Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2009

EKIN BIROL
Affiliation:
International Food Policy Research Institute, 2033 K Street, NW, Washington DC, 20006, USA. Email: e.birol@cgiar.org
ERIC RAYN VILLALBA
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University College London, UK
MELINDA SMALE
Affiliation:
Oxfam America, USA
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Maize originated in Mexico, where it is typically grown in association with other crops in the milpa system. This ancient mode of production is practiced today in ways that vary by cultural context and agro-environment. We use a choice experiment to estimate farmers' valuation of three components of agrobiodiversity (crop species richness, maize variety richness, and maize landraces) in the milpa system, and examine their interest in cultivating genetically modified (GM) maize. We apply a latent class model to data collected from 382 farm households in the states of Jalisco, Oaxaca, and Michoacán to analyze the heterogeneity of farmer preferences. We identify the characteristics of farmers who are most likely to continue growing maize landraces, as well as those least likely to accept GM maize. Findings have implications for debates concerning the introduction of GM maize and the design of in situ conservation programs in these sites.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Andrews, R.L. and Currim, I.S. (2003), ‘A comparison of segment retention criteria for finite mixture logit models’, Journal of Marketing Research 40: 235243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellon, M.R. (2004), ‘Conceptualizing interventions to support on-farm genetic resource conservation’, World Development 32: 159172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellon, M.R. and Berthaud, J. (2004), ‘Transgenic maize and the evolution of landrace diversity in Mexico: the importance of farmers’, Plant Physiology 134: 883888.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellon, M.R. and Brush, S.B. (1994), ‘Keepers of maize in Chiapas, Mexico’, Economic Botany 48: 196209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, J.J. and Blamey, R.K. (2001), The Choice of Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Birol, E., Smale, M., and Gyovai, Á. (2006), ‘Using a choice experiment to estimate farmers’ valuation of agricultural biodiversity on Hungarian small farms’, Environmental and Resource Economics 34: 439469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birol, E., Villalba Rayn, E., and Smale, M. (2007), ‘Farmer preferences for Milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach’, IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 726, Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).Google Scholar
Boxall, P.C. and Adamowicz, W.L. (2002), ‘Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach’, Environmental and Resource Economics 23: 421446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G.M. (1990), ‘Valuation of genetic resources’, in Orians, G.H., Brown, G.M., Kunin, W.E., and Swierzbinski, J.E. (eds), The Preservation and Valuation of Biological Resources, Seattle: University of Washington Press, pp. 203228.Google Scholar
Brush, S.B. and Perales, H.R. (2007), ‘A maize landscape: ethnicity and agro-biodiversity in Chiapas Mexico’, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 121: 211221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canales, A.I. (2003), ‘Mexican labor migration to the United States in the age of globalization’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29: 741761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Consejo Nacional de Población (CONAPO) (2001), Índice de Marginación 2000, México.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. and Hodgkin, T. (2004), ‘Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture: assessing global availability’, Annual Review of Environmental Resources 29: 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, A.M. (2002), The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods, Second Edition, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. (1997), Econometric Analysis, Third Edition, New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Harlan, J.R. (1992), Crops and Man, Madison, WI: American Soc. Agronomy.Google Scholar
Hensher, D., Rose, J., and Greene, W. (2005), Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, W., Hünnemeyer, A., Veeman, M., Adamowicz, W.L., and Srivastava, L. (2004), ‘Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food’, European Review of Agricultural Economics 31: 389408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kontoleon, A. and Yabe, M. (2006), ‘Market segmentation analysis of preferences for GM derived animal foods in the UK’, Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization 4: Article 8, Accessed online, July 2007 at http://www.bepress.com/jafio/vol4/iss1/art8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, K. (1966), ‘A new approach to consumer theory’, Journal of Political Economy 74: 132157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louette, D.A. and Berthaud, J. (1997), ‘In situ conservation of maize in Mexico: genetic diversity and maize seed management in a traditional community’, Economic Botany 15: 2038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., and Adamowicz, W.L. (2000), Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luce, D. (1959), Individual Choice Behaviour, New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
McFadden, D. (1974), ‘Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour’, in Zarembka, P. (ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Meng, E.C. (1997), ‘Land allocation decisions and in situ conservation of crop genetic resources: the case of wheat landraces in Turkey’, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
Naidoo, R. and Adamowicz, W.L. (2005), ‘Biodiversity and nature-based tourism at forest reserves in Uganda’, Environment and Development Economics 10: 159178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ndjeunga, J. and Nelson, C.H. (2005), ‘Toward understanding household preference for consumption characteristics of millet varieties: a case study from western Niger’, Agricultural Economics 32: 151165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Othman, J., Bennett, J., and Blamey, R. (2004), ‘Environmental values and resource management options: a choice modelling experience in Malaysia’, Environment and Development Economics 9: 803824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruto, E. (2005), ‘Valuing animal genetic resources: a choice modelling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya’, Paper presented at the Seventh Annual BIOECON Conference Economics and the Analysis of Biology and Biodiversity, 20–21 September 2005, Kings College, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Scarpa, R., Drucker, A., Anderson, S., Ferraes-Ehuan, N., Gomez, V., Risopatron, C. R., and Rubio-Leonel, O. (2003a), ‘Valuing animal genetic resources in peasant economies: the case of the Box Keken Creole Pig in Yucatan’, Ecological Economics 45: 427443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarpa, R., Ruto, E.S.K., Kristjanson, P., Radeny, M., Drucker, A.G., and Rege, J.E.O. (2003b), ‘Valuing indigenous cattle breeds in Kenya: an empirical comparison of stated and revealed preference value estimates’, Ecological Economics 45: 409426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smale, M., Bellon, R.M., and Aguirre Gomez, J.A. (2001), ‘Maize diversity, variety attributes, and farmers’ choices in Southeastern Guanajuato, Mexico’, Economic Development and Cultural Change 50: 201225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J.E. and Martin, P.L. (2000), ‘Human capital: migration and rural population change’, in Rausser, G. and Gardner, B. (eds), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.E., Yunez-Naude, A., and Dyer, G. (1999), ‘Agricultural price policy, employment, and migration in a diversified rural economy: a village–town CGE analysis from Mexico’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 653662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dusen, M.E. (2006), ‘Missing markets, migration and crop biodiversity in the Milpa system of Mexico: a household farm model’, in Smale, M. (ed.), Valuing Crop Biodiversity: On Farm Genetic Resources and Economic Change, Wallingford, Oxon: CAB International.Google Scholar
Van Dusen, M.E. and Taylor, J.E. (2005), ‘Missing markets and crop diversity: evidence from Mexico’, Environment and Development Economics 10: 513531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedel, M. and Kamakura, W. (2000), Market Segmentation: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 24
Total number of PDF views: 231 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 28th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-898fc554b-q2rfn Total loading time: 0.507 Render date: 2021-01-28T06:25:52.900Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *