Alternatives to Rural Development: Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas, Mexico Neusa Hidalgo-Monroy Wohlgemuth Department of Geography and Planning University of Toledo Abstract Fair’Trade has created democratic producer organizations that are able to benefit from the higher returns and more stable prices. However, non-income impacts are at least as important and with more lasting effects. The social empowerment generated and connections to the alternative markets have brought fundamental changes to the traditional social hierarchies. This study presents a geographical analysis of the profound social and economic impacts of Fait Trade markets and organic agriculture in community organizing, empowerment of women, and rural development in Chiapas, Mexico. It also looks at the new initiatives created through the Fair-Trade movement and the challenges that climate change offers. Keywords: sustainable rural development, women empowerment, indigenous rights, organic agriculture Resumen Los Mereados Alternativos (0 Fair Trade) han permitido el desarrollo de organizaciones demoeriticas de productores que se han beneficiado de los sobre-precios ofrecidos asi como de la mayor estabilidad de los mismos. Sin embargo, el impacto no monetario ha sido mucho mis profundo y permanente. El fortalecimiento social generado, asi como las conexiones con los mercados alternativos, ha propiciado cambios fundamentales en las jerarquias sociales tradicionales. Este ensayo presenta un anilisis del profundo impacto socio- econémico que estos mercados y la agricultura orginica han tenido en la organizaci6n comunitaria, el fortalecimiento del estatus de la mujer y el desarrollo rural. Asi como también analiza las nuevas iniciativas generadas a través de los mercados alternativos y los retos que los cambios climaticos ofrecen. Palabras clave: desarrollo rural sostenible, empoderamiento de las mujeres, derechos indigenas, agricultara orginica Journal of Latin American Geegraphy, 13 (1), 2014 © Conference of Latin Americanist Geographers68 Journal of Latin American Geography Introduction The indigenous population of Chiapas, Mexico is undergoing rapid economic changes in the current context of neoliberalism, regional autonomy, the Zapatista movement, globalization, and the 2008 trade agreement between the countries of Colombia, Central America and Mexico, named Plan Mesoamerica to promote and create infrastructure for a trade corridor between Southern Mexico and Colombia and to promote economic integration. This paper is an analysis and synthesis of the factors and actors participating in Chiapas’ alternative model of rural development based on grassroots activism through the production of organic coffee and the Fair Trade network. This Paper suggests that the growing success that organic production initiatives and participation in the alternative Fair Trade markets among farmers of Chiapas is the product of the consolidation of their organizing efforts since the 1970s along with the impact of neoliberal market reforms. The social capital generated by the level of social organization achieved through the years has increased the producers negotiating capacity within the Mexican society and within international markets, contributing to the democratization of rural Mexico. At the local scale we have the Maya indigenous farmers, their culture and their historic struggle against a political and economic system of oppression and economic marginalization, At the national level we have the conditions generated by the neoliberal economic policies, in addition to changes in the land tenure system. At the global scale, the collapse of the International Coffee Agreement and subsequent decline in coffee prices, the effects of free trade and the actions of alternative fair trade and organic certification organization. Despite the widespread poverty experienced by many indigenous communities in Latin America, small-scale organic farmers have found economic success and social empowerment by selling through specialized Fair- ‘Trade Networks. On 1 January 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement between Mexico, the United States and Canada (NAFTA) took effect, aimed at further opening the country’s neoliberal economic policies through direct foreign investment and limiting the state’s role. As a consequence, Mayan farmers in the state of Chiapas, rebelled, triggered by their history of exploitation, where their lands have continuously been taken over by national and foreign corporations interested in the state's abundant resources and cheap labor. However, the conditions created by the neo-liberal policies also enabled small growers that were organized in cooperatives to sell their product directly to international buyers that were willing to pay a premium for the organic product. Selling directly to buyers obviously reduced the number of middlemen, thus providing more profit and opportunities for self-determination for the growers. The worldwide support for the Zapatista Army’s cause, a revolutionary group of mostly rural indigenous people who declared war on the Mexican government the day that NAFTA was to take effect, also created the conditions for further indigenous organizing movements, including the right of indigenous women. Therefore self-organized alternatives and agro-ecological agriculture have emerged in rural zones in Mexico as a consequence of the social exclusion resulting from neoliberal and modern agricultural policies. Several scientists and development specialists have also documented the benefits of small-scale farming and agro- ecological approaches for regional food security in the midst of climate change and increasing energy costs (Altieri, 1992, 1995, 2009; Rosset ef al, 2006)Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas ) Methodology Data for this study are the product of intensive fieldwork in Chiapas between 1990 and 1995 and subsequent visits, in addition to a critical ethnographical review of more-recendly published work. Formal and informal interviews and participant observations were made among members of the coffee growing organizations “Indigenas de la Sierra Madre de Motoxintla” (ISMAM), “Union de Ejidos Profesor Otilio Montano” “La Selva” and “Union Majomut® i Chiapas, and “Union de Comunidades Indigenas de la Region del Istena” (UCIRI) in Oaxaca. Coffee growers from the communities not associated with these organizations were also interviewed for comparative purposes. Data were also collected from local government and research institutions and certification agencies. Follow up visits and interviews have been made to these organizations and their members, and further information has been collected since 1995. The information gathered from these later visits is included in this paper. (For a detailed study of these organizations and their organic techniques sce Hidalgo- Monroy, 1996) Development, Organic Agriculture, and Fair Trade Chiapas offers an excellent case study of the crucial role that decades of organizing efforts undertaken by small-scale farmers, local NGOs and other actors have had in making Chiapas, the leading organic coffee producer in the world, with almost all production being generated by organized small-scale indigenous Maya producers with landholdings of up to 2 hectares, accounting for 36 percent of the national organic production (Willer and Kilcher 2009). ‘The United Nations Millennium Summit in New York placed the plight of poor countries at the heart of the global agenda adopting the Millennium Development Goals, signed in September 2000 by heads of State and Government and multinational institutions. The advanced industrial nations committed themselves to helping provide financial resources for development priorities of poor countries; and the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, established an action plan to ensure sustainable global development (Stiglitz and Charlton 2005). In economic terms, development means achieving sustained rates of income per capita to enable a nation to expand its output ata faster rate than the growth rate of its population. Economic development is also seen in terms of the changes to the structure of production and employment, so that agriculture’s share in both (production and employment) declines while manufacturing and service telated industries share increases. Therefore, development policies usually focus on rapid industrialization at the expense of rural development. Rural development, on the other hand, is particularly important in countries where large sectors of the population still rely on the land for subsistence. Onganic agriculture and Fair-trade markets have been widely recommended as a better alternative and a holistic approach that can best achieve the Millennium Development Goals (Altieri and Hecht 1990). Organic farming is based on the definition of ecological principles. According to the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) it:70 Journal of Latin American Geography all agricultural systems that promote the environmentally, socially and economically sound production of food and fibers...By respecting the natural capacity of plants, animals, and the landscape, it aims to optimize quality in all aspects of agriculture and the environment...It allows the powerful laws of nature to increase both agricultural yields and disease resistance” (Ibid. 2009: 115). To become truly sustainable, rural development must incorporate the needs of local populations, employment characteristics, income structures, and cultural characteristics. Organic agriculture attempts to combine the traditional practical knowledge of conventional farming with today’s scientific results. Fair Trade The unfairness of international trade, with terms favorable to the developed nations, has always been unequal but has worsened significantly since 1970s in Mexico, Agricultural policies that favor export crops while cheap, usually subsidized agricultural imports undermine small producers. With low prices paid for agricultural products (at the national level), relative to the cost of imports, added to the high costs of living (at the household level), small farmers are disproportionally negatively impacted by the inequity that results from trade between developed and underdeveloped nations. Fair trade constitutes an attempt to address this structural injustice. ‘The Fair trade concept was started by a group of importers and non-profit retailers in the wealthy, Northern European countries, and small-scale producers in developing countries in the 1960s, While fighting low market prices and high dependency on brokers or middlemen, these small-scale farmers were secking better price terms and direct access to the European market. “Max Havelaar” from the Netherlands, was the first certified brand that appeared in 1989. To receive Fair trade labeling certification all producers, merchants, processors, wholesalers and retailers must adhere to a set of standards, One standard is for small producers, and another for workers on plantations and in factories. Fair trade certification requires producers to constantly improve labor conditions, product quality, to foster environmental friendly practices, and to invest in the organization and its members. In order to become certified to use the Fair Trade label on the products, merchants must: —pay a price to producers that cover the costs of sustainable production and housing =pay a premium so that producers can invest in development —make a partial pre-payment when producers ask for it, and sign long- term contracts that enable better planning and encourage sustainable production practices In its efforts to achieve social justice and change the unjust terms of trade among developed and underdeveloped nations that hurt mostly small farmers, fair trade paradoxically has opted to use the same market system to resolve these injustices. A central goal of the movement is to reduce the levels of middlemen (the exporters, brokers, and buyers) allowing a greater portion of the value added to remain with the growers and harvesters, and thus create more direct, socially just, and environmentally responsible trade relations.Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 7 Through the certification requirements and process, Fair Trade promotes the existence of democratically organized farmer and artisan cooperatives, and the formation of unionized labor organizations among commercial plantations in order to improve social and living conditions at the community level. To be successful, Fair Trade requires the presence of strong local institutions that play key roles, in addition to the development of strong external ties by producers with corporate buyers, development NGOs, and other international organizations. Cooperatives enhance the power of producers by the individual and collective “empowerment and capacity building” (Lyon 2004: 116). Through cooperatives, Chiapas organic growers can obtain access to social, economic, and environmental benefits that would otherwise be difficult to obtain operating as individual farmers. These include access to credit, the ability to negotiate, training, certification label benefits, access to health programs, among other benefits (Torok 2009) Historical Background of Chiapas Chiapas is characterized by a high degree of social and economic heterogeneity: It has one of the largest and most diverse indigenous populations with approximately 959,066 indigenous language speakers over the age of five, or 27 percent of the state’s population (De Janvry, and Garcia, 1988). It is second only to the state of Oaxaca in both indigenous population size and that population's marginality in terms of socio-economic development (Collier & Lowery 1999). In the 2010 UNDP report the Human Development Index (HDI) value for indigenous people of Chiapas was rated at 0.61, compared to 0.76 for Mexico’s non-indigenous population. This is the worst HDI figure of any of Mexico's 31 states or federal district; however, it represents a significant improvement compared to previous years, in a state that was long characterized by little social investment, and violent confrontations between the indigenous Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) and government forces. A third of the Chiapas state budget is now allocated to the 28 municipalities with the lowest indices, all of which are indigenous (UN Refugee Agency Minority Rights 2013). There are conflicting views about the role of social inequality as a force leading to conflict and revolution, Recent studies have indicated positive relationship between income inequality and civil wars (Auvinen and Nafviger 1999; Maystadt 2011). However empirical evidence collected by Collier and Hoeffler (1998, 2000, 2004, 2010) and Collier ef a/, (2008) suggest that social grievances do not necessarily affect the risk of conflict, while economic decline are more significant. Harvey's (2001) paper clearly indicates the role that the struggle for collective rights among indigenous Maya in the Chiapas has had in their armed resistance to globalization. Political Context The region of Chiapas was a contested area between Mexico and Guatemala until 1894, when a boundary treaty left several indigenous groups divided between the two nations, A Colonization Law was passed in 1883 by President Porfirio Diaz to promote the occupation of national lands near the newly created international border. Foreign corporations were invited to72 Journal of Latin American Geography establish commercial