas knows that he needs to save up and prepare himself for his next cargo. He’s exactly the kind of community member people nominate and elect in this community – the educated kind. Source: Open-ended interview

C. Continued Constraints in Access to Upper--Secondary School and Beyond Table 31 shows how returns to schooling for indigenous peek for upper-secondary education. The income of indigenous males increases by nearly 30 percent with high school completed. For indigenous females, it results in an increase in income of about 40 percent. The returns to high school is twice as high for indigenous than for non-indigenous, for both men and women. Table 31: Returns of Schooling from Mincerian Earnings Functions, Indigenous Areas, 1997 Indigenous Non-indigenous Returns to Male Female All Male Female All Basic education 5.2 10.4 6.3 12.3 10.4 11.9 Secondary school 14.4 9.3 13.3 8.4 10.5 8.9 High school 28.6 39.4 32.4 13.6 17.7 14.5 College/University 16.3 15.0 16.2 17.4 16.9 17.6 Sources: ENEZI 1997 Includes employed individuals with positive earnings and years of experience ages 14-64 Clearly, completing upper-secondary carries the promise of moving up and out of poverty. At the same time, this is the level of education where constraints kick in. In all communities, both in Yucatán and in Oaxaca, the transport and living expenses involved in sending children away for high school or other upper-secondary schooling were seen as the key constraint facing youth, and the main reason why many youth are forced to leave school earlier than they would have wanted. One man (49) from Santa Rosa explained how sending your children to high school demands great sacrifices: “Very few attend high school in Maxcanú. They sacrifice their breakfasts. In order to go they need to save or limit what they eat.” Table 32 shows the percentage of the population with upper secondary education completed. Not surprisingly, better off families invest more in their children’s education, than the chronic poor do. The gap between chronic poor and others is particularly pronounced in Oaxaca. Table 32: Upper Secondary Education, by Transition Group and State

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico, successful communities only If we look across types of communities, we see a marked difference between more and less successful communities in each state. Table 29 shows that in successful communities in Oaxaca, 7.5 percent of the population has completed upper-secondary schooling, while only 1.2 percent in the non-successful community has. The same difference occurs in Yucatán. In both Oaxaca and

Completed high school or other upper-secondary

Never Poor Movers Chronic Poor All

Oaxaca 10.1% 8.3% 3.5% 7.5%

Yucatán 15.6% 11.3% 7.1% 10.8%

78

Yucatán, however, high school completion rates in successful communities are lower than state averages. Combining the two tables, we see that poorer segments of the population as well as populations living in poorer communities are still disadvantaged in terms of access to education at levels of schooling beyond lower-secondary. In other words, the closing of the educational gap described in the introduction to this section, breaks down after lower-secondary schooling.

Table 33: Upper Secondary Education, by Type of Community and State Oaxaca Yucatán Successful Communities 7.5% 10.8% Non-successful Communities 1.2% 3.2% Total 6.4% 9.5% State averages (2000) 9.9% 16.0% Source: INEGI Household Survey MOP Mexico, successful communities only Youth in Yucatán, where off-farm employment that demands formal education was perceived as one of the most important mechanisms for moving ahead, were particularly worried about the lack of access to high school education. It also made them express concerns about the reinforcing link between educational and economic inequality (box 18).

Box 18: The Link between Education and Economic Inequality as Viewed by Youth Youth in many communities in Yucatán referred to differences in education when asked to define the concept of inequality. They also pointed to how education and inequality is linked in a vicious circle: economic inequality leads to unequal access to education, while the resulting differences in education reinforces initial levels of economic inequality. Young women in Sanahcat voiced many of these concerns: Says one of the women (24): “Economic inequality exists: we who have little money can’t get education.” Another woman (21) confirmed this and also pointed to lacking understanding of this on the part of the better off: “You want to have the same privileges as the rich in order to continue studying, but they [the rich] don’t always appreciate that” (woman 21). The result is educational inequality: “As we have very few resources we can’t get an education. Because of this, there is another inequality: that of education” (woman, 24). The group concludes the discussion by giving the following definition of inequality: “Inequality is when you do not have the same opportunities as others” (woman, 22). Men in Chan Chochola also explained how the lack of economic resources for schooling results in economic inequality: “We can’t study because of lack of resources…Some go to high school - the ones that have money - and this creates economic inequality” ” (man 24). Source: Focus group discussions with youth

Both youth and adults expressed concerns about how their economic situation affects schooling opportunities. When asked about the main obstacle to obtaining their goals for the future, one woman (26) from Guadalupe de Morelos answered: “Poverty, because it is too strong of an obstacle. It is a problem that affects the education of children. And this affects them not only economically.” A man (22) from Abejones explained that lack of money forced him to leave school to work: “I did not finish secondary school, I had to start working to support my family.” Money also determines the type of schools you attend. When we asked a young woman (17) from Quintana Roo what had been her greatest obstacle she answered: “Money, because when I finished secondary school I would have liked to enter a better school, but since I didn’t have the required economic resources to do so I had to enter a school that fit my economic ability”. Across communities it was noted that money became a problem primarily after lower-secondary education because schools are located outside the village, as explained by youth in Quintana Roo: “Because if there is not the level of studies that you want to pursue you have to leave the

79

community to study and if there is not enough money, well you can’t do that” (woman, 22). “We lack a high school here because after secondary school those who want to continue to study have to leave the village and some do not have the economy to do so” (man, 17). Finally, when there is no money, wellbeing goes down and your ability to perform at school also falls. Says one man (17) from Yosoyuxi: “When there is hunger, the letters don’t enter.”

Box 19: Youth on Why they Leave School Early Most youth said that they left school earlier than they would have liked because there was no money and they often had to work to help their families. Says one young man (22) from Abejones: “I want to study but I barely have any money…I did not finish secondary school, I had to start working to help my family.” Another man (22) from San Pedro el Alto noted how his main obstacle had been “not to be able to continue my studies. I always wanted a better future, but as I have to work I am losing motivation. But if I don’t work, well, then my younger brothers won’t have anything to eat”. Finally, many youth also complain about having to work at the same time as they go to school: “I am working and studying but the truth is, it’s difficult. In the end I am exhausted and there is not enough time to study” (Man, 18, Abejones). In Oaxaca, migration is another cause for leaving school early. Young men in Guadalupe de Morelos tell us that while the majority of youth graduate from lower secondary school, only a few have continued on to high school or all the way to university. The main reason for this they think is lack of money and the temptation to go North (to the US). Says one young man (24) who already went to the US: “I didn’t finish primary school, and I need at least secondary school to get a job.” Other pointed to the fact that they needed better, not only more, schooling: “We need computerized schools for a better education for all of us and this way we wont have to go to a different country” (Man, 21, Guadalupe de Morelos). Youth in Abejones, another community with high levels of migration, agreed that some youth leave school early to go to the US, however it was not seen as the best choice: “Those who leave earn money but later they have no security. It is better to study than to leave, even if you suffer more” (man, 17, Abejones). That high schools are located far away from the communities exacerbates economic costs, due to transportations and other expenses. In both states this was above all a problem when moving beyond lower-secondary: “The economy is a limitation when you want to continue studying and it is not possible. And besides there is no high school here in the community” (Man, 24, Macuiltianguis). This is what one woman answered when asked what her greatest obstacle was: “The lack of a high school because the fact that we have to go to other villages to study makes it more difficult for us” (woman 17, Santa Rosa). Source: Youth Focus Group Discussions, Youth Survey

Differences emerged across communities as to what was seen as the required level of education to move ahead. Completing high school is today common among youth in Sanahcat, and local people point to how the municipal government offers free transportation to the nearest high school as one reason for this. Youth in this community now feels that a high school degree alone is no longer enough, but studying beyond this is practically impossible due to the lack of money: Says one young woman (24): “The majority of kids here have finished high school, but because there are no money they were not able to continue studying.” The women explain that to go to university you have to go to Merida where everything is expensive: “Many have gone to Merida to continue studying, but they don’t have enough [money] to study, eat and pay for transportation: they quit studying and begin to work” (woman, 24). Another woman (21) told her personal experience: “I always dreamt of studying, of having a title, a degree, but as we don’t have the resources I was not able to. I tried to continue studying but my dad could not manage the costs. In order to go to Merida you need at least 100 pesos a day to pay for transport and food.”

80

While youth in Sanahcat lament not being able to continue their studies after high school, youth in the non-successful communities point to not being able to read and write and speak proper Spanish as their major obstacles. A common answer in these communities to the question “what is the main obstacle for your future?” was: “I don’t speak Spanish very well and I don’t know how to read and write” (man, 22, San Simon). Youth in both of the poorest communities know that finding jobs is impossible if you have poor Spanish skills in addition to low levels of education: “Because if we do not know how to read and speak Spanish, no one will give us work” (woman, 20, San Simon). As youth realize the extent to which lacking education hinders their ability to progress, many resign. Victor tells us his story and how easy it is to stagnate due to low levels of education (box 20).

Box 20: Lack of Education and Access to Job Opportunities - Victor, 20, San Simon

The experience of Victor, a 20-year old man from San Simon illustrates the constraints faced by youth with low levels of education. Relatively speaking, Eliso is doing very well for himself, both by community standards and given his level of education. At the age of 16, even though he only finished primary, Victor was lucky to get a job at one of the hotels in Uxmal. Local people see his job as a gardener as an enviable position, as very few manage to get a steady job like this. The problem, according to Victor, is that he will receive no wage increases beyond the minimum wage, even if he continues to gain experience, because he has no education that could justify it. “I began earning 150 pesos a week, and now I earn 350 pesos a week…I won’t earn more as I gain experience because I am already earning the minimum wage.” At the age of 20, Victor feels he is already stagnating. Due to lacking education, Victor is blocked from entering any of the better-paid jobs in the hotel. “My life has improved now that I do not depend on anyone. I can provide for my own family alone. But I know I won’t improve more economically because I did not do lower-secondary school and high school. Had I done that, I could have obtained a position as a waiter or as a chef. They earn more…I only completed 6th grade of primary school. I learnt to read and write. Of course, this helps but it is not enough. If I had a high school degree I could have gotten a good position in the hotel. As I am now, I don’t have any opportunities…I have stagnated due to my lack of education. More education would help me to have more, to get a better job and a better salary. With this I could have reached some of my personal goals in life, like continuing to support my parents because since I got married I haven’t given them as much as a peso.” As an employee in the tourist complex at Uxmal, Eliso is surrounded by good job opportunities; however not having a good enough education to take advantage of any of these is tearing away on Victor’s self esteem. When asked if he feels confident, Victor answers: “Yes I have confidence in myself, and even more now that I earn a little bit of money. However, it’s a shame that I don’t have the education needed to get a better position here in the hotel and earn more. I think about this at times, and then I have a little less confidence in myself.” Victor married at 18, and with a wife and child to provide for, he is not considering the possibility of going back to school. Source: Open-ended interview Hidden amongst the many stories of lost opportunity and failed aspirations are isolated stories of young men and women who have been successful in overcoming these constraints. Factors common to these educational achievers are: then support of the family; a willingness to sacrifice comfort today for better opportunities tomorrow; and a strong will to succeed. A good example is 25-year old Carla from Sahcaba who since the age of 12 worked to pay her way through high school and university (box 21). Other young women in Carla’s community discussed how economic constraints prevented them from getting the education they wanted. Says one young woman (19): “Our parents don’t have the money to put us through high school, because it is

81

costly.” Due to their economic situation, youth leave their studies to work, they explain: “Some of us have to work cleaning houses to help our parents with some money instead of studying” (woman, 25), “All young men and women leave their studies because they have to work…The economic aspect is an obstacle for us, because we want to go ahead and there is no money” (woman, 18). Carla however, overcame economic constraints by working double shifts, and also rose above other obstacles such as an unplanned pregnancy mid-way through university. Today Thelma works in a law firm in Merida.

Box 21: Life History, Carla, 25 years old, Sahcaba Carla’s household – which also consists of her parents, her older sister and her son - was classified as having moved out of poverty over the past ten years. Carla attributes her family’s progress to the hard work and dedication of all members of the household. They all contribute to the household’s expenses. She says: “We all have worked hard to move ahead, we have improved.” Carla’s personal history is however what stands out: With an incredible will and many sacrifices, she paid her own way through high school and university. An unplanned pregnancy did not stop her from completing a university degree in law, and today she works in a law firm in Merida.

Carla was born in 1980 in Sahcaba where she lived with her parents until the age of twelve. She would help her parents with the farming and her mother with household chores, but says that she was never forced to work. In 1986 she entered primary school and she liked it a lot. “Since I was just a little girl, I liked going to school.”

Carla’s life changed when she moved to Merida in 1992 to help her mother who worked as a maid in a private house. In the city, Carla worked in the mornings, cleaning and looking after her patrons’ children, and in the afternoons she went to school. The family paid her, and having money of her own was a big change for Carla. “They only paid me about 100 pesos per week, but can you imagine? For a child of 12 or 13 years old that was more than sufficient” Her mother let her buy what she wanted with the money, which Carla enjoyed immensely. Every weekend she and her mother would return to Sahcaba to be with the rest of the family.

In 1995, her mother returned for good to Sahcaba, while Carla, then 15 years old, continued to work as a maid in Merida. She stayed on primarily because she wanted to enter high school. To do so, she needed work, and she found a position with another family. Carla is very grateful to the new family she went to work for as they helped her buy books, notebooks and uniforms for school. While the workload was heavier, she had a room of her own and was also well paid. “The work in this house was very hard, but the woman helped me. She bought me notebooks and uniforms…I earned 450 pesos a week and it was enough for me and even to give some to my parents” Making a living on her own and being able to pay her way through high school made her feel independent and proud. Being able to buy her own things continued to motivate her: “I remember with such great joy when I bought my back pack and my shoes for school.”

