Abstract
This article is based on a 2003 case study of the Special Program for Food Security in two dry, upland regions of Honduras and Nicaragua. In particular the research sought to identify factors influencing farmers’ interest in various “best practices” being promoted as alternatives to the use of fire in cropping and ranching systems. The economic feasibility and/or affordability of several of these practices are questionable in light of most farmers’ priorities, risk concerns, or limited resources. The technical feasibility of several of the practices is unclear, at least in the marginal agroecological environments in which most of the farmers in these regions operate. The study highlights the weaknesses of agricultural development initiatives designed without a sufficient understanding of existing agricultural strategies and their purposes. It also reveals the limitations of technological approaches to problems of food insecurity and land degradation, and the need for broader, more integrated rural development strategies. The findings support critiques regarding the biases of many development professionals that may prevent them from giving sufficient attention to local knowledge and perspectives.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
There appears to be some confusion regarding income levels; another PESA report (PESA, 2003) indicates that US$110 per year is the average household income, rather than the amount per capita.
The Cordoba is the official currency of Nicaragua. US$1 = 15 Cordobas (July 2003).
One manzana (mz) equals 70% of a hectare, or 7,000 square m s.
This was calculated based on the following values: 0–5 years = 0.2 adults, 6–11 years = 0.4 adults, 12–16 years = 0.7 adults, 17–60 = 1 adult, and 61+ = 0.7 adults.
Calves were counted as one-half head.
Lempiras are the official currency of Honduras; US$1 = L17.3 (July 2003).
These possessions include all animals, vehicles, bicycles, televisions and radios in the household’s possession. An estimated average value was assigned to each of these items.
Under the agreement between farmers and the program, the farmers who receive support for establishing and managing a nursery must share planting materials with others in the community.
References
Ashby, J. A. (1985). The Social Ecology of Soil Erosion in a Colombian Farming System. Rural Sociology 50(3): 377–396.
Ashby, J. A., Sanz, J. I., Knapp, E. B., and Imbach, A. (1999). CIAT’s Research on Hillside Environments in Central America. Mountain Research and Development 19(3): 2–18.
Blaikie, P. (1985). The Political Economy of Soil Erosion in Developing Countries. Longman, London, UK.
Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H. (1987). Land Degradation and Society. Methuen, London, UK.
Collins, J. L. (1987). Labor Scarcity and Ecological Change. In Little, P. D., Hrowitz, M., and Nyerges, A. E. (eds.), Lands at Risk in the Third World: Local-Level Perspectives, Westview, Boulder, CO.
Current, D., Lutz, E., and Scherr, S. (eds.) (1995). Costs, Benefits, and Farmer Adoption of Agroforestry: Project Experience in Central America and the Caribbean. World Bank Environment Paper Number 14. The World Bank: Washington D.C.
DeMendonca, M. J. C., Vera Diez, M. C., Nepstad, D., Seroa da Motta, R., Alencar, A., Gomes, J. C., and Ortiz, R. A. (2004). The Economic Cost of the Use of Fire in the Amazon. Ecological Economics 49(1): 89–105.
Ellis, F. (2000). Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Grossman, L. S. (1997). Soil Conservation. Political Ecology, and Technological Change on Saint Vincent. The Geographical Review 86(3): 353–375.
Haug, R. (1999). From IRD to Sustainable Livelihoods: What is the Role of Food and Agriculture? Forum for Development Studies 2: 181–201.
INEC. (2005). Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Censo, Nicaragua. Available at: http://www.inec.gob.ni/estadisticas/proyecciones/proyecman. htm (accessed 28 March 2005).
Jansen, K. (1997). Diversity and the nature of technological change in hillside farming in Honduras. In DeGroot, J. P., and Ruerd, R. (eds.), Sustainable Agriculture in Central America, St. Martin’s, New York, NY, pp. 108–126.
Johnson, N. L., and Baltodano, M. E. (2004). The Economics of Community Watershed Management: Some Evidence from Nicaragua. Ecological Economics 49: 57–71.
Kaimowitz, D. (2000). Useful myths and intractable truths: the politics of the link between forests and water in Central America. Paper presented at the UNESCO Symposium/Workshop on Forests-Water-People in the Humid Tropics. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 31 July–4 August.
Lupone, E. (2001). Informe Final, Consultoría: Organización Comunitaria con Enfoque de Genero. Unpublished report for the Special Program for Food Security, Honduras.
Morales, G. M. (2002). Una Mirada a la Situación Socioeconómica y de Genero en Seis Comunidades Rurales del Área de Influencia del PESA Honduras. Unpublished report for the SPFS: San Lucas, El Paraiso, Honduras.
Nagle, G. (1997). Fire. Geography Review 11(2): 22–25.
Nair, P. K. R. (1993). An Introduction to Agroforestry. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Peet, R., and Watts, M. (eds.) (1996). Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements. Routledge, London.
PESA. (2003). Resultados e Impactos, Fase Pilote: Enero 2000–Junio 2003. Unpublished report, San Lucas, El Paraiso, Honduras.
PESA. (undated). PESA en Honduras: Programa Especial Para la Seguridad Alimentaria. Program pamphlet. FAO/Secretaria de Agricultura y Ganadería/AECI: Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Pottier, J. (ed.) (1999). Anthropology of Food: The Social Dynamics of Food Security. Polity, Cambridge, UK.
Ruerd, R., and Bastiaensen, J. (eds.) (2000). Rural Development in Central America: Markets, Livelihoods and Local Governance. St. Martin’s, New York, NY.
Sayer, J., and Campbell, B. (2004a). The challenge: Alleviating poverty and conserving the environment. In Sayer, J., and Campbell, B. (eds.), The Science of Sustainable Development: Local Livelihoods and the Global Environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 3–28.
Sayer, J., and Campbell, B. (2004b). Learning by doing on tropical American hillsides. In Sayer, J., and Campbell, B. (eds.), The Science of Sustainable Development: Local Livelihoods and the Global Environment. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, pp. 170–187.
Shriar, A. J. (2001). The Dynamics of Agricultural Intensification and Resource Conservation in the Buffer Zone of the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Petén, Guatemala. Human Ecology 29(1): 27–48.
Sundberg, J. (2003). Strategies for Authenticity and Space in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Petén, Guatemala. Chapter 3 (pp. 50-69) in: Zimmerer, K.S. and Bassett, T.J. eds. Political Ecology: An Integrative Approach to Geography and Environment-Development Studies. The Guilford Press, New York and London.
UNDP. (2002). Informe: Desarrollo Humano en Nicaragua. United Nations Development Program, New York, NY.
Warner, K. (1991). Shifting Cultivation: Local Technical Knowledge and Natural Resource Management in the Humid Tropics. FAO, Rome, Italy.
World Bank. (1999). Honduras Poverty Reduction Strategy. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Zimmerer, K. (1993). Soil Erosion and Labour Shortages in the Andes with Special Reference to Bolivia, 1953–1991: Implications for Conservation-with-Development. World Development 21(10): 1659–1675.
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge the logistical and financial support provided by the Special Program for Food Security that made the research possible. Many staff members in both program areas shared their knowledge and insights with me. In particular, I thank José Luis Vivero for initially contacting me about conducting the research and for subsequently managing much of the logistics involved. Finally, I am grateful to the many farmers in both program areas who openly shared their time, knowledge, and opinions with me.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shriar, A.J. In Search of Sustainable Land Use and Food Security in the Arid Hillside Regions of Central America: Putting the Horse Before the Cart. Hum Ecol 35, 275–287 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-006-9088-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-006-9088-z