estates for cash crops, including coffee, banana, among other crops. With the expansion of the agricultural and livestock frontier, and the development of capitalist relations of production in the field (salaried labor, production of commercial crops, capital investments in agrarian property, and the growth of infrastructure in the rural areas) the indigenous populations suffered @ massive despoiling and appropriation of their territories, and many of them were exiled or resettled in less hospitable areas. This was the origin of the emergence of the great /atifundios and hariendas, that established themselves in the territories belonging to the indigenous people and into which the indigenous populations were incorporated in systems of indenture servants (Bonfil Batalla 1996). ‘The Mexican Constitution of 1917 recognized the land rights of the original occupants under their regimen of customary tenure, and returned these lands to the original peoples and to other landless peasants under a new land tenure system called the giida. At the same time, it sought to foster education, health, and a more active participation in a national economy with the goal of eventually incorporating and integrating the indigenous peoples into the national culture, By 1930s many of the coffee haciendas were parceled out and given to their former workers as part of the gjido system. As Blackwell (2012) points out the historic project of subject-making by the Mexican state, based on the official racial state discourse of mestizge, 4 project of assimilation that celebrates the indigenous past while denying an indigenous present, has made it difficult for indigenous groups to articulate an independent indigenous status. Itis in fact this state-gencrated discourse about indigenous versus mestizo people that has produced the indigenous identities (Jung, 2003). As part of the program of national indigenous assimilation, the Mexican government tried to acculturate these groups through the creation of state-run rural boarding schools. Many families then responded by not sending their children to school, and in the process, further isolating themselves. In the 1960s and 1970s with demographic growth in the region came an increase pressure for land, and migrations to marginal and more distant, and isolated regions in the search for land. Religious Background Another important force for change in the region has been religion. Protestantism entered this arca in the early 1900s, primarily with the Mormons and later Jehovah Witnesses. In order to appeal to the local population and to oppose the Catholic influence, they promoted the use of native languages and criticized assimilation. The indigenous people that had migrated to the lowland areas to work in the coffee estates had most contact with these religions. Those who converted became united through religion and attempted to convert their communities into a space for resistance in the face of the integrating state presence. This often caused conflict and division within the communities, and in many cases those converted were forced to leave, sometimes through violence, The groups that were forced to migrate to the rainforest in search of land and/or to escape persecution have developed a general resistance to the governmental institutions through a discourse that restructures indigenous communal values under new social norms (Kovic 2005).Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 7B In the 1960s another strong counter-force for economic and cultural survival in the region came with the influences from Central America and Catholic Liberation Theology. Protestantism and liberation theology encouraged indigenas and campesinos to set up non-PRI social organizations (Hidalgo-Monroy 1996). Through a network of cooperatives a dialogue of re-vindication of indigenous rights has developed. Such grassroots organizations experimented with community development, created networks among different ethnic groups, and have fostered regional and class identities. Since the mid-1970s, these peasant groups have become increasingly radical, fighting for land reform, labor rights, and fair credit programs (Lines 1995). In 1974, the Catholic Bishop of Chiapas, Samuel Ruiz, organized the Indigenous Congress in agreement with government agencies. The goal was to organize previously isolated members of the Tzotzil, Tzeltal, Chol and Tojolabal indigenous communities in an attempt to generate support for the government and to provide the means to incorporate them into the national economy. Historians and agronomists, among other experts were invited to teach courses on Mexican history, agrarian law, and economics to indigenous communities with assistance of catechist translators. This event marks the beginning of radical peasant and indigenous movements in Chiapas. The Congress set the conditions for the creation of new networks of community representatives with common demands, and strengthens their connections to national organizations statewide. As communities were asked to reflect on their socio-economic situations and formulate specific demands to government representatives, the congress created the conditions for an effective bottom-up approach to grassroots organization. In the decades that followed, the leadership of the progressive members of the Catholic Church combined with the indigenous collective wisdom and the support of national and international organizations lead to the Zapatista uprising (Martinez-Torres, 2006). The Catholic Church supported cooperatives in the region; Las Abejas, ISMAM, La Selva, and UCIRI, sympathize with the Zapatistas and support their demands for indigenous rights and culture, however they distinguish themselves for their Christian-based active nonviolent resistance (Hidalgo-Monroy 1996: 121-122). The Catholic church through priests and nuns influenced by liberation theology also played a key role in the promotion of women rights in Chiapas through workshops and courses on social equality and on mestizo society's racism (Hernandez Castillo 2002). In the 1980s the indigenous Mexican coffee farmers from the UCIRI cooperative in Oaxaca, approached the European alternative trade network in order to gain access under fair terms and in large quantities, to the European consumer specialty markets so members of UCIRI would no longer need to rely on grants. UCIRI’s leader was a Dutch liberation theology priest, Franz Vanderhoff Boersma who became a key participant in the carly Alternative Trade Organization movement. In Chiapas cooperatives [SMAM, La Selita, among others were also first established with the assistance of Catholic religious allies who were looking to address the structural causes of poverty and marginalization in the region. The Max Havelaar label for coffee was thus created to be used by existing coffee roasters and retailers who agreed to comply with their criteria of social fairness in trade. “The creation of this first certification — the structure that allowed fairly remunerated coffee from small-farmer cooperatives to move beyond marginalized world shops into the mainstream market- is the moment when alternative market became fair trade” (Jaffee 2007).74 Journal of Latin American Geography Today, in addition to Max: Havelaar, alternative trade organizations include Fairtrade Labeling Organization, TransFair Germany and TransFair USA, international and domestic certifiers, buyers, and Fair Trade related associations. Fair trade owes its growth and continued success to coftee’s global importance, more than $70 billion worth of coffee is traded yearly. ‘The Fair Trade movement has helped cooperative members learn about coffee quality, marketing, permits and bureaucratic procedures, export/import transactions, and multiple certification