Once Carla finished high school, in 1998, the family she worked for moved and she had to look for other work. She was 18 years and now she wanted a university education. To pay for school and living expenses, she had to work double shifts. In the morning she worked at a paper shop making photocopies and in the afternoons she worked as a waitress. “I had to look for a place to live and I worked double shifts. In the mornings I would work for a while making photocopies near the university, and in the afternoon as a waitress.” Those were hard times for Carla because she worked all day long and had to study at night. “I didn’t do too well because I worked double shifts, yet I earned the same as when I worked in the house [as a maid].” She however notes that it was worth it because a university degree would surely open new opportunities for her in the future. Carla also thinks that juggling two jobs in addition to her studies made her a more organized and responsible person. She now began valuing every single peso she earned. “I used to be more of a spender, but since that time I learned to manage my money.”

Two years later, Carla had to leave university because she got pregnant. The pregnancy was not planned and at first she was both frustrated and sad. Having to leave university felt like the end of all her aspirations and goals. She also felt lonely and abandoned. “When I realized I was pregnant, I felt very depressed, it felt

82

as if my life was over. How I regretted those nights…” She returned to Sahcaba to have her baby and her parents were of great support to her in those hard times. They never turned their backs on her. “My parents helped me and maintained me, so I came back to the village to have the baby. Those were difficult times…” After giving birth, Carla moved back to Merida to return to her studies. Her mother took care of her son, and her parents helped her economically. Being able to return to her studies and seeing her boy grow up, Carla felt much better. “When my boy was born I was very happy. Now, it is seeing him grow that motivates me to move ahead.”

A year later, Carla gets a job in the law firm where she is still working. She began working there for her social service (unpaid work which Mexican students have to do after graduating) and the firm hired her to stay on. She likes her job because her bosses are kind to her, they teach her about legal procedures and are overall very comprehensive and supportive. Carla also tells us that she uses her legal experience and training to help her community. “I go to see lawyers to straighten out legalization matters of plots of land. I like this a lot because I feel I am able to help people”. Carla earns 1,000 pesos a week, which is enough to make a living for herself and her son. Whenever she can, she also helps her parents with some money. After this, there is little left and she can’t save. Carla lives in Merida but she returns to the community to see her parents and her son every weekend.

When reviewing the story that emerged from her interview, Carla is both proud and grateful for the education she acquired. This, ultimately, is what has helped her move ahead. “Thanks to my studies I have reached a higher level of life” She thinks the most important factors that helped her get education was moving to Merida at the age of 12 and the support she received from the families she worked for. “If I hadn’t gone to Merida, I would not have been able to continue studying.” Her family was also a great support, especially when she became pregnant. Finally, Carla mentions how her experiences and achievements have helped her gain more self-confidence and she feels she can solve any problem on her own. “Now, I am a more confident woman and I need nobody.” Source: Open-ended interview

83

V. Social Capital and Local Government Indigenous communities are often described as rich in social capital, a description that contrasts the more typical accounts of these communities as marginalized and with higher levels of absolute and relative poverty (see chapter 1). As such, a look at how this asset affects community prosperity and household mobility is of interest. Furthermore, an individual’s social network is often a contributing factor to mechanisms that move people out of poverty, be it in terms of finding higher-paid employment, migrating to areas with more economic opportunity or taking better advantage of existing sources of livelihoods. Due to the special circumstances of half of our study communities, this section also discusses local government and its impact on both social capital and mobility. Social capital and local governance are difficult to disentangle in the case of Oaxaca, where the local governance structure operates as a form of institutionalized, and village–based social capital. Definitions Social capital has been defined in a myriad of ways, some focusing on trust and reciprocity in social interaction while others focus on measurable definitions related to social networks and associative activity. Woolcock and Narayan (2000) sums up our conventional wisdom of social capital by the aphorism “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know,” before giving a more formal definition of social capital as the norms and networks that enable people to act collectively. Furthermore, the most commonly used definitions distinguish between bridging and bonding social capital8. Putnam (2000) suggests that bonding social capital is good for “getting by” and bridging is crucial for “getting ahead”. Bonding (exclusive) social capital refers to relations amongst relatively homogenous groups such as family members and close friends and is similar to the notion of strong ties. Examples of bonding social capital include ethnic fraternal organizations and church based women's reading groups. Bridging (inclusive) social capital refers to relations with distant friends, associates and colleagues and examples include civil rights movements and ecumenical religious organizations. Woolcock and Narayan (2000) refer to bridging social capital as supra-communal linkages among social organizations. A third distinction – linking social capital - refers to relations between individuals and groups in different social strata (i.e. that have differential access to power, social status and wealth). According to Woolcock (2001), the key function of linking social capital is to leverage resources, ideas and information from formal institutions beyond the community. When discussing local government, we refer to municipal government unless otherwise stated.

A. How does Social Capital and Local Governance Affect Mobility? The main analytic link between social capital and mobility examined in the Moving out of Poverty study is that “The types of social capital which are important to movements out of poverty will vary among communities with high and low levels of social stratification. In communities which are more socially stratified, linking social capital will be more important to

8 Bonding and bridging social capital may also be considered analogous to the “strong and weak ties” of Granovetter (1973).

84

movements out of poverty. In communities which are less socially stratified, bonding and bridging social capital will be more important”. The main hypothesis with regard to local government is that “Well functioning local democracy is more important for movement out of poverty in communities with less social stratification than in communities with more social stratification”. The strength of the different categories of social capital (bonding, bridging or linking) within a household or within any given group or community, is typically measured by looking at individuals’ membership in different types of associations. These estimates of social capital were difficult to extract from the data gathered in Mexico, mainly because of the characteristics of Oaxacan communities governed by Usos y Costumbres. While people in these communities participate heavily in local organizations that work for the community’s common good, i.e. school and health committees or the tequios (voluntary communal work), their participation is not a choice but simply one of the many obligations inherent in their traditional governance system. Because of this, very few respondents in Oaxaca listed any organizational participation when asked about membership in associations – despite the high levels of associative activity registered during the fieldwork. It follows that estimates of social capital based on self-reported associative activities will give erroneous measures of social capital for the two regions. Furthermore, social stratification is generally low across all our study communities. First of all, these are all predominantly indigenous communities (70 percent indigenous). Second, (and in part related to being indigenous), these are communities where the majority of the population is poor. Some differences can be seen across communities in Oaxaca and Yucatan, and these differences are largely linked to local government structures. In Oaxaca, all communities are governed by the traditional system of Usos y Costumbres – a system designed so as to minimize economic stratification and to avoid the entrenchment of political hierarchies. The highest form of authority is the communal assembly and the principle of the majority vote governs the decision-making process. Relatively more affluent or otherwise successful members are often assigned official posts in local government – a service which is rendered without pay and which in economic terms represent a strain on the individual’s and his family’s resources. Since our sample of study communities do not allow for comparisons between communities with high and low social stratification, this section will explore how social capital and local government affects mobility in communities marked by low social stratification. The hypothesis starting out is that (i) bonding and bridging social capital matters more than linking social capital; and (ii) that well-functioning local democracy matters for movements out of poverty. Given the problems of measuring associative activity, the analysis of social capital focuses on perceptions of trust and mutual assistance as well as time spent on communal activities. Approximate estimates of the different types of social capital will be gathered from qualitative data where available. Social Capital and Households Mobility in Indigenous Communities The traditional community values that persist among indigenous peoples are often seen as the basis for high levels of social capital and one of the inherent strengths in indigenous socioeconomic structures. Generally speaking, these include communal land ownership, reciprocal and mutually supportive work systems (social networks), sharing of natural resources, strong social organization and high levels of communal responsibility (Perafán, 2000). Indigenous peoples or groups are often characterized as having stronger network ties, as well as a stronger sense of solidarity than non-indigenous populations (Reingold, 1999). For instance,

85

indigenous people in Latin America have been found to place great importance on the kinship system, or comuneros in Latin America (IFAD 1992), and Collins (1983) report that kinship-based exchange relationships such as the institution of compadrazgo play an important role in providing economic security and well-being. More differentiated analysis of social capital conclude that indigenous communities are particularly well-endowed in bonding social capital – and of a kind that is often strongly village-based (Uquillas and Davis 2004, Skoufias and Patrinos, forthcoming). The strength of social capital in indigenous communities is most commonly viewed in terms of its function as an informal safety net that protects members when hard times hit. When formal mechanisms of risk management such as health insurance are absent – which is more often than not the case for poor, indigenous households – social networks take on a crucial role in insuring households and individuals against falling into or further into poverty. Social capital can however also be leveraged for material gain and it can be an important asset to movements out of poverty– e.g. by helping individuals access secure jobs or take advantage of other economic opportunities. This study focuses on up-ward mobility and as such the prime interest is in how social networks help or hinders households moving ahead. We can also imagine cases where certain types of social capital becomes a liability, in the sense that it narrows the scope to move ahead. A set of theories of social capital – in particular those related to disadvantaged ethnic groups or minorities - describe how group-level influences on individuals perpetuate the disadvantaged economic status of some groups. For instance, some social scientists argue that a culture has developed in which poverty reinforces itself through social networks (Wilson, 1987). For instance, individuals gain information about job opportunities and other economic opportunities through their friends, family and acquaintances. As such, it matters in which sectors and occupations members of your network work, or in which public programs they participate. Araujo et al (2004) looked at the role of peer effects in accessing off-farm non-agricultural employment in Mexico and found these to be important for members of groups that already engage in these activities. Members of these groups are typically male, better educated, and non-indigenous. Similarly, A recent study of economic opportunity for the indigenous in Latin America looks at the effects of social networks on economic outcomes such as employment, migration and participation in public programs, and concludes that the principal effect of the social networks available to indigenous peoples seem to be to maintain current patterns, thus reinforcing indigenous/non-indigenous differences in economic activity (Patrinos and Skoufias, forthcoming). In other words, social networks reinforce employment in agriculture or handicrafts, but they do not facilitate moves out of traditional sectors and into higher-earning occupations. The outcome might be explained by the fact that social capital is typically of the bonding kind, be it family, village or ethnically based. A recent study of job search strategies in Guatemala (Fazio, forthcoming) reveals that the indigenous depend more on the help from relatives (bonding social capital) than the non-indigenous. In contrast, the non-indigenous tend to use more the contacts from friends and politicians (bridging social capital). In other words, it seems bridging social capital is relatively weak among the indigenous in comparison to bonding social capital, with the result that indigenous have a harder time accessing non-traditional sectors and employment. The measures of social capital available for this study lends itself to a more general analysis of levels of trust and cooperation within communities than to the more rigid analysis network effects on the individual household’s ability to move ahead.

86

Local Government in Indigenous Communities

Local government will be discussed in particular in terms of how it affects communities’ ability to act collectively and less so in terms of how it directly affects individuals’ ability to move out of poverty. As mentioned above, local governance structures differ significantly between the two study regions, due to Oaxaca’s official recognition of indigenous communities’ right to govern themselves according to their traditional system of Usos y Costumbres, Box 22 gives an outline of how this system works. Oaxacan study communities were superior to their Yucatan counterparts in terms of their ability to act collectively and to assure good governance at the local level. It is important to note however, that while this was a common trait of the successful communities sampled for this study, it cannot be inferred from this that a community governed by Usos y Costumbres will always do better in terms of good governance and organizational capacity.

Box 22: Usos y Costumbres: The Autonomous, Traditional Local Government System in Oaxaca

The recognition by Oaxaca state law in 1995 of indigenous peoples right to determine their internal policy-setting systems led to a significant change in the way Oaxacan municipalities are governed1. In practice, this law granted indigenous groups full powers to elect their local authorities through their own traditional procedures. Today, 418 of Oaxaca’s 570 municipalities have changed their governing system to this form of indigenous self-government named ”Usos y Costumbres” while the remaining 52 are governed according to a traditional party system. The Usos y costumbres system is non-partisan (leaders have no affiliation to political parties), and community leaders tend to be elected at general assemblies via public voting. The nomination and election of representatives for local government is based on collective decision-making rather than political competition. Citizens have the right and the obligation to perform unpaid work - the cargo - for the community. The cargo system was brought from Spain and imposed on indigenous communities in the 16th century. However, native communities adapted this to their own traditions, and the current system is also based on customary practices that cover forms of social organization dating back to pre-conquest times. The cargo system is based on four principles: (1) the obligation to accept and complete a cargo; (2) a level of reciprocity in the distribution of cargos and services; (3) prestige as a form of remuneration for services offered and as a vehicle for differentiating levels of power within the community; (4) and sanction in the case of failure to fulfill cargos, services and other communal obligations. The system dictates that men – from youth to old age – are under the obligation to periodically serve their community by occupying un-paid positions (cargos) in local government. The ladders of the cargo system run from topiles (errand boys) to presidente municipal (municipal mayor), and the system provides citizens the opportunity to rise in rank and prestige over time. In addition to the obligations of the cargo system, each community member has to participate in labor projects known as tequios. This required physical labor supports community development and infrastructure and might include rebuilding a road or maintaining a municipal or community government building. Communities and municipalities handle the obligations of absent community members in different ways. Some accept payments from migrants, while others accept substitute workers such as the wife who fulfill the responsibilities of heads of household not present. Some require migrants to make large payments upon returning to cover the obligations they have missed. Others ignore the obligations that people have missed while they were away, but quickly get them involved in the cargo system when they come back. The system – in which most decision-making takes place at public assemblies - is often seen as highly participatory. However, a study in 1997 found that women do not vote in 18 percent of municipalities governed by Usos y Costumbres, while new comers (avecinados) are disenfranchised in 30 percent of these

87

…yes, the majority of people in this village are willing to help you if needed

…yes, in this village you can trust the majority of people

50.6

65.1

36.6

55.1

64.5

45.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Average

Oaxaca

Yucatan

Average

Oaxaca

Yucatan

municipalities. Finally, people that live in communities (agencies) outside the municipal centers (cabecera municipal) are excluded from the municipal elective assembly in 26 percent of the cases. 1The Law on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Communities of Oaxaca (Ley de Derechos de los Pueblos y Comunidades Indigenous de Oaxaca 1995) Source: www.oaxaca.gob.mx and Maria C. Velasquez and Salvador Aquino (1997), “Fronteras de Gobernabilidad Municipal en Oaxaca: ¿Qué son las usos y costumbres para la renovación de los Ayuntamientos?”

B. Social Capital and Local Governance in Oaxaca and Yucatan As mentioned above, we are not able to compare measures of associative membership between the two regions, and will focus on quantifiable measures of trust. One of the main patterns that emerge when comparing these measures of trust, is the higher levels of trust in Oaxacan communities when compared to Yucatan. Fig. 10 shows that 65 percent of respondents in Oaxaca feel they can trust the majority of people in their village, while only 45 percent of respondents in Yucatan feel the same. In addition, there was even a greater difference in respondents’ perceptions of other people’s willingness to help. In Oaxaca, 65 percent believe that the majority of the people in their village would help them if needed, while only 37 percent of respondents in Yucatan believed the same. As such it seems that not only is trust in others higher in Oaxaca but also the likelihood of this trust translated into assistance.

Fig. 10: The Percentage of People who Answered…

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico While measures of participation in associations and organizations are difficult to extract, we can compare the average number of days that respondents in each community spent working and collaborating with other inhabitants on communal projects in the past year. The average for respondents in Oaxaca is 17 days – three times as many days as in Yucatan. As already mentioned above, helping out on communal works is not an option in Oaxaca but one of the many obligations imposed on citizens in a community governed by Usos y Costumbres. One of the most important institutions of this system is the tequio – which are days when the entire community comes together to collaborate on public works, be it in order to paint the school or pave a road.

88

11.3

16.6

5.9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

All

Oaxaca

Yucatan

Fig. 11: Days Spent Working and Collaborating with the Community

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico In Oaxaca, an interesting evolution caused by migration to the US is the increase in access to financing of communal works. In order to comply with their obligations under Usos y Costumbres to volunteer for work that benefits the community, migrants are sending back money for different community projects. This practice was particularly developed in Guadalupe de Morelos as discussed in Chapter 3, box 8, where migrants have financed the building of a park, a community center and the paving of streets to mention a few. This practice was however also seen in other Oaxacan communities. This might be seen as a practice that constrains the mobility of individual households in the sense that migrants’ earnings are ‘taxed’, however it is clearly positive for community prosperity. Overall, the Usos y Costumbres system can be seen as having helped community prosperity in the study communities, while in some ways holding back successful individuals who are either taxed by having to send communal remittances, or who pay in terms of having to take a cargo and thus work in local government for one or more years without pay. As mentioned earlier (see chapter 2, table 15), local government and social unity came up as a key driver of community prosperity in Oaxaca. In Yucatán, however, local politics and political division was seen as something that hindered communities in prospering. Furthermore, from focus group discussions we found that in Oaxaca, local government and officials are seen as positive actors for community prosperity acting with the common good in mind. In Yucatán, party politics frequently leads to political division, which is seen to hamper community prosperity. Local politicians are rarely trusted and are not seen to be acting for the common good and often characterized as crooks. The same perceptions and attitudes emerge from the household survey data. As shown in Table 34, half of the people interviewed in Oaxaca felt they could trust local government officials a lot or quite a lot, while only 30 percent felt the same in Yucatán where over half of the respondents had little or no trust in local officials. Table 34: How Much Do You Trust Local Government Officials?

Oaxaca Yucatán All A lot, or quite a lot 50.0 30.4 39.3 Neither a lot nor a little 19.7 15.2 17.2 Little, or not at all 30.3 54.3 43.5

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

89

Table 35: Does Local Government Take into Account the Opinion of Local People?

Oaxaca Yucatán All Yes, a lot 38.7 22.8 30.7 To some degree 46.4 46.8 46.6 Not at all 14.9 30.4 22.7

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico Our hypothesis regarding the impact of local government on mobility is that in communities with low social stratification, a well functioning democracy matters for mobility. Overall, perceptions of democracy are strongly positive in Oaxaca and much less so in Yucatán. Box 23 gives one example from Macuiltianguis of how local people described the working of their local government – a government based on unity, cooperation and consensus.

Box 23: . San Pablo Macuiltianguis: Democracy, Good Governance, Unity and Prosperity A strong sense of their indigenous identity (the first line of the municipality law in Macuiltianguis reads: “The community of San Pablo Macuiltianguis is a Zapotecan indigenous community”), .alongside a highly developed community union were perhaps the two features that made Macuiltianguis stand out from the other study communities. Both are anchored in and supported by Usos y Costumbres. Democracy, good governance, unity and prosperity

The system of Usos y Costumbres has unchallenged credibility in Macuiltianguis, and was seen as the most democratic way to govern a community. One young man (24) says: “Here it is the majority vote that wins, this is how you obtain democracy.” Adds a woman (42): “In addition, any decision or problem is communicated to the citizens, and it is not just the president who decides but the entire village.” A young man (22) also mentioned how the system prevents any linking of economic and political power: “There is no relation between political and economic power because the decisions are taken by the community and are not taken by the persons who have economic or political power here in the community.”

People in Macuiltianguis elect their authorities based on their willingness to work for the greater good and those elected perform as expected. Says one woman (30): “Those that are elected look after community prosperity.” The system’s credibility is further boosted by the absence of corruption. One young man (18) says: “The authorities are serious and they don’t steal money.” Adds an older man (60): “There are no corruption or bribes here, never have been.” When discussing corruption they not only refer to regular bribes, but also to vote buying and other ‘dirty’ election tricks. There is none of that in Macuiltianguis. It was however noted that corruption in the rest of the country hurts them: “In this country, there is corruption. We can even see it in the news. This harms all of us” (woman, 36). Knowing about corruption elsewhere strengthened people’s pride in their own ‘clean’ system.

Local people however noted that earlier, when party politics entered the community, it created social division even here. Says one man (32): “To be quite honest a social problem damaged our situation, this was because of political interests. I mention this because there were even partisan behaviors in the village…Now we are progressing, an obstacle to go on was the division of the people.” One of the older men (70) point to how things improved with Usos y Costumbres: “Now we are more united, we are making democracy work.” The absence of party politics was clearly something people felt had benefited the community: “Here nobody forces us to vote for a particular political party and this is why we are moving ahead” (woman, 39).

People in Macuiltianguis saw a clear link between prosperity and democracy in their community because their system fosters unity and the participation of all members. Says one man (45): “We agree that if we take decisions together we will improve.” Another man (33) also noted how working together is making them move ahead: “We are more prosperous because all of us cooperate.” Women agree and underlined how they too participate in communal work known as tequios: “Tequios also help the community with the

90

cooperation among citizens, for example, for the paving of the street and the building of the sports complex and community center. This is the work of all the community. We women participate too” (woman, 39).

People’s hopes for democracy in the future were that their system remains intact. Any change or interference by the government was seen as potential cause of conflict. When asked if their community will be more prosperous in ten years, a young man (22) answers: “If Usos y Costumbres is still respected we are going to be better off, but if government interferes with this, there are going to be problems.” Adds another man (28): “By trying to look for alternatives and proposals together with everybody else - this is how we will continue the community’s progress.” The Cargo System

People cannot refuse a nomination to a post in local government – a so-called cargo. Failure to comply once nominated is penalized and you or your family can lose your rights as a citizen, which includes the right to farm communal land. The community takes advantage of the system and singles out highly educated or otherwise successful community members for nominations. As one man (70) put it: “Those who are more educated, have a greater chance of being elected.” This benefits their community: “There have been people who have occupied the political positions and who have studied and because of this they use the community resources better” (man, 43). The fact that youth in the community are getting more and better education bodes well for the future of local government. Says one man (33): “In the near future, we have to concentrate all this potential of human capital and make projects. We will make the professionals act in favor of what benefits the community.” People also thought the village would be even more prosperous in the future as the younger, more educated generations are integrated into the system. Says one man (59): “There will be a difference because some of us who are currently in power did not even finish primary school, and so for sure, the next generations who already studied will do better with their spirit of collective work.”

Despite the promise of no or only a meager salary during the year-long cargos, most people comply in good faith. One man (60) likened the system to the taxes you pay in the city: “It’s like in the city where they make you pay taxes, here the political positions are accepted with good will.” It was also pointed out time and again that a cargo is a duty and an obligation - not a choice. Says one man (45): “It is a duty to serve our village.” The few critiques people had about the system were related to the economic impact of not being able to engage in other income bringing activities during the term in office. One man (70) told us that the year he had to leave his job at the sawmill because of a nomination to local government was a very difficult one: “I did not like to be regidor because I did not earn any money and that year was a difficult one.” Along the same lines, one young man (16) mentions how a cargo limits your economic freedom: “The ones who don’t have a political position are freer because they can have lands, livestock, have a property. They are freer because they don’t occupy a political position.”

Macuiltianguis has many citizens who live outside the community - in Oaxaca, Mexico City, Baja California, and the US. By law, migrants are not exempt from their duties as citizens. They can be nominated for a post in local government, and they also need to participate in tequios or communal works. Migrants solve these obligations in different ways. If nominated for a post in local government, some decide to return to the village for the length of the term. The current municipal president decided to fulfill his cargo when nominated, and after living in Mexico City for the past 40 years, he left his children and returned to the community for a year. He says of his decision: “…I feel part of this community, I feel integrated, I adapted easily to the environment. Although I miss my children, I know they support me. The service I render I do for the satisfaction of serving others, not for gain.” Others choose to pay someone else to take their place. A young man (24) tells us how he is currently filling the cargo of a US migrant who chose not to return. He is paid 4,500 pesos (about 415 USD) [check number] a month from the migrant. Migrants’ obligation to participate in tequios, where community members offer their manual labor for free, is solved by giving financial contributions, which is then used for communal works. People from Macuiltianguis who live in the US are organized in migrant associations and some participate actively in community’s decision-making process. “The ones who are at the border are organized and speak up regarding the community” (woman, 39). “Yes they give their opinions and sometimes they send money” (woman, 39).

91

Female Participation

A negative facet of Usos and Costumbres is the exclusion of women, which is flagrant in some of the communities governed by the system. In Macuiltianguis we were told that women were allowed to and even encouraged to participate, but that often they themselves did not want to. Both men and women, young and old, told us this. One woman (36) said. “We talk with our husband and that way we feel we are represented, because we do have the possibility to participate but we don’t go because we are lazy. Yes they invite us, but we won’t go.” A young man (24) confirms this: “Women have been invited to participate but they don’t want to.” Some felt that nothing changes with more participation of women. Says one young woman (19): “I have not seen any improvement. When the women go to the assemblies, they don’t give good opinions.” However, opinions were mixed both in terms of the degree of female participation and the need for women to get involved. Says another young woman (19) “We have to give our opinion and there are women who have occupied local government positions”. An older woman (60) adds: “Now, women participate more and you will see in the near future that a woman will be president”. Some saw a higher degree of female participation as ultimately beneficial to the community: “With respect to local government posts, there have also been a change. The opinion of women is needed, and I have myself participated as the treasurer. We have other criteria and do things in a different way, I think women know how to take more concrete decisions” (woman, 39). A group of young women discussed how constrains to participate were often self-imposed, and that the way to increase the freedom of women is to change the way of thinking of women themselves. Says one young woman (20): “…creating in them the conscience that things are not as they think they are. Times are changing and we all have the same possibilities. Tell them that a woman is not just for staying at home, to install in them a conscience of change, through talks to youth. We are all capable.” Source: Focus group discussions, key informant interviews and open-ended interviews in Macuiltianguis While local people in Oaxaca credited their traditional system for providing unity, progress, democracy and good governance (see box 23), the situation was quite the opposite in Yucatán. The answer given by one man (50) from Chan Chochola to questions about local government exemplifies views expressed throughout the communities in Yucatán: “The government promises and doesn’t do anything, everything they gain, they put in their own pocket and when they finish their term they leave with their earnings.” That politicians made their fortunes while in office was a common complaint in Yucatán. A man (53) from Sanahcat sums up the general contempt for politicians: “A politician is a thief who robs and robs again. All politicians are corrupt.” Votes buying is a common practice, according to local people, and political conflict between people supporting different parties was mentioned time and again. Women in San Simon talked extensively about the political division that splits their community down the middle: “There are two groups that do not get along well. At any point they’ll split and they don’t work well together” (woman, 46). They felt this division made government think twice about bringing projects to the community: “In terms of government assistance this is bad” (woman, 47). A woman (57) from Sahcaba felt division was bad because it makes people forget about politicians’ shortcomings: “There are always political problems because people are never happy and the politicians think that if we fight about it amongst ourselves we are going to forget that they are not helping us.” Finally, parties and politicians were seen to care a lot during campaigns, but doing nothing once elected. Says one man (34) from Sanahcat: The political parties get very involved with the people. They take people’s opinions into account, but only during electoral periods. Afterwards no one remembers any of it.”