requirements. In some cases it has even helped them understand and even develop value added processes such as transportation, roasting, and packaging (Hidalgo-Monroy 1996: 70). One of the most important roles that Fair Trade has played is encouraging exchange and coordination among small farmer organizations, often including sharing of contracts. ‘Today, the sharing of contracts is the only way for new organizations to break into the Fair Trade market as supply far outstrips demand. However, today’s tighter market is pushing Fair Trade producer organizations to increasingly compete with each other, As a consequence, several cooperatives in Mexico are working together to develop secondary level forms of organizations based on collaboration with other cooperatives to collect and market Fair Trade coffee not absorbed through already established contracts, and to promote a new system of Mexican Fair ‘Trade within the national market. For example, La Sela cooperative is well known for its chain of 18 coffee shops located in Mexico, Adanta and Barcelona. These coffee shops pay a premium and only buy coffee from its members, In addition, a percentage of the profit is devoted to development projects within the cooperative. Another example of direct marketing is the agreement between Starbucks and the Conservation International joint venture in Mexico and members of CESMACH (Campesinos Ecologivos de la Sierra Madre de Chiapas) cooperative near F/ Trimfo Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas. Many cooperatives have also developed and market name of origin brands, such as ISMAM, Café Chiapas, and so on. These direct ties between cooperatives and large international corporations are of course causing controversies within the Fair Trade movement (Taylor 2002). Most cooperatives have found that gaining Fair Trade certification does not automatically bring buyers or bonus payments. Reliability in the fulfillment of contracts and consistent delivery of quality coffee are extremely important, the label is simply the mean to access the Fair Trade markets, Killian ef a/. (2006) support this in their economic analysis of the viability of sustainable agriculture, where they concluded that fair trade certification offers, in general, a substantial contribution to improve farm income and therefore living conditions for farmers and their families. However, price is always a function of both quality and certification, where quality is a more basic prerequisite for a price premium. ‘Therefore an optimized farm management leads in many instances to even higher economic benefits as coffee quality improves. Access to favorable pre-financing through Fair Trade is a crucial condition of a successful commercialization. Nevertheless, several organizations have also developed their own credit unions, or have accessed other bank sources or governmental financing when available, The future of small farmer sustainability lies in organic production, as both Fair’Trade and even conventional markets have begun to discriminate in favor of organic products. Organic coffee accounts for only 3 percent of the specialty coffee imports in the United States, and similarOrganic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiap: percentages reported for Europe. While the current demand for organic coffee outstrips supply globally, fair trade coffee suffers from oversupply (Fuchs 1997, cited by Rice 2001), It is however important to point here that in the most successful cooperatives the role of key individuals, often national or foreign technical advisors, whom have served as mentors or interlocutor, are crucial to gain and maintain access to the Fair Trade market. Cooperatives lacking advisors with the language and education skills to be effective international interlocutors have found access to this market very difficult (Hidalgo-Monroy 1996; ‘Taylor 2002). Economic Context ‘The price of coffee hit a 100 year low in the 1989 when the International Coffee Agreement broke up, causing the international price of coffee to fall. On the other hand, multinational corporations continue to prosper as a result of the low prices. Traditionally, subsistence farmers have used coffee as a source of cash to complement their income, As a consequence of the drop in coffee price, the majority of the 500,000 Chiapanecos struggle to feed their families, and some growers lost their land to banks (CEPAL 2002). However, organic farmers survived the crisis since their product was traded in the specialty market. ‘The social capital built up in Chiapas encouraged many organizations to convert to organic methods and to take advantage of fair trade opportunities (Hidalgo- Monroy 1996; Martinez-Torres 2006). At the same time and under the new liberalization policies implemented in Mexico under pressure from the international World Bank, and other lenders, Mexico transitioned from a protected and centralized economy to free trade. ‘The withdrawal of government support and the privatization of institutions opened the door for individual producers and markets to do business directly without intermediaries. Organic production became an attractive option to the low market prices for coffee. The organic product market at the time was growing in Europe, and rural Mexico became an attractive location to expand production. European organic certification companies came to the region looking for products for this booming market. Organic agriculture also encouraged local farmers to diversify their farm crops and to incorporate traditional methods of farming and knowledge to solve production challenges in the areas of soil health, disease control and resource conservation, such as the use of crop rotations, construction of terraces among other widespread practices commonly used among indigenous farmers. In addition, farmers were able to diversify their production base and gain access to more diverse markets for their crops that included both conventional ones and specialties. In turn, part of the increased profits generated by the fare trade markets were put aside and used to finance social programs to benefit the community. Alll these economic changes created an atmosphere that encouraged the ongoing consolidation of organic agricultural cooperatives and a social fight for self-determination, land demand, and cultural survival. This is reflected in the cooperatives names including: “Indégenas de la Sierra Madre de Motozintla? “K’nan Choch”, “Nuestra Madre Tierra”, “Union de Cafeticultores Indigenas de la Regidn del Istmo” among others (Hidalgo-Monroy 1996: 119-121).1% Journal of Latin American Geography ‘The state of Chiapas, Mexico, then burst into the world’s headlines during New Year’s Day in 1994 - the day that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect - when an uprising led by the Zapatista movement, a revolutionary group of mostly rural indigenous people declared war on the Mexican government, and reminded the world that indigenous people are still struggling for their rights 500 years after the European conquest. The federal Mexican government was forced to declare a cease-fire after only twelve days of armed combat in order to avoid an international investor confidence crisis, and due to pressure from a widespread mobilization of national and international groups, clearly demonstrating the importance of civil society. The presence of NGOs, particularly international NGOs, dramatically increased after the 1994 Zapatista rebellion as a response against the Mexican government decision to send heavy military presence to repress the Zapatistas. The effective use of media, particularly the Internet, prevented further massacres. However the presence of NGOs in Chiapas began to diminish after the 2000 presidential election of Vicente