C. A Closer Look at Study Communities When looking in more detail at how respondents from the different communities evaluated trust in others and in local government we find that the higher levels of trust and participation in

92

30.0

30.0

31.0

36.6

36.7

41.7

51.7

53.9

59.3

61.3

64.3

65.1

74.1

77.8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Chan Chochola

Santa Rosa

Quintana Roo

Average Yucatan

San Simon

Sahcaba

Sanahcat

Yosoyuxi

Concepcion Carrizal

San Pedro el Alto

Macuiltianguis

Average Oaxaca

Guadalupe de Morelos

Abejones

33.3

43.3

43.3

45.9

48.0

53.3

53.3

55.6

57.1

58.6

60.7

64.5

76.9

77.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Quintana Roo

Santa Rosa

Chan Chochola

Average Yucatan

Sahcaba

San Simon

Sanahcat

Concepcion Carrizal

Macuiltianguis

Guadalupe de Morelos

Abejones

Average Oaxaca

Yosoyuxi

San Pedro el Alto

Oaxaca was not driven by the results from a few villages. Indeed, in most cases all Oaxacan villages scored higher than any Yucatec village. For instance, figure xx show that in all communities in Oaxaca, a higher percentage of respondents say they trust other villagers than in any of the Yucatec villages. It is the same for the belief that others would help when needed.

Fig. 12: Percentage of respondents that answered, “Yes, in this village you can trust the majority of people”

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

Fig. 13: Percentage of respondents that fully agreed with the statement “The majority of people in this village are willing to help you if needed”

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

93

Another thing to note from the comparison of study communities is that within each region, the poorest communities exhibit the highest levels of trust. For instance, while on average 65 percent of villagers interviewed in Oaxaca felt they could trust people, 77 percent of respondents in the poorest community – San Pedro el Alto – felt this was the case. Similar results were found in Yucatan where 53 percent of the poorest community San Simon had trust in other people compared to only 45 percent on average. This is not the case when asked about how willing local people are to help out when needed, where both the poor communities scored close to the average. It is also interesting to look a closer at Quintana Roo, the community with the lowest level of trust in others. Here only 33 percent felt that they could trust the majority of the people in their community. This community was marked by a strong political division stemming from recent conflict between the two major political parties – a conflict that recently culminated in the cancellation of municipal elections. Information from qualitative data – from focus groups and open-ended interviews – revealed how the political conflict has led to rifts between neighbors and friends and how it has even broken family ties. In the words of a 63-year old man from Quintana Roo: “We no longer help each other. There is no trust anymore - as if there had never been any” (see box 24).

Box 24: Political Conflict, Party Politics and Broken Social Ties in Quintana Roo A key characteristic of Quintana Roo is the division of its members between two political parties: The PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional) and the PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática). Party politics have divided both the community and its families, and tensions peaked in May 2004 when the PRI won the municipal elections by only 2 votes. The PRD filed a complaint accusing PRI of vote buying and the election results were cancelled followed by an extraordinary round of voting. In the extraordinary election held in October that same year, PRI’s victory was confirmed, this time with a 40 vote-margin. During the extended campaign period, the PRD again objected to the amounts of gifts and services that the PRI candidate offered potential voters. Yet these practices were widely used by both parties. The national newspaper El Universal referred to political competition in Quintana Roo as a “war of gifts”9 as the two candidates distributed food and beer to gain votes. Followers of PRD told us that PRI campaigners brought several hairdressers to the community and offered free haircuts. The PRIistas defended themselves saying this was offered to members of the community as a ‘social service’. The PRI candidate also received help from other PRI municipalities in Yucatan. The mayor of one of our other study communities told us how he had personally sent three truckloads of beer to Quintana Roo in order to help out. The damaging effects of partisan conflict on communal life Focus groups, interviewees and key informants all mentioned political tensions and the elections in 2004 as one of the main negative events to have affected community prosperity in the past decade. Authorities highlights the limbo that local government found itself in during the period of May to December 2004 when both time and resources were lost for the community. The elections also became a show off of political campaigning at its worst, as mentioned above. Other community members mentioned partisan government assistance, political inequality and broken social ties as other negative outcomes of the current state of party politics in the community. The need for personal wealth to stand as a candidate in local politics: A point made during the election campaigns in Quintana Roo, the so-called ‘wars of gifts’, is that it is costly to stand for public office. The female participants in one discussion group pointed out that if you don’t have money you can’t be a 9 El Universal, “Yucatán: Desatan guerra de regalos”, October 28th 2004 (www.eluniversal.com.mx)

94

politician because you can’t afford the campaign. One woman explains: “People are invited to present themselves as candidates and you have to have money. If you don’t have money you can’t be a candidate.” Another woman continues: “And how are you supposed to get to a political position if you don’t have enough money? You can’t.” One man tells us during an open-ended interview how he had to take on debts to be able to actively participate in PRI’s campaign. Partisan government support and unequal distribution of power: According to community members, another problem of party politics in Quintana Roo is that assistance from local government is often partisan as local politicians tend to help only their party’s followers. “If you support the politicians in their campaigns and they win you have power. And those that didn’t support the politicians are not taken into consideration” says a 31-year old woman. An elderly man also noted that this is a cause for inequality in the community: “There’s inequality in terms of political parties or in terms of money.” A young woman agrees: “There is political inequality. Now the candidates only support the once that voted for them”. Torn families and broken social networks: A man who participated actively in the PRI campaign laments how local politics has torn his family apart and tells us that: “my mother turned her back on me just because of politics as she was with one party and I was with another and we won.” He feels that other members of the community that he appreciates have also turned from him because of politics and this hurts. “They didn’t know how to lose. And they wounded me a lot. I was very hurt when they all turned their backs on me.” Another man tells us that his cousins used to be an important support for him, but that they no longer speak because while they support PRI, he supports PRD: “The parties have caused division between families. They have even divided the women” he says. He also tells us how relationships in his neighborhood have soured due to politics. “Everybody around here supports PRI, except my family and I who support PRD. They are all selfish. They point their fingers at us”. He adds: “Earlier I had some very good friends but with the political parties came hatred. We no longer help each other. There is no trust anymore - as if there had never been any. Now it is all about political ambition, that is: money” (man, 63). Characteristics of local democracy and government as perceived by community members Participants in focus group discussions agreed that getting rich while in public office is common practice in Quintana Roo, and participants in nearly all activities we held in the community confirmed this. When a focus group of adult men are asked if there is a link between political and economic power a 73-year old man answer: “Yes there are people who enter and leave the local government and they leave rich.” The PRD candidate in the 2004 elections was often used as an example of how local politicians get rich while in office. One 19-year old man tells us about his earlier term in office: “…corruption was widespread as he did not give any help to the community and stole all the money that came from the state government.” The incident most often mentioned was when local politicians administering the relief aid received after hurricane Isidoro in 2002, pocketed the money. The community claims they never saw any of the aid. Says another youth: “Here the authorities always fall into corruption.” In his inauguration speech in December 2004, the new municipal president said that his administration would break with the bad politics of the past, promising that “local government will not be run as a family business”. While this is what most people in the community hope for, they have little faith in politicians and their promises. Source: Focus group discussions and open-ended interviews in Quintana Roo In terms of spending days working for the common good of their communities, the villages in Oaxaca again stand out. Apart from Concepcion Carrizal, all households in communities in the low-growth study region spend more time volunteering for public works etc. than their counterparts in Yucatan. The number of days per community varies a great deal however, as it runs as high as 27 days in San Pedro el Alto – the poorest village in Oaxaca - to not even a full day in Sanahcat – one of the more prosperous villages in Yucatan. Much of for the regional

95

0.7

4.7

5.3

5.9

8.0

8.6

8.9

5.0

13.1

16.4

16.6

17.9

19.2

27.1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Sanahcat

Sahcaba

Quintana Roo

Yucatan

San Simon

Chan Chochola

Santa Rosa

Concepcion Carrizal

Macuiltianguis

Guadalupe de Morelos

Oaxaca

Abejones

Yosoyuxi

San Pedro el Alto

13.8

20.0

30.0

30.0

36.0

51.7

23.1

40.7

45.2

50.0

60.7

74.1

69.0

73.3

56.7

46.7

44.0

37.9

61.5

37.0

35.5

23.1

17.9

14.8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Santa Rosa*

Chan Chochola*

San Simon*

Sanahcat

Sahcaba*

Quintana Roo

Guadalupe*

Concepcion Carrizal*

San Pedro el Alto*

Yosoyuxi*

Macuiltianguis

Abejones

A lot or quite a lot Netiher a lot nor a little Little or no trust

difference in days spent working for the community is, as already explained, linked to the rules, norms and values embedded in Usos y Costumbres.

Fig. 14: Days Spent on Volunteer Work for the Community Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico Finally, a disaggregated look at trust in local government and voice in local decision making gives a much more nuanced image from both regions. What seems to be a key driver here is not only the region – and as such the local governance structure – but whether or not the communities are also the municipal center and therefore home to the municipal government. In figures 15 and 16 below, villages that are not the municipal center are denoted with an asterisk (*). Usos y Costumbres is often criticized for excluding certain groups, for instance, in cases where women are not given the right to vote. Another criticism focuses on the fact that not always do people from communities outside the municipal center have the right to vote in municipal elections. The below tables show that in general, trust in government officials and perceptions of voice are high in municipal centers when compared to non-municipal centers.

Fig. 15: Do you Trust Local (municipal) Government Officials?

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

96

8.3

16.7

20.0

25.0

26.7

37.9

19.2

23.1

35.5

44.8

46.4

60.7

25.0

33.3

53.3

35.7

23.3

10.3

19.2

26.9

25.8

6.9

3.6

7.1

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sahcaba*

San Simon*

Santa Rosa*

Chan Chochola*

Sanahcat

Quintana Roo

Yosoyuxi*

Concepcion Carrizal*

San Pedro el Alto*

Guadalupe*

Macuiltianguis

Abejones

A lot To some degree Not at all

Fig. 16: Does Local Government take Local Peoples’ Opinions into Account?

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico Guadalupe de Morelos in Oaxaca was particularly marked by problems and conflicts with their municipal government, which was repeatedly referred to as a direct hindrance to community prosperity in focus group discussions [see box 25]. The other non-municipal centers that score low on trust in local government are Chan Chochola and Santa Rosa in Yucatan. Both communities are located in the same municipality and both provide similarly poor perceptions of trust and voice in local government. Also here, the local municipal government was often viewed as causing more problems and hindrances than solutions and assistance. Clearly, these villages provide indications of governance problems at the sub-municipal level.

Box 25: Guadalupe de Morelos: Lacking Faith in and Support from Municipal Government

Maybe the most striking feature of Guadalupe de Morelos – apart from the mark US migration has left on the community – is their strong views on local government. The municipal government –located about 15 minutes away in San Jorge Nuchita – is frowned upon for being both incompetent and extremely partial. All discussion groups spent a lot of time lamenting how the municipal government actively works against Guadalupe’s development - a claim that also emerged from individual interviews and the household survey.

At the same time, villagers take great pride in the community’s own ability to organize, collaborate and raise funds for public works. The people of Guadalupe are united, there is little political division and a strong sense of civic responsibility. Families can for instance count on the help of the community to carry out home improvements (i.e. a new roof) or to construct a house. It was also said that community members would help out if you fall ill or have other problems. An elderly man tells us that “Here, every body helps each other, every body cooperates. In times of sickness every body helps, the people give money to help the needed even if it’s just with 10 pesos.”

The municipality follows the governance system of Usos y Costumbres, however people from Guadalupe and other communities outside the municipal center do not have the right to vote in municipal elections. Instead, communities have their own governing systems – also based on Usos y Costumbres - under which they elect communal leaders and organize community life. Not having much say in municipal affairs

97

…yes, the majority of people in this village are willing to help you if needed

…yes, in this village you can trust the majority of people

53.2

51.8

48.0

46.9

54.4

61.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

matters, because government resources are increasingly being funneled through municipalities as a result of Mexico’s decentralization process. According to community members, the municipality does not assign any municipal resources to the community. Says one man: “The municipal government has been an obstacle to the socioeconomic development of the community because the economic resources meant for the community is not given to us.” Continues another man: “Without exception they will pass all economic opportunities to the municipal center.” When asked what kinds of economic opportunities he refers to, he answers: “All of them! Businesses, programs, projects.”

The road to Guadalupe runs through the municipal center and the differences between the two villages are striking. While San Jorge is a sprawling, untidy and dirty village with a run down municipal building, Guadalupe de Morelos is a tidy and meticulously clean village with paved streets, a beautifully restored church, a community park and a brand new and brightly painted communal building. Women in Guadalupe come together every week to sweep the streets, clean the park and to scrub all communal buildings and the school. The contrast between the well-run Guadalupe and the ill-managed municipal center was highlighted time and again by the villagers. Some also allude to corruption. Says a 55-year old man: “We would never allow a person to pocket the money of the community. Not here…The authorities here have never ‘eaten’ communal resources… In San Lorenzo and San Jorge there is a lot of money, but it is eaten up.”

The fact that their village seems to be doing better than the municipal center – despite the lack of access to any municipal funds – adds to people’s contempt for San Jorge. One woman sums up the general feeling when she says: “If we were the municipal center (cabecera) we would beat San Jorge. Everything is done here first, and then they do it.” The men focus on how the municipal center is wasting its opportunities. Says one: “The people in San Jorge have not taken advantage of what they have because they don’t want to work.” In addition, municipal officials are viewed as incapable. An elderly woman complains in poor Spanish: “The municipal president does not know how to speak. He is like us, he doesn’t know how to speak well.” In contrast, the community authority in Guadalupe, not only speaks fluent Spanish but also English after nearly 20 years of working in California.

Two concrete examples of how the municipal government actively works against the community were frequently mentioned. One is a water canal built to bring water from the river to San Jorge. The canal is built so as to serve also Guadalupe, we were told that the local government has so far refused to share it. The second is how the municipal center has over the past 4 years blocked the completion of a road that will connect Guadalupe directly to the main road going to Huajuapan – the nearest urban center. Community authorities say the road is just 1-2 kilometers short of completion, and that the rest could be done easily with the help of communal work (tequio) and money from migrants in the US. However, the authorities tell us, the municipality will not give them the needed permits, claiming the road will run over land they own.

Source:

D. Trust and Transition Categories When looking at levels of social capital and trust between the different transition groups we found stronger trust in others among the chronic poor, followed by movers and the never-poor. However, the chronic poor were less prone to believe that people in their communities would help them if in need. The differences are however not great.

Fig. 17: Trust and Assistance across Transition Categories Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

98

58.3

62.6

73.3

40.0

43.1

50.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Oax

aca

Yuc

atan

69.6

63.9

66.7

43.6

35.2

33.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Oax

aca

Yuc

atan

It is also interesting to see if the different categories show different perceptions of trust in the low growth region when compared to the high-growth region. Fig. 18 shows trust in fellow villagers in Oaxaca and Yucatan. Again, regional differences are great. 73 percent of chronic poor trust others in Oaxaca compared to only about half of the chronic poor in Yucatan.

Fig. 18: Percentage that answered “Yes, in this village you can trust the majority of people”, Yucatan and Oaxaca

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico Within the regions there are some more nuanced differences when looking at how people perceive fellow villagers’ willingness to help. While the non-poor in both regions are more prone to believe in help from others than the other categories, the difference is stronger in Yucatan: 44 percent of non-poor answered yes to the question of whether people in the village are ready to help when needed, while only between 33-35 percent of other households did. Apart from showing much stronger faith in the willingness of other people to help, categories in Oaxaca did not differ a lot where between 64 and 70 percent answered yes. Fig. 19: The percentage that answered “Yes, the majority of people in this village are wiling to help if

needed”, Yucatan and Oaxaca Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico

99

Interestingly, movers also seem to volunteer more days for communal work than other transition groups. 14 days, compared to 10 and 7 for movers and never poor respectively, again indicating that movers play a more active role in communal life than the other categories.

Fig. 20: Days spent on volunteer work for the community

Source: Household Survey MOP Mexico The regional differences when looking at days spent working for the community were, as shown above, strong. In particular, we see that movers in Oaxaca are particularly active participants in such communal work. They spend 18 days a year working for their community compared to only 6 days for their counterparts in Yucatan. Interestingly, chronic poor in Yucatan participate more than movers and chronic poor, while the chronic poor in Oaxaca are the ones that participate the least. Again, the local governance system in Oaxaca places great importance on participation. In addition, local people explained how communities tend to single out successful members – i.e. people who have done well economically and in particular those that have more education, when nominating and voting for people to take on a cargo or post in the local government. While focus groups discussions in Oaxaca highlighted the benefits of Usos y Costumbres for the community as a whole, participants in open-ended interviews would also discuss how being nominated to a cargo would also be a burden to them economically. In the sample of 66 respondents, many listed for instance how they had been forced to return from their migration to fulfill a cargo. These positions generally do not pay and can hurt a household’s income and savings. However, the positions are a good opportunity for people to contribute to the community. Of the 9 in Oaxaca with higher education, three have held political positions.

Fig. 21: Days spent on volunteer work for the community, Oaxaca and Yucatan

7.2

10.3

13.7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

13.0

18.1

11.4

3.9

6.1

7.6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Oax

aca

Yuc

atan

100

Movers in Oaxaca also have greater faith in local government and their own ability to influence decision-making at the local level. However, the strongest difference across groups was the relatively high percentage of chronic poor in Yucatan who thought that local government does not at all trust in local government: 61 percent compared to 16 and 29 percent for the chronic poor in Oaxaca.

Fig. 21: Trust in Local Government

Fig. 21: Trust in Local Government

From the analysis of life stories we found that bonding social capital is particularly important for migration - a key mechanism for moving out of poverty. This is above all true for migration to the US where family loans (particularly for US migration) are commonly used to pay for the border crossing. Migrants to the US, in particular first-time migrants, also rely heavily on family,

39.1

53.1

46.7

30.0

29.6

29.8

43.5

30.2

28.9

47.5

54.9

61.4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Oax

aca

Yuc

atan

A lot or quite a lot Neither a lot nor a little little or not at all

29.2

41.0

35.6

22.5

19.4

26.3

8.33

12

28.89

20

29.78

38.6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Never poor

Mover

Chronic poor

Oax

aca

Yuc

atan

A lot A little Not at all

101

friends, or community members already in destination. These help by providing a place to stay, finding the migrant a job, or teaching them skills to work in a new field.

E. Conclusions Going back to our definition of social capital as the norms and networks that enable people to act collectively, we can see why the effects of local governance and social capital are difficult to disentangle for our study communities. Norms that enable people to act collectively are institutionalized in Oaxaca’s traditional system of local governance. Non-compliance to such norms, such as the obligation to participate in communal works or accept unpaid posts in local government, is penalized, sometimes severely as when the right to farm communal land is withdrawn. The findings that people in Oaxaca spend more time collaborating with others in the community or are more certain that community members would help them if in need are therefore not surprising. Indeed, if people didn’t, the repercussions could be serious. It seems that this environment fosters greater intra-community trust. Finally, this system of local government is generally more trusted and viewed as more participatory than the orthodox democratic system and partisan politics in place in Yucatan. Qualitative data suggest that partisan conflicts in Yucatan is causing severe rifts in the social fabric of many communities and a discussion of the case of Quintana Roo where political tensions peeked recently brings further evidence to support this. Surprisingly, given Mexico’s recent democratic transition, we found little or no appreciation or feeling of increased participation in local government or politics over the past ten years, quite the contrary. A disaggregated look at study villages also confirms these regional differences with estimates from Oaxaca being in general much more positive than those from Yucatan. The comparison of villages also confirm that regional differences outlined above are not driven by a few villages, but generalizable to all 6 Oaxacan study communities. Clearly, much of this regional difference is explained by the traditional system of local government in place in Oaxaca. Questions regarding local government however produced more nuanced results indicating that not only regional factors and governance structures matter. The results suggest that whether or not the community is a municipal center, i.e. the community’s administrative level, also plays an important part. Local government is generally less well viewed in communities that are not the municipal center. This might indicate governance problems at the sub-municipal level in both regions, and thus regardless of local governance structure. The qualitative findings from three study communities that are not municipal centers, and who are having a lot of problems in their dealings with local government further highlighted this. While the above relates more strictly to the communities’ ability to work collectively and to promote community prosperity, the question remains as to how social capital and local government affect the mobility of individual households. In terms of trust in others, this is highest among the chronic poor in both regions. At the same time, trust in the readiness of others to help is relatively low among the chronic poor in Yucatan and relatively high in Oaxaca. The chronic poor in Yucatan also show little faith and trust in local government. The descriptive statistics provided above also indicate that movers in Oaxaca take a more active role in communal life, measured in days spent working for the community. An issue not captured in the above analysis is how the tightly nit villages networks in place in Oaxaca have expanded to northern Mexico and even across the border in the US. Villagers migrate together and ‘sister’ communities have sprung up in Baja California and in California. In

102

some ways, this can be seen as bonding social capital transferred into bridging social capital as some members of the network in the US are now in a position of differential access to power, social status and wealth. This transformation of bonding social capital into bridging, and its impact on community prosperity, warrants further study.

103

VI. Conclusions and Policy Implications This report presented key findings from extensive fieldwork conducted in 12 indigenous communities in Mexico. The main questions asked were: What characterizes ‘economically successful’ indigenous communities? And, how and why have some households within these communities moved out of poverty? Overall, we found few internal sources of growth that could explain why incomes in these communities have grown in the past 10-15 years. However, a high and increasing share of community members in successful communities leave to find employment elsewhere. Mechanisms of upward mobility are, in other words, those that link individuals to economic opportunities outside their community of origin. In Yucatán, an increasing number of people who commute to nearby cities and tourist centers – often moving from farm to non-farm employment. In Oaxaca, successful communities were marked by high and increasing rates of migration to Northern Mexican states, and above all, to the US. Communities that have shown low growth in incomes in the period 1990-2000, are characterized by the few number of community members that work outside the traditional agricultural and handicraft activities of their communities. While there is a budding trend of leaving the community to work also in these communities, obstacles are higher due to low levels of education, poorer language skills (a larger monolingual population) and a general lack of information and networks.

Chapter 1 gave a brief outline of the national context including national poverty trends. It shows that Mexico has made significant advances in terms of access to health, education and basic services in the past decade. In terms of income, poverty rates have recovered since the massive setback experienced following the crisis in 1994-95, and in recent years, extreme poverty continued to fall despite sluggish growth, primarily due to income growth for the rural poor spurred by off-farm employment and transfers – both private (remittances) and public (e.g. Oportunidades and Procampo). A review of trends for indigenous peoples in Mexico showed that poverty is higher, deeper and more severe in indigenous communities, while poverty rates have fallen more slowly than in non-indigenous communities. As a result, the income gap between indigenous and non-indigenous is growing, despite progress in terms of access to basic services, health and education. When discussing progress in Mexico in terms of poverty reduction, national key informants focused on macroeconomic stability as a key contributing factor. They also highlighted changes in social spending in Mexico, which has become more progressive and the pivotal role of Oportunidades, not only in helping reduce poverty, but also in setting new and higher standards for effective targeting and impact evaluation. Key informants also raised concerns about the lack of formal mechanisms for upward mobility available to poor Mexicans.

Chapter 2 discussed people’s perceptions of community prosperity and households mobility. It first looked at changes in sources of livelihoods over the past ten years. Local people in both states portrayed identical images of lacking economic opportunity within their communities. Consequently, increasing numbers of people leave to find jobs elsewhere. All communities in Oaxaca felt there were more economic opportunity today than ten years ago, while in Yucatán, men in particular, felt opportunities had dwindled, referring back to the ‘employment crisis’ following the collapse of henequen production. A classification of households within the communities according to whether these had stayed poor, moved out of poverty, fallen into poverty, or stayed non-poor over the past ten years, revealed a perception of generalized progress. Yet, in successful communities, inequality was seen to have increased over the past ten years, driven by differences between those who stay in the community and those who commute or migrate. When determining different levels of wellbeing within their communities, local people placed households where members commute or households that receive remittances at the highest levels. These households were also typified as having higher education, more assets, less

104

children, and, in Yucatán, jobs in non-agricultural activities. The lowest levels were characterized by a higher dependency on agriculture, more children, lower levels of education and often lacking Spanish skills. Elderly with no support from family or government were often identified as a special case of households stuck at bottom of the welfare distribution. Education was seen as a key mechanism for upward mobility in both Yucatán and Oaxaca. In Oaxaca, migration was also seen as an important way to move ahead, above all migration to the US. In Yucatán, people focused on the ability to find jobs outside the community, if possible a steady job with benefits found in non-agricultural sectors, which reinforced the importance of formal education. Lifecycle factors also matter: households move up when children grow up and start working. Other factors of upward mobility were public assistance, hard work, having the ‘right’ attitude, and quitting drinking or other vices. Old age, illness, death of head of household, bad harvests and natural disasters were the most important shocks seen to cause downward movement or stagnation.

Chapter 3 looked at migration as a mechanism for upward mobility in Oaxaca, where going to work in the US was seen as one of the most important ways up and out of poverty. The chapter discussed how the migratory experience of a community as well as its migrant networks, affects the costs and returns to households and communities from migration. A strong network lowers costs and increases returns, and as these networks develop over time, more poor households are able to send migrants. In terms of community-level prosperity, US migration was seen as having both negative and positive impacts, and these too vary with migratory experience. For instance, communities at the peek of out-migration experience construction booms, while communities that have lived with mass-migration for decades combat the negative effects of severe population decreases. Finally, the chapter discussed the tremendous non-material costs of migration – costs that are hard to measure but that came across very strongly in discussion groups and personal interviews. These costs – e.g. torn families, dangerous and strenuous border crossings, discrimination and the pressures that illegal immigrants in the US live under – were still viewed by most as less important than the potential returns from migrating, which points back to the severe lack of alternative ways to move ahead at home.

While US migration came up as maybe the most important way out of poverty in Oaxaca, education was seen by many as providing the only alternative mechanism. In Yucatán, moving ahead is linked to getting a job outside the community – often in off-farm sectors where formal education is a sine qua non for getting hired. Chapter 4 focused on education and showed that education has a pivotal role in determining economic opportunity and key to understanding differences in incomes and opportunity between the indigenous and non-indigenous. It was also shown that tremendous progress has been made in terms of access to education in all study communities, above all due to public assistance in the form of Oportunidades and improved educational infrastructure. Stark differences in years of education between successful and non-successful communities have been closed and gender gaps are also closing. While the effects of US migration on education are complex, the chapter discusses examples where education does provide ways out of poverty other than migrating illegally to the US. Studies have shown lower levels of education among children in remittance-receiving households, yet people’s perceptions in Oaxaca were mixed: Most households receiving remittances said they prioritized education, while some focused on sending children to the US to work as soon as feasible – in some cases as early as after completion of lower-secondary school. The chapter finally discusses how constraints to education manifest themselves above all at the level of upper-secondary (high school). At the same time, empirical studies show that graduating from high school has a strong and positive effect on the earnings potential for the indigenous, much more so than primary, lower secondary and tertiary education. Local people pointed to economic resources as the main constraint, in particular beyond lower-secondary schooling. Concerns were raised about how this unequal access to education reinforces existing economic inequalities.