Fox and his change in politics towards the movement in order to produce confidence among foreign investors. As many NGOs redirected their financial assistance to the Middle East, Africa or other trouble zones, the Chiapas based organizations began facing serious financial problems, forcing changes in strategics or cven closing programs, affecting indigenous organizations. The Zapatistas have made clear their intentions to build political and economic autonomy without government funds, Instead they receive significant support from the international solidarity movement, ‘The 1994 jump in coffee Prices in Chiapas has been attributed to the Zapatista movement as international allies opened up new solidarity markets (Martinez-Torres 2006: 65). Today, the struggle for indigenous autonomy to create peaceful communities free from poverty and oppression continues in Chiapas. Since NAFTA ‘The Structural Adjustment Programs implemented by Mexico in order to become eligible to negotiate the terms of their loans in the 1980s required the privatization of all state owned industries and the implementation of deep cuts in social spending and an emphasis on export production. This eliminated nearly all loans and government subsidies to those in the agricultural sector producing goods for local and national markets. Previously, the Mexican constitution protected communal lands, called ejidos, one of the remaining victories of the Mexican Revolution. The policy changes implemented with NAPTA encouraged the privatization of ejido land. With the passing of NAFTA under the Clinton administration many key agricultural crops had special protection, but as time passed the tariffs for key products such as corn, beans, rice, potatoes, pork, and chicken disappeared. US. exports to Mexico have soared displacing hundreds of thousands of small farmers. In October of 2008, previous Mexican President Vicente Fox warned then President George W, Bush that the U.S. subsidies could push up unemployment in Mexico's countryside and drive farmers across the border (Gonzalez-Jacome 2010). Agricultural trade between Mexico and the USA has increased during NAFTA, especially since 1997-2002. During this period the value of importsOrganic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 7 at constant USA dollars has grown faster than that of exports, and so, the agricultural trade deficit of Mexico with the USA. Mexico has fared particularly well with labor-intensive non-traditional crops: According to Yunez Naude and Barceinas Paredes (2004: 8), fresh and prepared vegetables and fruits are the group of commodities whose exports have grown faster since 1997-2002. However, over 64 percent of the fruits and vegetables imported from Mexico are during the December to May winter months, providing products that are not available in the US and do not compete with the American industries. On the other hand high US.A. subsidies for exported crops along with producers, large, capital-intensive farms, superior technology and infrastructure, have boosted their exports of rice, cattle, corn, dairy products, and apples between 159 percent and 707 percent from the carly 1990s (Wise 2009: 3). From a Mexican perspective, the playing field is greatly tilted in the favor of the US. According to Mexico’s National Agricultural Council (CNA), in the year 2000, the average Mexican farmer received less than $750 dollars in aanual subsidies, compared to a value of over $20,000 to US farmers, as part of a massive US farm bill. Mexico’s agro deficit with the US. reached over $4 billion since the year 2000 (Fox and Haight 2010: 21). The importance of Mexican agricultural exports cannot be measure by pesos, as it is less than 5 percent of the gross domestic product, but rather on the fact that about a quarter of the population makes their sustenance directly from the land. Before the signing of NAFTA, only 2 percent of corn consumed in Mexico was imported from the US; by 2007 imports of cheap com from the US had increased to 26 percent. The Zapatista Autonomous Communities ‘The Chiapas indigenous uprising of the EZLN or Zapatistas (Zapatista Army of National Liberation, EZLN) on January first 1994, the day NAFTA went into effect, made public all the economic and cultural tensions prevalent in Mexico, disrupting the myth of progress and exposing the devastating poverty, racism and neglect that Mexico's indigenous communities continue to experience. Initiatives for constitutional reform after the Zapatista war, based on the San Andrés Peace Accords on Indigenous Rights and Culture, continued at a stalemate until a government counter-reform law on Indigenous Rights and Culture was instead passed by the Mexican legislature. This reform failed to meet the basic agreements of the San Andres Peace Accords originally negotiated between the previous Mexican presidency of Zedillo and the EZLN Blackwell, 2012), The spatial political organization of the Zapatista territory today (Figure 1) includes a dual based power system between what is considered as “The Bad Government” (national Mexican government) that includes, in order of increasing scale: local communities, municipios (the main unit of local government in Mexico, typically the size of a US. county), regional and national level entities. Alongside are “The Good Government Councils” (part of the Zapatista system), decision-making bodies that coexist within the Caracoles (caracal --“snail” or “conch” used as a symbol for communication), or complexes of regional services. The Zapatista organization itself has very clear requirements: in addition to adhering to its ideological principles, members must follow a set of standards that include rejecting aid from the central government and abstaining from alcohol. It is not surprising that many within the community78 Journal of Latin American Geography decline to join. Therefore, the Zapatista presence within cach community ranges from a tiny minority to an overwhelming majority Gonzalez Casanova 2005). =>“ Hinaltian VERACRUZ of Ps rus c isin ope hu CHIAPAS. \aniaga Sina Meare we Mapas GUATEMALA ren anes Area of Zapatista \ iluence NN aie \ ie dows |S, ° OE on Cd. Hidalgo. & Figure 1, (the author thanks Tony Burton for preparing the map) Within these autonomous communities in Chiapas, cooperatives have been forming to produce and sell diverse products to the Fair Trade Market. These cooperatives are examples of economic alternatives to improve living conditions among community members, as well as to fund their struggle for autonomy and indigenous rights. Zapatistas have a system of taxation. They charge a ten percent tax on projects funded by outside agencies, including NGOs (the highway tolls were dropped in 2003). Coffee and craft cooperatives bring in additional revenues, In addition to receiving higher prices than the ones commonly paid by fair trade, 15 percent of the cost of all the coffee and honey purchases is paid back to the Zapatista Junta del Buen Gobierno to fund social projects such as health and education. Within cach community, assembly decisions and services are reimbursed by labor or in-kind contributions from cach family in the community. International solidarity projects provide additional benefits (such as the clinic at the community of Magdalena, supported and staffed by Médecins du Monde for a number of years). Despite all these, the total budget of the resistance communities is, still quite austere (Tavanti, 2005). Café Rebelion is an example of a solidarity commercial enterprise that was started at the suggestion of leaders of the autonomous indigenous communities in resistance in Chiapas, Mexico. The purpose was to develop direct markets in the Unites States for the products from the autonomous indigenousOrganic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 