105

A. Create Economic Opportunity within Communities Unstable and seasonal harvests, alongside the inability to diversify crops were the most common problems discussed by local people. The main constraints to more productive agricultural production as perceived by local people were: (i) lack of infrastructure such as irrigation systems and high-voltage electricity; (ii) lack of technical assistance and training; (iii) lack of credit; and (iv) insufficient government support. In most communities, it is the lack of proper irrigation systems that makes harvests unstable and seasonal. With no irrigation, crops depend on the weather and many farmers felt that climate related problems have become worse in recent years due to a change in climate. Says one man from Quintana Roo (60): “The only water we can count on is what falls during the rainy season…If we had water pumps it would have been different…Lately it has not rained and this has caused lost harvests.” Women in Quintana Roo also talked a lot about climate problems such as draughts, late rainfalls and strong winds, all of which damage the harvests. They noted that these factors are particularly harmful to households that depend entirely on agriculture, which are often the poorest in the community: “They have enough to eat when God wants them to” (woman, 53). “Sometimes there are no harvests. It’s a risk, a lottery. You invest everything and sometimes you are left with nothing” (woman, 27). Some households are already diversifying their agricultural production and people recognized the importance of this. Women in Guadalupe de Morelos observed that moving into other harvests beyond corn and beans – the traditional produce grown – has been good for the community because it offers jobs during the harvest when pickers are needed. “People who grow other harvests such as tomatoes provide jobs” (woman, 51). However many communities complained about the lack of technical assistance and training as farmers try out new and more productive crops. Farmers also complained about the lack of credit, and the lack of government support. Procampo was seen as good, but not sufficient to make any kind of real investments. Access to credit and banking services could play a role in improve agricultural productivity. The banking sector also offers other financial services such as insurance, which could help reduce the insecurity of agricultural incomes. Women in San Simon were among the many who mentioned the need for credit. When we ask how this would help them one woman (57) says: “On the one hand if they gave us this money as credit we could work. The problem then would be how to get out and sell the things we produce.” Men in the community agree that getting credit is difficult because of the papers required and also because they now ask you to ‘match’ credits with your own participation. Says one man (32): “They ask for a lot of paperwork. They also ask for you to put up 50 percent of the investment yourself.” When land is communal, which is the case in all study communities, you also lack collateral: “For example, they ask for property licenses, but here since the land is the property of the community we don’t have that” (man, 40, San Simon).

Obstacles to more productive farming are also obstacles to a more productive investment of remittances. Rapidly increasing amounts of money flowing back into indigenous communities from the US offers unprecedented opportunities for local development, or so-called remittance-induced development. Today, however, remittances seem to be primarily used for consumption – not to save and invest – and many question their developmental potential. Looking beyond agriculture, lack of credit is a key obstacle also to the productive investment of remittances. Access to formal financial services could promote productive investment of remittances through savings accounts, credits and other products and services (loans at competitive prices, insurance products at low cost, credits to build a house). At the same time, the rural poor have higher incentives now then anytime before to seek out formal banking services, due to the increasing number of households that receive remittances. Financial companies offer cheaper ways to send money and access to bank accounts would reduce the cost of transaction which increases returns to migration. Creating a ‘popular’ banking sector is underway in Mexico, with Bansefi as a key

106

player, however efforts should be stepped up. If the goal of extending access to formal banking is to bring the poorest Mexican communities out of poverty, then, remittance-receiving indigenous communities would be a good place to concentrate efforts. While credit is important to more productive investment of remittances, so is infrastructure. Many studies have identified lacking infrastructure as a key obstacle to prosperity in remote and marginalized communities. When money flows into these communities, as has been the case in Oaxaca due to remittances, the constraints imposed by lacking infrastructure are made even more visible. In Guadalupe de Morelos – a community with high levels of US migration - investments in agriculture plummeted following the break down of their irrigation system in 2004. In a study of the productive potential of remittances, Taylor (1999) concludes that remittances are not spent on productive projects because poor public services and infrastructure seriously limit the potential for remittances to contribute to local production and notes that: “Most migrant sending communities are rural villages distant from natural markets and lacking basic infrastructure such as paved roads, electricity, running water, sewage, and phones. Many are characterized by poor quality land, a fragmented tenure system and unequal land distribution. It is unrealistic to expect migration to promote development where complementary infrastructure, service, and ecological conditions are so unfavorable” (1999: 73). Remittances can be used as a way to link people to banking, while the financial services provided (credit, insurance etc.) could – given infrastructure was up to par - provide the means to invest those remittances more productively. Access to markets is not only about location, while the private sector can be an important actor in local development – when it wants to. Box 26 compares and contrasts the experiences of two indigenous communities with ties to the tourism industry in Yucatán. Both communities were strategically located in terms of accessing jobs and opportunities in the thriving tourism industry, however, the communities’ experiences could not have been more different. While the private investors who bought the old hacienda in Santa Rosa and turned it into a luxury hotel are investing heavily in local people and local development, villagers in San Simon are still struggling to access opportunities offered by the Mayan ruins Uxmal and the surrounding tourism complex. Clearly, one of the key obstacles for people from San Simon is poor education, which will be discussed below. Private sectors actors in Uxmal – hotels and restaurants – could learn a lot from what Fundación Haciendas Mundo Maya is doing in Santa Rosa. Such learning should be facilitated and promoted.

Box 26: Tapping into Opportunities offered by the Local Tourism Industry in Yucatán San Simon: Problems of accessing markets and economic opportunity despite ideal location Although San Simon is the only Mayan community in the immediate vicinity of the Uxmal ruins - one of Yucatán’s biggest tourist complexes - people from the village have only recently been able to access the economic opportunities it offers. They still have a hard time entering jobs at hotels and restaurants and are blocked from selling their handicraft. Only when an archeologist at Uxmal took a personal interest in the community, did things begin to change. In 1992 the archeologist began hiring villagers from San Simon to help with the maintenance of the ruins and the clearing of new dig sites. The work he offers is temporal and today he sporadically hires 40-60 men and women for 90-days contracts at a time. This is a lot of people for a community with only about 70 households. The archeologist gives preference to people from San Simon when he hires. He feels the exclusion of San Simon from economic opportunities in Uxmal is a shame and highly unjust. According to him they should be the first to benefit from the activities at the ruins because in many ways it is their heritage they sell to the tourists. “It is the people from San Simon that work and live here. The ruins are more theirs than anyone else’s. And they remain damned. It is shameful.” Local politicians have tried to interfere with his hiring process but so far the archeologist has stood his ground. Once, a high-ranking municipal official in Santa Elena made threats and wanted the archeologist to hire

107

‘his’ people from Santa Elena – not people from San Simon. On another occasion, the municipal commissioner in San Simon tried to impose himself as a ‘middle-man’ distributing the 90-days contracts in the community (while capturing his cut). Today one of the archeologist’s assistants is from San Simon. The assistant is in his early 40s and despite having no formal education he now operates sophisticated software, which they use to develop archeological projects. Youth from San Simon have on several occasions approached the archeologist asking for training on the computers. Over the same time period as people began working in the ruins, a few men from the community also found jobs at the restaurants and hotels in Uxmal. Today, about 8-10 young men work in the hotel and restaurants as security guards, gardeners and in maintenance. 2 men work as waiters in the restaurants. The hiring process for jobs in the restaurants and hotels is very competitive and people from San Simon have several disadvantages. Most importantly they have low education levels and poor Spanish skills. Says an informant from the municipal government: “The majority of people in San Simon speak Maya. About 80 percent understands Spanish. But they almost do not speak any [Spanish] and this is more of a limitation than anything else, especially when they want to leave to look for jobs.” Most men that have obtained jobs have finished secondary schooling, however applicants from other towns often have a high school degree, something which is still rare in San Simon. There are several ‘local’ vendor stands at the entrance of the ruins that sell handicrafts and souvenirs. However, the people who operate these stands are intermediaries who buy their merchandise elsewhere. One key informant suspected these operators also have had political connections in the municipality. Women in San Simon complained that they have no market for the things they produce. Cristina (25) makes huipiles (traditional garments) and embroidery but tells us that she lives too far from the market towns to sell much, and that in nearby Uxmal she has no access: “For example in Uxmal it is not easy because they wont let us sell anything as they don’t know me.” That finding a market for local handicrafts is difficult in a community located next to one of the most visited Mayan ruins in Yucatán –a place where tourists leave millions of pesos every year – is difficult to understand. Santa Rosa: When private sector actors take charge of local development In 1998, a group of private investors bought the old hacienda around which the village Santa Rosa is organized. They remodeled it and turned it into a 5-star luxury hotel. The investor group also has a Foundation, Fundación Haciendas Mundo Maya, which has launched a range of social programs in indigenous communities surrounding their luxury hacienda hotels. Since 2002, the foundation has, in partnership with the Ministry of Rural Development, constructed four libraries, two ‘quality schools’ (Escuelas de Calidad), five health centers, and they have initiated and supported the creation of 27 workshops for women. In 2005, the group and its foundation received the Tourism for Tomorrow ‘Investing in People’ award for their work in the local communities surrounding their luxury hotels. They were awarded the prize – in competition with 90 tourism projects from around the world - for having demonstrated direct benefits to local people, including the transfer of industry skills that spread the benefits of tourism. This is how the Foundation explains what it does: “We decided to select a hotel project as the backbone to promote development. During a first phase, job sources were created for community members in the process of the Hacienda restoration process, and later on they received training to provide support to the services of the haciendas. In a second phase sustainable social development projects were elaborated […] in the following areas: housing, health, education, and environmentalism; allowing the communities to take part in their own development process”. The main project in Santa Rosa is the 3 handicraft workshops for women. The foundation has however also helped build a small library and a health center, launched a small reforestation project, and is planning to start adult learning courses. On the grounds of the hotel, the foundation has developed a botanical garden where the local curandero (shaman) grows medical plants and where tourists can buy traditional Mayan remedies. These remedies and the curandero’s services are offered free of charge to community members. There are three types of workshops for women: one where the women make embroidered table clothes and napkins, another were they make products out of henequen fiber, and a third where they make silver filigree jewelry. About 60 women work in these workshops and they specialize in one of the three types of

108

products. The women work every day of the week, some from 9 am to 1 pm, and others from 3 pm to 7 pm. Not all the women in the village participate although everyone was invited. The women think it was the lack of support from their husbands that made some women stay home. The women that participate told us that their husbands help by looking after the children. Says one woman (29): “You have to leave the children. My husband supports me in this.” The foundation hopes to support the women with technical and financial assistance until the workshops develop into an independent cooperative that produces and sells handicrafts. The women told us how the foundation has a three-year program set up for them. The first year they were in training with no pay. Now, in their second year, they are paid for the products they produce but receive the inputs for free. The third year, the women will have to pay for the inputs as well. One woman (43) explains: “Now we receive a payment for each product, but they give us the material for free. They tell us that starting next year we will have to pay for the material ourselves”. The women also receive help and support from the foundation in managing sales. The goal is that the women take over the entire responsibility in a year. In parallel, they will receive training in how to manage resources and organize their work. Young women in the community were particularly enthusiastic about the job opportunities offered by these work shops: Says one woman (22): “I hope the workshop will continue to operate so that we can continue moving ahead and this helps us a little.” The women felt there had been an increase in economic opportunities thanks to the foundation: “It has changed because of the jobs that we have thanks to the foundation…Earlier we were just at home, but with this opportunity that they gave us, we have been helped economically”, (woman 26). The hacienda created a lot of employment during the reconstruction, however now there are fewer jobs. Those that work at the hotel receive extensive training. One man (49), who only had one year of primary schooling before beginning his job at the hotel, explains: “The hacienda forces us to go to adult education classes to finish primary school and they want us to learn English. A (English) teacher came but we didn’t learn much. The young ones learned a little but I didn’t. I am also learning how to use the computer.” It is mostly younger community members who work at the hotel as in general you need at least primary school completed. Youth in the community are however motivated by the prospects of jobs in the hotel. Says one young man (27): “I want to learn to speak English in order to be able to work at the hacienda.” Source: Open-ended interviews, key informant interviews and focus group discussions in Santa Rosa and San Simon

B. Improve Access to and Returns from Outside Economic Opportunities Clearly, education is one of the most important factors that determine both access to and returns from outside sources of opportunity. In terms of migration to the US – another key mechanism for moving ahead – public policies are probably best aimed at increasing returns to this locally, i.e. by promoting the productive investment of remittances. As already mentioned, extending the reach of formal banking sector could help both to increase returns by lowering the costs of sending money back home, while also providing complementary services (i.e. credit) that might facilitate productive investments. In addition, the public sector could strengthen incentives for migrants to send ‘communal’ remittances back to their home communities. Improving Access and Quality of Education Hall and Patrinos (2006) in their study of indigenous peoples and poverty in 5 Latin American countries, note that narrowing education gaps is not yielding higher earnings for indigenous and relates this to the quality of their education. As mentioned in chapter 4, students in indigenous schools consistently score lower on national reading and math tests. There were in general few comments about the quality of schooling in the communities, however some noted how teachers some times do not show up or leave school early. A man (40) from San Simon: criticizes the teachers in the village who do not take their jobs seriously. “The teachers do as they please. They

109

come here at 9 and leave at 11. They should stay until 2 in the afternoon.” He also felt that he does not have the right to criticize the teachers in public. “There’s about 10 or 8 women who say that the teachers are good and they’ll attack you if you criticize the teachers.” Hall and Patrinos (2006) also note that working while in school may be constraining learning in schooling. Indigenous children are more likely to work than non-indigenous (Ramirez 2006), and many youth complained about work affecting their studies. Work also affects youth in school. Says a young man (18) from Abejones: “I am working and studying but the truth is, it’s difficult. In the end I am exhausted and there is not enough time to study.” Poverty also affects school performance, as explained by a young man (17) from Yosoyuxi: “When there is hunger, the letters don’t enter.” More attention needs to be given to the quality of the education indigenous children and youth receive, while also considering the potential detrimental effects on school performance of working while in school. From concerns raised by youth and adult in both Oaxaca and Yucatán, more assistance is needed to ensure that children enter and graduating from high school. In 2001, the Oportunidades scholarship extended to cover also high school students. Then, in 2002 the program added a component for youth entering high school called Jovenes con Oportunidades, which provides additional incentives for youth to complete high school. Despite this, people in local communities still point to economic constraints to sending children to high school. Across communities youth lamented having left school too early, seeing this as one of the main obstacles to realizing their aspirations for the future. Yet, few were thinking about, or taking any actions toward, going back to school. Options to bring these youth back into the educational system should be explored. Provide Incentives for Communal Remittances The Mexican government operates a program called Programa 3x1, which simply put matches each dollar that US migrants send home for communal works, with 3 dollars from the municipal, state and federal government. The goal of the program is to provide incentives for productive investment in poor communities with high levels of migration. Clearly, the 5 successful study communities in Oaxaca fit this description. However, in none of the communities was this program mentioned. This raises the question of whether the program could be tailored more to indigenous communities, especially since communal remittances are already formally institutionalized in some (Oaxaca) and informally institutionalized in others due to the Usos y Costumbres system. Also, if the goal is to help poorer communities – and since more and more indigenous migrate – there may be good reasons for targeting indigenous communities more specifically or more intensively.

110

- Sources -

Adams, Richard H. 1991. “The Economic Uses and Impact of International Remittances in Rural Egypt.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 39(4): 695–722.

--------------- 2006. “Remittances, Poverty and Investment in Guatemala” in Özden and Schiff (eds.) International Migration, Remittances and the Brain Drain, Washington DC: World Bank

Aroca, P., M. Bosch and W. F. Maloney, 2005. “Spatial Dimensions of Trade Liberalization and Economic Convergence: Mexico 1985-2002”, The World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 345-378

Behrman, J.R., P. Sengupta, and P. Todd. 2005. “Progressing through Progresa: An Impact Assessment of a School Subsidy Experiment in Rural Mexico,” Economic Development and Cultural Change 54(1), pp. 237-76.

Bellon, M.R. et. al., 2004.“Geospatial Dimensions of Poverty and Food Security: A Case Study of México” Mexico City: CIMMYT http://www.cimmyt.org/gis/povertymexico/

Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas, CDI, 2005. “Desarrollo indígena en 50 municipios” August 2005, www.cdi.gob.mx

Figueroa, A., 2003. La Sociedad Sigma: Una Teoría del Desarrollo Económico. Lima: Fondo de Cultura Economica

Fox, J., and G. Rivera-Salgado (eds.), 2004. Indigenous Mexican Migrants in the United States, La Jolla, California: Center for U.S. - Mexican Studies

Finan, F., E. Sadoulet and A de Janvry (2005). “Measuring the Poverty Reduction Potential of Land in Rural Mexico,” Journal of Development Economics 77, 27-51

Garcia-Verdu, Rodrigo. 2005. “Income, Mortality, and Literacy Distribution Dynamics Across States in Mexico: 1940-2000.” Cuadernos de Economia. Volume 42, Number 42, May pp165-192.

Hall, G and H.A. Patrinos (eds.) 2006, Indigenous People, Poverty and Human Development in Latin America: 1994-2004, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan

INI, 2002. Indicadores Socioeconómicos de los pueblos indígenas de México, edited by E. Serrano, A. Embriz Osorio, and P. Hernández Ham. Mexico, INI, UNDP and CONAPO

McKenzie, D.J., 2006. “Beyond remittances: The Effects of Migration on Mexican Households” in Özden and Schiff (eds.) International Migration, Remittances and the Brain Drain, Washington DC: World Bank

Mora, J. and J.E.Taylor, 2006. “Determinants of Migration, Destination and Sector Choice: Disentangling Individual, Household and Community Effects”, in Özden and Schiff (eds.) International Migration, Remittances and the Brain Drain, Washington DC: World Bank

Mora, J., J.E. Taylor, R. Adams, and A. Lopez-Feldman, 2005. “Remesas, Desigualdad y Pobreza: Evidencias en el Mexico Rural” Presentation given during the Expert Group Meeting on International Migration and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean in Mexico City, 30 November - 2 December 2005

Patrinos, H.A. and G. Psacharopoulos, 1994. Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin America, Washington DC: World Bank

Garcia, V. and Patrinos, H.A. (forthcoming), “Difference in returns to schooling across the earnings distribution: Indigenous and Non-indigenous People in Mexico,” Washington DC: World Bank

Ramirez, A., 2006. “Mexico.” In G. Hall and H.A. Patrinos (eds.), Indigenous People, Poverty and Human Development in Latin America: 1994-2004, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan

Rodriguez-Pose, Andres, and Javier Sanchez-Reaza. 2005. “Economic Polarization Through Trade: Trade Liberalization and Regional Inequality in Mexico.” In Ravi Kanbur and Anthony J. Venables (eds.), Spatial Inequality and Development. Oxford University Press. January.

111

Schultz, Paul T., 2004. “School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa Poverty Program” Journal of Development Economics 74(1), pp. 199-250

Scott, J., 1999. “Decentralization, Social Spending and Poverty in Mexico,” Background Paper for “Government Programs and Poverty in Mexico”. Report No. 19214-ME. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Scott, J., 2005. “Public Spending and Inequality of Opportunities in Mexico”. Forthcoming in Quentin Wodon (ed.), Public Spending and Inequality in Latin America, Washington DC: The World Bank

Skoufias, E. and S.W. Parker, 2001. “Conditional Cash Transfers and their impact on Child Work and Schooling: Evidence from the PROGRESA program in Mexico” Economia, Vol.2, No 1, Fall 2001, pp. 45-96

Taylor, J.E., 1999. “The New Economics of Labor Migration and the Role of Remittances in the Immigration Process” International Migration, 37, 63-87

UNDP, 2005. Informe Sobre Desarrollo Humano: México, Mexico City: Mundi Prensa México and Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo

World Bank, 2003. Southern States Development Strategy, Washington DC: The World Bank.

World Bank, 2004. Poverty in Mexico: Conditions, Trends and Government Strategy. Mexico City: World Bank

World Bank, 2005. Income Generation and Social Protection for the Poor, Mexico City: World Bank

World Bank, 2006. “The Mexico Quality of Education Programmatic AAA” Washington DC: The World Bank.

112

Annex 1: Local People’s Perceptions of Factors of Mobility

Factors of upward mobility Life cycle factors Employment/ Sources of income Education &

Language Government

support Other

Bottom 1 or 2 steps

Children grow up and start working Elderly are stuck if they do not have the support of their family Children in HHs with elderly head move up when they move out

More family members help out economically, including women Head of HH or other relatives migrate and send money back Head of HH finds a job outside the community Buy and raise animals Get access to land/become member of the ejido

Learn to speak Spanish Learn to read and write

Oportunidades Government support for the elderly (except Oportunidades) not likely

Effort and hard work Charity or help from community

Step below CPL

Children grow up and start working

Head of HH or other family members work outside the community Head of HH or other family members get a full-time, stable job Income from remittances Most family members contribute economically Open a business (grocery store, tortilla shop or bakery) Savings Buy on credit Inheritance

Learn to speak Spanish Learn to read and write Children stay in school longer (get better jobs once they start working)

Children get scholarships to study (Oportunidades and others) Government programs (Procampo and Oportunidades most often mentioned)

Hard work Quit vices (alcohol, drugs, women and gambling) Quit being lazy and living off remittances Help from community

Top 1 or 2 steps

Children grow up and start working

Leave the community to work Keep job outside community or get an even better outside job Migrate to the US above all but also nationally Migrate for longer periods Save and make good investments and business decisions Get access to credit Inherit

Higher education Children have better education Learn English

Government support mentioned in only one focus group

Work hard Political contacts

Source: FGD Ladder of Life in 12 communities

Annex 2: Local People’s Perceptions of Factors of Stagnation or Downward Mobility

Factors of Stagnation or Downward Mobility Life cycle Employment, sources of

income and government support

Education &

Language

Shocks Other

Bottom 1 or 2 steps

Old age Children grow up, leave or get married and abandon parents Having many small children/

Unemployment Inability to work (old age, illness, disability) Lose government support Not receive government support

Lack of education Not speaking Spanish

Illnesses or accidents Death, in particular of head of HH Natural disasters (hurricanes, droughts, floods and

Vices, (alcohol, drugs, gambling and women) Head of HH abandons the family Being lazy, not fighting ‘hard

113

school children bad weather)

enough’, growing ‘accustomed’ to being poor

Step below CPL

Old age Children grow up, leave or get married and abandon parents Having a lot of small children

Not leaving the community to work/not finding a job outside the community Unemployment and job loss Remittances stop or decrease Bad harvests Money or business are mismanaged Lack of government support

Cost of sending children to school

Illnesses or accidents Natural disasters (hurricanes, droughts, floods and bad weather) Having to sell animals in case of emergency Death, above all of head of HH

Vices, above all alcohol but also drugs, gambling and women Not working hard and laziness Debt Head of HH abandons family

Top 1 or 2

steps

Children grow up, leave or get married and abandon parents Old age

Loss of business or bad business Forced to tell a productive asset (i.e. a car used to get to work outside the community) Migrants stop sending money or send less Bad harvest Money, business or savings are mismanaged Only temporary jobs Unemployment/ job loss

Not invest in children’s education

Death, in particular of head of HH Illnesses or accidents Natural disasters (hurricanes, droughts, floods and bad weather)

Vices, above all alcohol but also drugs, gambling and women Head of HH abandons family If you give up fighting Debt

Source: FGD Ladder of Life in 12 communities

114

Annex 2: Youth Perceptions of Help and Hindrances on their Way Ahead Below is a summary of findings from the youth survey. When asked the question “What are the two or three things that has helped you the most in preparing for the future?” the great majority of youth answered education (70 percent), followed by family support (50 percent) and having a job (28 percent). One-fifth of youth also referred to attitudinal factors such as being dedicated, having self-confidence, working hard and never giving up. When asked about which obstacles they feel they will face, the most frequently noted hindrance was lack of money or being poor. Of the 68 youth who felt money was a key obstacle, 28 specifically mentioned that their family’s economic situation had forced them to leave school earlier than they would have wanted. Lacking education was the second most listed obstacle, followed by the lack of jobs or good jobs where they live. Finally, illnesses and family problems were also seen as important obstacles.

Table 1: Youth Perceptions of Help and Hindrances on their Way Ahead

ALL YOUTH (MALE AND FEMALE)

Sample: 150 youth, 75 young men and 75 young women

Average age: 20.4

What are the two or three things that have helped you the most in preparing for the future?

Number of responses

% of youth who listed the

factor once

Education, ability to read and write 105 70%

Support of family 75 50%

Work 42 28%

Positive attitude: Dedication, willingness to fight and work hard, self confidence, respect for self and others, etc. 28 19%

Relations with people outside the family (friends or teachers) 17 11%

Workshops, experiences, skills 13 9%

Knowing or learning to make handicraft 8 5%

Government support 5 3%

Music, Sports etc 4 3%

NGO/org 3 2%

What are the main obstacles to achieving your aspirations for the future?

Number of responses

% of youth who listed the

factor once

Money* 67 45%

Lacking education 44 29%

No jobs or no good jobs 39 26%

Illness 26 17%

Lacking family support or family problems 25 17%

Lacking government support 10 7%

Difficult to leave community, remote location 9 6%

Getting married and having children 7 5%

"Bad" attitudes: Fear of responsibility, lacking motivation, laziness, inability to make good decisions 7 5%

Lacking infrastructure (Roads, irrigation systems, transportation) 5 3% Source: Youth Survey, MOP Mexico

115

Table 2. breaks these findings down by gender. Positive factors were ranked the same between the young men and women, although the women’s answers were more disperse. There were however some differences in terms of negative factors or obstacles. First, illness was seen as a potential obstacle by 25 percent of female respondents compared to only 9 percent of male respondents. Many of the female youth surveyed were married with children and one plausible explanation is that women answered as mothers and referred more frequently to their children’s illnesses. There were also some gender differences in the number of respondents who answered money or lacking education, however the two are closely linked. In most cases, youth listed either the cause (money) or its negative outcome (lacking education) as the main obstacle while all the time seeing them as one and the same thing. If we collapse the two categories, differences are not that big. Finally, men worried more about lacking job opportunities while the women were more concerned with lacking family support or problems in the family.

Table 2: Youth Perceptions of Help and Hindrances on their Way Ahead, by Gender

What are the two or three things that have helped you the most in preparing for the future?

Women Men

# % # %

Education, ability to read and write 48 64% 57 76%

Support from family 33 44% 42 56%

Work 18 24% 24 32% Positive attitude: Dedication, willingness to fight and work hard, self confidence, respect for self and others, etc. 15 20% 13 17%

What are the main obstacles to achieving your aspirations for the future?