7 communities in Chiapas. Indigenous producers are actively involved in all decisions made by the business. All products are from Zapatista cooperativ In addition to shade grown and organic cofice, they also produce natural coffee flower honey (http://wwweaferebelion.com/about html). Biodiversity and “Shade Certification” Much of Chiapas that remains with “forest” vegetation is managed for coffee production. Coffee is traditionally grown under the shade provided by a canopy of cither natural forest or a planted canopy often dominated by Inga spp. This species diversity allows for a high biodiversity of associated insects and other important native organisms. This fact has given rise to the Shade Coffee Certification, and other conservation initiatives. The idea of shade certification is to compensate farmers for the biodiversity conservation service provided by their ecological practices of incorporating trees in their plantations. However, the premium offered may not always compensate for the low yields among the most shaded plantations (Perfecto ef a/, 2005). ‘Traditional coffee farms in tropical countries have long been recognized as important birding spots (Griscom 1932). Both planted and natural shade coffee plantations support a high overall diversity of bird species. Over 105 species have been recorded in each plantation type on fixed radius point counts and a combined species list of 180 species (Greenberg, Bichier and Sterling 1997) Neo-tropical migratory birds that winter in northern Latin America represent 60 to 80 percent of the bird species that inhabit forests throughout the eastern US and Canada. In Chiapas traditional coffee covers very significant areas with closed canopy, agro-forestry systems with high species diversity. The Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center has created the “Bird Friendly” label and implemented shade coffee certification or Bird-friendly coffee programs over the past six years to verify that coffee marketed as “shade grown” is actually grown on farms that provide higher quality habitat for biodiversity. In order to carry their trademarked label coffee must be grown under a minimum shade cover of 40 percent, and the over-story should include at least ten different species of shade trees, with no more than 70 percent of the trees being Inga species. Pruning of the over-story and the removal of epiphytes are discouraged, and buffer zones are encouraged. These are the most stringent environmental criteria Greenberg, Bichier and Sterling 1997). There are additional costs to the farmers and roasters associated with the shade and bird-friendly certification process, The process is particularly expensive in the case of the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center certification label, especially among small growers, Production, monitoring and inspection requirements of organic, Fair Trade and shade coftee are compatible and often overlapping. There are also problems with applying one-size-fits-all biodiversity criteria to different regions. Importers agree that shade certification doesn’t always bring farmers premium prices, but it helps their coffee to sell more quickly because of its environmentally friendly association. Coffee farmers, particularly small producers, are ultimately in the business of growing coffee to support their families. According to the Sustainable Coffee Survey, of the 6.6 million pounds of coffee that was shade-certified globally, from 2000 to 2001, only 2.1 million80 Journal of Latin American Geography pounds were sold as such. For many coffee producers, there simply isn't enough demand for shade coffee, and it ends up in the market at conventional prices (Giovannucci 2003). Shade and Bird-friendly certification has also allowed some producers to tap into the new carbon trading market under the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol as a source of funding through payments and benefits for environmental benefits such as carbon mitigation (Ambio 2006; Soto Pinto ef a/, 2010). Over time, Fair Trade networks are becoming more diversified and complex. On the other hand, producer organizations are developing new forms of coordination among themselves, and are also looking to diversify their products and to open new markets, They are diversifying their markets by negotiating direct relations with foreign buyers, outside the Fair Trade label network, who are interested in small farmer coffee under similar conditions offered by Fair Trade companies. Conclusions The southern states of Mexico are undergoing rapid economic and demographic changes as globalization penetrates these relatively remote and previously marginal regions, In 2008 the Plan Mesoamerica trade agreement between the countries of Colombia, Mexico and several countries in Central America was signed with the goal of promoting economic integration under the neoliberal scheme (Bartra A. 2004). Producers interviewed believe that by becoming part of a farmer organization or conperatira, they get a “basket of benefits” that goes beyond the premium price. Growers are also able to get access to lines of credit with low interest loans, health programs, production infrastructure, access to transportation, awareness and education in many areas including ecology, quality control, certification requirements and process, negotiating skills, and so on. Some producers have also sent their children to schoo! with the promise of getting jobs within the organization (bookkeepers, accountants, secretaries, agronomists, and so on). Most farmers agreed that the possibility of receiving a higher permanent and more stable income is what keeps them committed to growing organic coffee, especially after their coffee becomes recognized as of high quality. Every one said that the higher price received compensated for the additional work needed, despite the high entry costs of certification. In addition, fair trade is encouraging member organizations to promote the development of women programs that include productive projects. Today, several income- generating organizations run by women can be found in the Chiapas Highlands. One of the most important roles that Fair Trade has played is to encourage exchange and coordination among producer organizations. Many of them are now working together to increase Mexican’s demand for organic products, and to develop a Mexican-based Fair ‘Irade system. For example, La Selva, one of the coffee producer organizations from Chiapas, has opened a chain of 18 coffee shops located in Mexico, Atlanta and Barcelona. These coffee shops pay premium prices and only buy coffee from members. A percentage of the profit is used to fund development projects within the farmer's communities (Martinez-Torres 2006: 47).Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 81 Mexican organic products can now be found within the country showing a significant growth, and in some areas the demand exceeds the supply. This growing interest has encouraged the increasing involvement of state and federal governments. In February 2006 a law was passed governing organic products that sets standards regarding regulation and promotion and the National Council of Organic Production was created to oversight the sector. This study of the factors and impacts of organic agriculture and Fair ‘Trade projects as alternatives to rural development among predominantly Mayan indigenous populations in the state of Chiapas has demonstrated that organic coffee production is an important and viable alternative with benefits that go far beyond the additional income and price stability offered by the fair trade market. Tt shows that the organizational, marketing, and social empowerment skills that are promoted have a potential for deeper social and economic changes with a much longer lasting impact. However, coffee must be part of a larger agro- ecosystem farming approach that encourages a more diverse production base and opening of new markets. While there is no doubt that fair trade has brought important improvements in livelihoods, it also cannot solve all the problems of rural development. Farmers are still only covering basic needs and certification has a high cost. Nevertheless fair trade has had significant contributions, especially in the array of community development programs that are funded, especially in relation to health, education and agricultural development. Non- income benefits are also equally important. Fair trade has raised farmer's awareness, empowerment, and negotiating capacity, It has also often acted as a safety net allowing many producers to stay on the land when others could not, such as during the coffee crisis in the 1990s. Small-producer organizations are crucial vehicles for rural sustainability and greater attention and support must be given to strengthening them, in particular women, as they are key to rural development and biodiversity conservation. Mayan indigenous populations in the state of Chiapas inhabit an extremely marginal area where local groups have initiated armed conflict against the Mexican central government and against the effects of neoliberalism. Through their experiences a more sustainable model for rural development has become evident that includes agroforestry of green coffee production (shade, organic, bird friendly), the voluntary carbon credit market, fair trade markets, and the full participation of women in project management. Chiapas offers an excellent opportunity to study these newly developing social geographies and the impacts that the forces of globalization are having on culture, social and political organizations and natural resources. Acknowledgements A very special thanks to Dr, Ray Bromley, Vice Provost for International Education at the University of Albany-SUNY for reviewing the original manuscript and his suggestions. I would also like to thanks the Editor for his assistance and the helpfal comments of the external reviewers.82 Journal of Latin American Geography References Alder, M. A. 1992, Sustainable Agricultural Development in Latin America: Exploring the Possibilities. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 39: 1-21. 1995. Agraecolngy: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture, Boulder: view Press. Altieri, M. A. and Hecht, 8. B. 1990, Agroecology and Small Farm Development. Boca Raton: CRC Pr AMBIO. 2006. Scoled Te. Reporte Annual 2005. San Cristobal de las Casas: Cooperative Ambio. Auvinen, J-and Nafviger, E. Journal of Conflict Resolution 43( 1999, The Sources of Humanitarian Emergencies. }: 267-290. Bartra, A. 2004. Profound Rivers of Mesoamerica, Alternatives to Plan Puebla Panama. Instituto Maya: El Atajo: Mexico Solidarity Network. Barton Bray, D, Plaza Sanchez, J. L. and Contreras Murphy, E. 2002. Social Dimensions of Organic Coffee Production in Mexico: Lessons for Eco- Labeling Initiatives. Society and Natural Resources 15: 429-446. Blackwell, M. 2012. The Practice of Autonomy in the Age of Neoliberalism: Strategies from Indigenous Women’s Organizing in Mexico. Journal of Latin Aumorican Studies 44; 103-732. . 2009. Zones of Autonomy: Gendered Cultural Ci Indigenous Women’s Organizing in Mexico. In Gendered Citizenshi Perspectives on Knowledge Production, Political Activism and Culture. Caldwell, K. L , Ramirez R. K , Coll, K,, Fisher T. and Siu L. (eds), pp. 39-54, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bonfil Batalla, G., 1996 Mexico Profunds — Reclaiming a Civilization, Austin: University of Texas Press. Camargo, M. B. P. 2009. The Impact of Climate Variability in Coffee Crop. In International Conference on Coffee Science, 22: 62-66. Campinas, Brazil: Association for Science and Information on Coffee. Collier, P. 1998. The Political Economy of Ethnicity: In Pleskovic, B. and Stiglitz, J.B, (eds), Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics, pp. 387-405. Washington DC.: World Bank. . 2000, Econonnic Canses of Civil Conflict and their Implications for Policy. Washington D.C.: World Bank.Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 83 Collier, P. and Hoeffler, A. 1998. On the Economic Causes of Conflict. Oxford Economic Papers 50; 563-573. . 2004. Greed and Grievance in Civil War. Oxford Economic Papers 56: 563-595. Collier, G. and Lowery, E. 1999. Basta! Land and the Zapatista Rebellion in Chiapas. New York: Food First Books. Collier, P., Hoeffler, A., and Rohner, D. 2008. Beyond Greed and Grievance: Feasibility and Civil War. Oxford Economic Papers 61: 1-27. De Janvey, A., and Garcia, R,, 1988. Rural Poverty and Exvironmental Degradation in Latin America: Causes, Eiffects, and Alternative Solutions, Rome: International Fund for Agricultural Development. Duncan, E. and Simonelli, J. 2005. Uprising of Hope: Sharing the Zapatista Journey to Alternative Development. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Eber, C, E. 1999, Seeking Our Own Food: Indigenous Women’s Power and Autonomy San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas (1980-1998). Latin American Perspectives 26(3): 6-36. Engla Eber, C. and Kovic, C. M, 2003, Women of Chiap. of Struggle and Hope. New York: Routledge. : Making History in Times Fox, J, and Haight, L. 2010, Mesican Agricultural Policy. Multiple Goals and Conflicting Interests. Subsidiging Inequality: Mexican Corn Policy since NAFTA, Santa Cruz, CA: Woodrow Wilson International Center. Flores, M., Bratescu, A., Martinez, J. Oviedo, J, and Acosta, A. 2002. Centroamerica: Elinpacto dea caida de ls precios del café. Serie Estudios y Perspectivas — Sede Subregional de la CEPAL. Mexico, DF: Unidad de Desarrollo Agricola y Desarrollo Econémico. Gallery, L. 2008. Mujeres en Accidn: Indigenous Women’s Activism in Chiapas, Mexico, Trascending Silence. Blectronic publishing in Women Studies. University at Albany, NY Gay, C., Estrada, F, Conde, C., Eakin, H., and Villers, L. 2006, Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture: A Case of Study of Coffee Production in Veracruz, Mexico, Climatic Change 79(3-4): 259-288. Giovannucci, D., and Koekoek F, 2003. The State of Sustainable Coffees A Study of Tinelve Major Markets. Washington: The World Bank34 Journal of Latin American Geography Gonzalez Casanova, P., 2005. The Zapatista Caracoles; Network of Resistance and Autonomy, Sosalism and Democracy 19(3): 79-92. Gonzalez Jacome, A. 2004. Dealing with Risk: Small-Scale Coffee Production Systems in Mexico. Perspectivas Latinoamericanas 11-39. Natural Resources and Out-Migration in Local Communities of Southern Mexico: Non-nafta Issues Impacting Nafta. Te Impacts of NAFTA on North America, Challenges Outside the Box, pp. 141-158, New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Greenberg, R., Bichier, P, and Sterling, J. 1997. Bird Populations in Rustic and Planted Shade Coffee Plantations of Eastera Chiapas. Mexico. Biatrypica 29(4): 501-514. Harvey, N. 1998. The Chiapas Rebellion: The Struggle for Land and Democracy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, Globalization and Resistance in Post-Cold War Mexico: Difference, Citizenship and Biodiversity Conflicts in Chiapas. Third World Quarterly 22(6): 1045-1061. Hernandez Castillo, R. A., 1994. Reinventing Tradition: The Women’s Law in Akwe Kon. A Journal of Indigenous Issues X1(2): 67-71. . 1998, La otra Palabra: Mujeres y Violencia en Chiqpas, Antes y Después os Uryentes, Mexico: CIESAS. 2001. Histories and Stories from Chiapas Border Identities in Southern Mexico, Austin: University of Texas Press. . 