Women Men

Money 39 52% 32 43%

Illness 19 25% 7 9%

Lacking education 16 21% 28 37%

No jobs or no good jobs 16 21% 23 31%

Lacking family support or family problems 15 20% 10 13% Source: Youth Survey, MOP Mexico

116

Annex 3: Methodology Annex The report is based on fieldwork that combined both quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative data comes from existing national-level data sets, as well as a household survey conducted in 12 indigenous communities in two different regions of the country (Oaxaca and Yucatán). The qualitative methods gathered evidence from the same 12 communities. Both types of data are described in this section. The study works around data limitations (lack of panel data) by using people’s recollection of a household’s status in earlier time periods and will be based on perceptions and recall of status (rank) today and ten years ago, as given by the community and the households themselves. The transition category of a given household in study communities is identified and verified based on the following:

• Status and change in a household’s position based on the raw ranks assigned to a household today and 10 years ago by community members in Focus Group Discussions. Male and female focus groups rank about 70-100 households in each community

• Status and change in the household’s position based on self-assessment and the raw ranks assigned by the respondent himself/herself today and 10 years ago in a household questionnaire (30 households in each community).

• The status and change assigned to the household by the community (focus groups) is also discussed and verified in open-ended interviews with a smaller sample of households (12 in each community). Following this verification of assigned status, these interviews focus on the how’s and why’s behind the assigned status, i.e. how and why - in their own opinion – the household became better off in the past ten years, or alternatively, how and why it didn’t.

The households are then classified into four transition categories depending on their mobility trajectories over a ten-year period: (i) the always or chronic poor, (ii) the never poor; (iii) those who fall into poverty (fallers); and (iv) those that move out of poverty (movers). The focus of the study will be on the latter category, although knowledge of the others can also shed light on mechanisms of upward mobility. For instance, what are the binding constraints that maintain people poor over time (determinants of chronic poverty)? And, what is it that keeps some people out of poverty even when faced with similar shocks as those that fall? Following the methodological approach proposed by the Moving out of Poverty team, data collection methods for the Mexico Country Study include an integrated package of quantitative and qualitative instruments. The primary tools are household and community questionnaires, focus groups discussions, open-ended household interviews, and key informant interviews with policymakers and community leaders (these tools are also outlined in the annex). A household survey was conducted with 25-30 households in each community, based on a prototype questionnaire adapted to the local context and existing data sets in Mexico. The questionnaires will collect information on demographic factors, asset ownership, sources of income, access to credit, access to employment opportunities, access to services such as education and health, memberships in groups and networks (social capital), empowerment and political participation, access to information, exposure to crime and violence, and aspirations. To complement the household questionnaire and existing quantitative data sets, a range of qualitative instruments were used to gather primary data on the mechanisms that support or

117

obstruct people moving out of poverty. Consequently, the fieldwork involved open-ended discussions designed to understand perceptions at both the household and community levels of mobility, freedom, power, democracy and aspirations, and how these are linked to escaping poverty and to chronic poverty. The key qualitative tools used in the Mexico Country Study include: (i) key informant interviews; (ii) focus group discussions; and (iii) open-ended interviews with individual households (life stories). The sampling framework used in this study is based on a three-step comparative case-study approach. Primary data was collected in a small sample of 12 communities located in two Mexican states - Oaxaca and Yucatán. In each community, about 30 households were included in a household survey. The two Southern states were selected based on the principle of maximum variance. This way, while we focus on cases that have similar outcome on the dependent variable (economic progress) the context in which the outcomes occur vary alongside external factors that may operate as explanatory variables. It is worth noting that the study focuses on positive cases, that is, indigenous communities with high growth in incomes, as well as households within these communities that have shown upward mobility, and the objective is to assess how these positive cases agree in displaying one or more causes. Purposive sampling is used to select information-rich cases and to assure the inclusion of enough observations of the particular phenomenon under study. In addition, two negative cases, that is, indigenous communities with low growth in incomes, were included in the sample to see if community level-factors of mobility and prosperity common across high-performing communities is indeed absent in ‘non-successful’ indigenous communities. The 12 communities are located in two Southern states - Yucatán and Oaxaca. Yucatán and Oaxaca have the highest percentages of indigenous population of all Mexican states: In Yucatán, 59 percent of the population is indigenous, and in Oaxaca 48 percent of the population is indigenous (INI, CONAPO and UNDP, 2002). While the two states are similar in that they both have a high presence of indigenous populations, they differ in most external factors that may affect economic performance and they were selected so as to provide maximum variance. As seen in table 1, the two states differ widely, first and foremost in terms of economic growth and income levels. Local government structures and institutions also differ, as does infrastructure, ethnic composition, and topography. In addition, social development indicators vary between the two states, as shown in the example of access to education and health in the table below (table 1). When all Mexican states are ranked by their Human Development Index (UNDP 2003), Yucatán ranks 19th out of a total of 32 states, while Oaxaca ranks 31st, with only Chiapas having a lower score. The 12 study communities are located in predominantly indigenous municipalities, that is, municipalities where more than 70 percent of the population is indigenous. There are 481 such municipalities in Mexico and they together account for more than 60 percent of the entire indigenous population. The municipalities in the sample are selected based on growth in income in the time period 1990-2000, measured as change in the share of the population that has an income of more than two minimum wages. Indigenous municipalities in Yucatán and Oaxaca are ranked, based on this measure of economic progress, and 10 study communities are selected from top-ranked municipalities in each state. In addition, 2 control communities were selected from one municipality in each state from the bottom half of the ranking. Each municipality often encompasses several communities (localidades) and the final selection of study communities was done purposely and based size, accessibility and consultations with local

118

informants. In two of the larger municipalities, two communities within the same municipality were included in the sample. The final selection of study communities is shown in table 2. Finally, 25-30 households in each community are selected for the household survey, which leads to a sample size of 350 households. We also over-sampled on the dependent variable in the case of households, as we want to assure that there is enough information about a particular group of households, i.e. those that were perceived by the community as having moved out of poverty in the past 10-15 years. Name of Country: MEXICO

Authors (with emails): Trine Lunde (tlunde@jhu.edu)

Vicente Garcia Moreno (vgarciamoreno@worldbank.org)

Number of Communities 12 Dates of Field work May 5th 2005 – June 20th 2005 Data Collection Method Types of Informants Total Number

of Informants Key Informant Interview or a Workshop: National Timeline

Academics (2), Civil Society (1), Government officials (2) 5

Community Profile Community authorities, members of local government 12

Key Informant Interview: Community Timeline

Community authorities, members of local government 13

Focus Group Discussion: Ladder of Life

12 Focus groups with men 12 Focus groups with women

24

Focus Group Discussion: Freedom, Power, Democracy and Local Governance

12 Focus groups with men 12 Focus groups with women

24

Focus Group Discussion: The Aspirations of Youth

12 Focus groups with young men 12 Focus groups with young women 24

Two Mini Case Studies: Community-Wide Events and Factors Affecting Mobility

Interviews with key informants 10

Household Questionnaire 25- 30 households per community 344

Open-Ended Interview: Individual Life Stories

12 persons per community 144

119

Annex 4: Community Time Lines Below are two examples of community time lines. The community timeline from Macuiltianguis, Oaxaca (box 1) represents a very detailed review of the history of a successful community. Key factors that have affected economic opportunity in this community were migration, above all to the US, as well as the communal forestry enterprise and how the profits from this have been invested to benefit the community. The community timeline from San Simon, Yucatán (box 2) tells of developments in an non-successful community and is based on two interviews, one with members of the municipal government and one with the evangelist priest living in the community. The priest was the closest we could find to a neutral authority in this highly divided community. All interviewees highlighted factors such as political division, failed public policies, lacking infrastructure and lacking economic opportunity, rather than actual events and projects.

Box 1: COMMUNITY TIMELINE SAN PEDRO MACUILTIANGUIS, OAXACA – ‘Successful’ 1930 Primary school opened – use of Zapotec language is punished 1945 First US migration: about 30 community members migrate to the US under Braceros10 1956 First federal highway in the district of Ixtlan, connecting Ixtlan to Tuxtepec 1958 Road from the highway to Macuiltianguis is opened 1958 25-year contract signed with national and international companies for the exploitation of the community’s

forest resources 1959 In-migration of workers from Michoacan (to work in forestry) 1960 Measles, smallpox and whooping cough (pertussis) epidemic – 90 people died 1960s Basketball is introduced by one of the teachers - the sport takes one a key role in community life, especially

for youth, still seen today. 1963 Potable water 1967 Workers from Macuiltianguis and other communities go on strike over work conditions and pay. A 5-year

labor conflict with the forestry/paper mill companies begins 1967 Conflict leads to increased migration to both the US and Northern Mexico 1969 Electricity 1971 Lower-secondary school opened – Zapotec language still banned from class rooms 1972 End of conflict with new labor agreements: workers’ contracts are revised and thepoy are given the right to

negotiate salary 1974 IMSS Health Clinic opened (for people w/health insurance) 1975 The contract with forestry companies and paper mills are broken 1977 SSA (Public Health Services) 1978 Community forestry enterprise is formed 1980 A sawmill is added to the community enterprise 1980 Opening of the first library 1982 Communal law on forestry exploitation, Unidad Economica de Explotacion Comunal San Pablo

Macuiltianguis 1983 Forest fires 1985 Kinder garden is built with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise 1986 Equipment, machinery and vehicles are bought with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise,

including a tractor, tow trucks, pick-up trucks and two buses 1988 Municipal buildings (Palacio) are built with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise 1989 Parking spaces in Oaxaca City are bought with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise – for the

use of anyone from the community who need to go to town on business 1990 Wood factory and store is set up in Tuxtepec with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise 1990 Procampo – agricultural subsidy program of the federal government – given to farmers 1991 A boarding school is opened for children from nearby, mostly non-Zapotec villages 1994 The system of distributing jobs and revenues from communal forestry company is changed to ensure that all

community members receive their share 1994 Reconstruction of the sawmill begins – based on tequio (communal labor) carried out by community

members 1994 Sewage 10 Under the Bracero program (1942-1964), Mexican farm workers were given temporary legal permits to work in the US. A total of 4.5 million Mexican citizens were legally hired as braceros, primarily in Texas and California

120

1995 Politically motivated split of the migrant community in California, and the creation of a second migrant association: Organización Macuiltianguense 2 de abril

1997 A recreational tourist park with cabins (eco lodges), common areas and activities (slides, swings and a an out-door pool) is built with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise

1998 A sports complex, which includes one of the finest basketball courts in Mexico, is built with the profits from the Communal Forestry Enterprise

2000 Opening of a second library equipped with computers 2001 Water treatment plant is opened 2003 Telephone system installed for the majority of households in the community 2004 Drought damages harvests completely 2004 Computers in the library are equipped with Internet connection 2004 Main streets in the community are paved 2005 Adult education (basic education) is offered 2005 Forest fires 2005 The community is fighting severe population decreases due to mass migration to the US Source: Interview with local authorities, and the Municipal Presidency’s strategic plan (document)

Box 2: COMMUNITY TIMELINE SAN SIMON, YUCATÁN – ‘non-successful’ Events, projects and programs 1988 Hurricane Gilberto hits San Simon and destroys harvests and houses 1993 Farmers in the village receive the agricultural subsidy Procampo 1993 Road from Uxmal to San Simon is paved. Electricity (low-voltage) is brought to the

community 1995 An archeologist at Uxmal begins hiring men and women from San Simon to help in the

maintenance of the ruins and the clearing of new dig sites, giving them preference above people from other communities in the region

1998: The secondary school (telesecundaria) is built and opened 1998: The municipal government builds a soccer/basketball field 1999: San Simon is given a community van from the municipal government which bring people to

and from Santa Elena once a day 1999: People begin receiving Oportunidades – a federal cash transfer program 2002: Hurricane Isidoro hits San Simon 2002: Expansion of the community health center with a full-time doctor (24/7) 2002: The first 4 men from San Simon migrate to the US 2003: FONDEN (natural disaster relief program) brings a housing project which results in new and

better housing for nearly every family in the community Jan 2005: Installation of radio communications between San Simon and the municipal government in

Santa Elena Feb 2005: The community truck is immediately replaced when the community authority crashes it April 2005: The DIF opens (reopens) a community kitchen serving lunch for children in the community June 2005: DIF starts a workshop for women to teach them how to weave hammocks and how to make

traditional garments (huipiles)

Factors that have hindered San Simon’s progress throughout the decade Political division: Between followers of the two political parties, PRI and PAN. It is less of a problem today than

ten years ago but still an obstacle to the community’s development. Municipal government and others often hesitate before bringing any kind of project to the community because community divisions hamper projects or make implementation difficult when the two groups refuse to work together

‘Paternalismo’: Key informants think earlier municipal administrations as well as state and federal government have fostered ‘attitudes’ of dependency by the way they have dealt with the community

Lack of jobs: With the exception of the job opportunities created at the Uxmal archeological site and surrounding restaurants and hotels, there are few job opportunities outside the milpa for people in San Simon and the milpa does not allow for households to improve

Infrastructure: Low-voltage electricity is not sufficient to work agricultural machinery or other equipment. The road to Xculoc, a bigger community located only 4 kilometers away but across the state

121

border into Campeche, is still unpaved despite repeated attempts to fix it. Lack of irrigation system makes harvests seasonal and unstable

Lack of credit: In particular a problem for farmers according to key informants Source: Two key informant interviews: one with municipal president and his secretary in Santa Elena and with the evangelist pastor in San Simon (the most ‘neutral’ authority we could locate in the community)