2002. Zapatismo and the Emergence of Indigenous Feminism. ICLA Report an Rave and Identity XXXV (6): 39-43. - 2005, Indigenous Law and Identity Politics in Mexico: Indigenous Men’s and Women’s Struggles for a Multicultural Nation, Pol AR 24: 90-109. Hidalgo-Monroy Wohlgemuth, N. 1996. Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas, Mexico: An Alternative to Rural Development. Doctoral Dissertation, Geography Department: University of California, Berkeley. Higgins, N. 2004. Understanding the Chiapas Rebellion: Modernist Visions and the Invisible Indian. Austin: University of Texas Press.Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 85 Howard, P. and Homer-Dixon, T. 1996. Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Chiapas, Mexico. New York: American Association for the Advancement of Science and the University of ‘Toronto. International Trade Centre (ITC) 2010. Climate Change and the Cafjee Industry (Technical Paper). Geneva: ITC. Jafice, D. 2007 Brewing Justice. University of California Pres ‘rade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival. Berkeley: Juarez Hernandez, L. and Hernandez Cervantes, T. 2009. Exploring Agriculture Practice in Mexico: An Opportunity for Small-Scale Farmers to Feed Themselves. Paper presented at the 113th EAAE Seminar: A Resilient European Food Industry and Food Chain in a Challenging World. Jung, C. 2003. The Politics of Indigenous Identity: Neoliberalism, Cultural Rights and the Mexican Zapatistas. Social Research 70: 433-462. Kilian, B., Jones, C., Pratt, L., and Villalobos, A. 2006. Is Sustainable Agriculture a Viable Strategy to Improve Farm Income in Central America? A Case Study on Coffee. Journal of Business Research 59: 322-220 Kovic, Christine Marie 2005. Mayan Voices for Human Rights: Displaced Catholics in Highland Chiapas. Austin: University of Texas Pres La Jornada Perfil, 19 March 2001, Comandanta Esther Central Message of the EZLN: 2-4. Lacroix, R. L. J. 1985. Integrated Rural Development in Latin America. World Bank Staff Working Papers # 716. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Lines, J. R, 1995. Denocratizing a Diocese: Liberation Theology in Chiapas, Mexico Doctoral dissertation. Brigham Young University. Martinez-Torres, M. E. 2006 Organic Coffee: Sustainable Development by Maya Farmers. Athens: Ohio University Press. Mas, A. H. and Dietsch, T. V. 2004. Linking Shade Coffee Certification to Biodiversity Conservation: Butterfly and Birds in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecological Applications 14(3): 642-654. Maystadt, J. EK 2011. Does Inequality Make Us Rebel? A Mitroeconomic Approach Applied to Southern Mexico. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Milford, A. 2004 Coffee Co-operatives and Competition: The Impact of Fair Trade. Bergen: Christian Michelsen Institute.86 Journal of Latin American Geography Navarro, L. 2004. To Die a Littl. Migration and Coffee in Mexico and Central America. Mexico: International Relations Center, Americas Program. Perfecto, I. and Snelling, R. 1995. Biodiversity and the Transformation of a Tropical Agroecosystem: Ants in Coffee Plantations. Ecological Applications 5(4): 1084-1097. Perfecto, 1 Biodiversit Biodiversi Vandermeer, J., Hanson, P., and Cartin, V. 1997. Anthropod Loss and the Transformation of a Tropical Agro-Ecosystem. and Conservation 6: 935-945. Philpott, S. M.and Armbrecht, 1. 2006. Biodiversity in Tropical Agroforests and the Ecological Role of Ants and Ant Diversity in Predatory Function. Ecolgcal Entomology 31: 369-377. Philpott, S. M., Bichier, P, Rice, R. and Greenberg, R. 2007, Field-Testing Ecological and Economic Benefits of Coffee Certification Programs. Conservation Biology 21 (4): 975-985. Pohlmann, D. 2007. Eeonomic Impuct of Nafta on Mexico. Munich: GRIN Verlag Publishing, Munich, Germany. Rice, R. A 1999. A Place Unbecoming: The Coffee Farm of Northern Latin America. Geographical Review 89(4): 554-579. . 2003. Coffee Production in a Time of Crisis: Social and Environmental Connections. SAIS Reeiew XXIII(1): 221-245. . 2001. Noble Goals and Challenging Terrain: Organic and Fair Trade Coffee Movements in the Global Marketplace. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental E:thics 14: 39-66. Rosenbaum, B., 1993. With Our Heads Bowed -the Dynamics of Gender in a Maya Community. Austin: University of Texas Press, ss, 2002. The War against Oblivion: Zapatista Chronices, 1994-2000. Monroe, ommon Courage Press. Rosset, R. P,, and Courville, M. 2006, Promised Land: Competing Visions of Agrarian Reform. Oakland: Food First Books. Rus, J., Hernandez Castillo, R. A., and Mattiace, S. L. 2003. Mayan Lives, Mayan Utopias: The Indigenous Peoples of Chiapas and the Zapatista Rebellion. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Organic Agriculture and Indigenous Communities in Chiapas 87 Serrano Carreto, E., A. Embriz Osorio, and P, Fernandez Ham (eds). 2003. Indicadores socioecondmicas de los pueblos indigenas, 2002. Mexico: Instituto Nacional Indigenista/Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo. Scott, C. D., 1987 Poverty and Inequality in the Rural Sector of Latin America and the Caribean, Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations. Smith, J. and Duncan, B, 2012. Transnational Activism and Global ‘Transformation: Post-National Politics and Activism for Climate Justice and Food Sovereignty. Presented at the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Soto-Pinto, L., Perfecto, 1., Castillo-Hernandea, J., and Caballero-Nieto, J. 2000. Shade Effect on Coffee Production at the Northern Tzeltal Zone of the State of Chiapas, Mexico. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 80: 61-69. Soto-Pinto, L., Mendoza, A., and Jimenez Ferrer, de Jong, 2010. Carbon Sequestration through Agroforestry in Indigenous Communities of Chiapas, Mexico. Agroforestry Systems 78: 39-51. Speed, S., Hernandez Castillo, R. A., and Stephen, L. M. 2006. Dissident Women. Gender and Cultural Politics in Chiapas. Austin: University of Texas Press. Stiglitz, J. E. and Charlton, A. 2005. Fair Trade for All. How Trade Can Promote Development, New York: Oxford University Press Tavanti, M., 2005. Chiapas Civil Society Organizations: Cultural Resistance and Economic Alternatives through Fair Trade Cooperatives and International Networks. Paper presented at 5th International Society for the Third Sector Research Regional Conference for Latin America and Caribbean. Taylor, P, 2002, Poverty Alleviation throngh Participation in Fair Trade Coffee Networks: Synthesis of Case Study Research Question Findings. Report to the Ford Foundation. Torok, J. 2009. Social Implications of Fair Trade Coffee in Chiapas, Mexico: ‘Toward Alternative Economic Integration. Master of Arts Thesis. Department of Government and International Affairs, College of Arts and Sciences. Tampa: University of South Florida Scholar Commons. Vagneron, I. and $. Roquigny, 2010. What Do We Really Know About the Impact of Fair Trade? A Synthesis, Paris: French Platform for Fair Trade, CIRAD (Agricultural Research for Development) Whitm Rebelliv , J. M. and R. L. Hoperoft, 1996. Community, Capitalism, and in Chiapas. Seciological Perspectives 39(4): 517-538.88 Journal of Latin American Geography Willer, H. and Klicher, L. (eds.), 2009. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2009. Bonn: IFOAM. Wise, C. 1998. The Post-NAFTA Political Economy Mexico and Western Hemisphere. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press Wise, T. 2009. Agricultural Dumping Under NAFTA: Estimating the Costs of US. Agricultural Policies to Mexican Producers. GDAE, Working Paper No. 09-08. Tufts University Yuiiez-Naude, A and F. Barceinas-Paredes. 2004. The Agriculture of Mexico after Tew Years of NAFTA Implementation. Santiqgo, Centeal Bank of Chile Working Paper 277.