Understanding the Interaction ofRural People with Ecosystems: A

Case Study in a Tropical Dry Forestof Mexico

Alicia Castillo,* Antonieta Magana, Anna Pujadas, Lucıa Martınez, andCarmen Godınez

Centro de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Apartado Postal 27-3 Santa Marıa de Guido,

Morelia, Michoacan 58090, MEXICO

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to help understand the

interaction of rural people with tropical dry forests.

It was based on social research conducted in the

Chamela-Cuixmala region, on the Pacific coast of

Mexico. The analytical tools used in the study in-

cluded stakeholder identification, environmental

history and social perceptions. The two main social

groups in the study were ejidatarios, who own most

of the territory, and avecindados, who possess no

land but have high population numbers. Through

an interpretative methodological approach we

documented the vision and meaning that rural

people give to their natural and social worlds. The

agricultural development model promoted by the

Mexican government for decades was identified as

the main driver of ecosystem transformation. Rural

people, who arrived recently in the region, were

proud of the pasture-lands that were transformed

from tropical forests. Conservation policies imple-

mented during the last two decades were viewed as

impositions although people recognized the value

of services provided by ecosystems. This case study

has helped to unravel the main dimensions of the

human system and how it relates to structures of

signification. The social panorama unveiled can be

used as an initial basis to promote further research

on the social-ecological system of the Chamela-

Cuixmala region and to develop future participa-

tory management schemes.

Key words: human systems; social-ecological

systems; ecosystem management; tropical decidu-

ous forest; LTER; developing countries; stakehold-

ers; environmental history; social perceptions.

INTRODUCTION

The need to include the human dimension in the

analysis of ecosystems has been recognized as an

essential element for understanding the complexity

of environmental problems and for constructing

policy and management alternatives that maintain

ecosystem health and that support, in dignified

ways, all human livelihoods (Gunderson and others

1995; Pace and Groffman 1998; Endter-Wada and

others 1998; Holling 1998; O�Neill 2001). For dec-

ades anthropologists have been concerned with the

nature-society dualism and still debate whether the

dichotomy helps or restrains the understanding of

human behavior (Descola and Palsson 2002). Stud-

ies of non-western cultures continue to show single

unified conceptions of humans as part of nature

(Toledo 2001) and it has been stressed that social and

ecological systems should be studied as one inter-

connected entity (Gunderson and others 1995;

Holling 1995; Berkes and Folke 1998). However,

systems of people and ecosystems have also been

differentiated because the human species presents a

Received 5 September 2003; accepted 21 April 2004; published online 9

September 2005.

*Corresponding author; e-mail: castillo@oikos.unam.mx

Ecosystems (2005) 8: 630–643DOI: 10.1007/s10021-005-0127-1

630

symbolic dimension (Westley and others 2002)

which is based on the reflective capacity of our spe-

cies to give meaning to phenomena and to act

accordingly.

The interaction of people with ecosystems can be

viewed in more than one way. It has been com-

mon, particularly within the natural sciences, to

see humans as a negative factor in biodiversity

conservation and to exclude local people�s views,

needs and preferences when conservation policies

are implemented. The establishment of protected

areas in the developing world, for example, has

been based on biological and ecological assessments

and little attention has been given to the social

contexts in which these interventions have been

made (Pretty and Pimbert 1995).

In Mexico, the Chamela-Cuixmala region on the

Pacific coast has been extensively studied in terms

of the biology and ecology of its natural systems,

particularly tropical dry forests (TDF). In 1971, the

National Autonomous University of Mexico

(UNAM) established a Biological Research Station

with the main objectives of conducting biological

research and preserving TDF (Sarukhan and others

1979). The nearly 400 articles and 150 theses based

on research from this area make it one of the better

studied sites in the Neotropics (Noguera and others

2002). Long-Term Ecosystem Research (LTER) has

been conducted since 1981 aimed at understanding

the structure and functions of TDF in order to

support the development of ecologically sound

management practices for forest use and conser-

vation (Maass and others 1994, 2002). More than

50 scientific papers and about 30 theses that mostly

examine the ecology of TDF and the consequences

of its perturbation have come out of the LTER

project. Recently, the project has been expanded to

include studies of how the human system is linked

to ecosystems in the Chamela-Cuixmala region.

The purpose of this paper is to report on this first

effort to understand the interaction of rural people

with TDF. Specifically, we were interested in the

relation of people with TDF in their own lands, TDF

in surrounding areas and TDF separated in pro-

tected areas. Of particular interest was also the

interaction of rural people with research institu-

tions and conservation policies in the Chamela-

Cuixmala region.

TDF IN THE CHAMELA-CUIXMALA REGION

TDF covers nearly 42% of world tropical ecosys-

tems (Murphy and Lugo 1995). In Latin America,

TDF and tropical semi-deciduous forests cover 65%

of forest ecosystems (Challenger 1998) and in

Mexico, TDF is the predominant type of tropical

vegetation covering over 60% of the total area of

tropical vegetation (Trejo and Dirzo 2000). Al-

though the human presence in TDF ecosystems

dates back to thousands of years and some of the

main Mesoamerican crops such as maize, beans

and squashes were initially cultivated in this eco-

system, most deforestation is recent (Toledo and

others 1989; Maass 1995). The Mexican TDF was

transformed during the second half of the 20th

century as part of policies aimed at increasing the

agricultural frontier (Challenger 1998).

On the Mexican Pacific coast, major areas of TDF

are located in the state of Jalisco (Trejo and Dirzo

2000). In the region known as Chamela-Cuixmala

between Barra de Navidad and Puerto Vallarta

(Figure1), the Biological Research Station of UNAM

initially protected an area of 1,600 hectares, which

was then increased to cover 3, 319 hectares. Because

of its ecological relevance (Gentry 1995), in 1993 an

area of 13,142 hectares was decreed as the Chamela-

Cuixmala Biosphere Reserve (Ceballos and others

1999), adding to the University-owned area private

lands whose owners agreed to incorporate them

under a protected scheme. The reserve is adminis-

tered by the Biological Station and a nongovern-

mental organization (NGO) created by the private

owners (Fundacion Ecologica de Cuixmala) under

an agreement by the federal govenment.

Despite its beauty, ecological importance and

tourism potential, this part of Mexico was long ig-

nored by Mexican authorities. After the Second

World War, the government initiated a program to

colonize the sea coasts and in Jalisco this program

included the distribution of land among land-less

peasants and guaranteed tenure security for small

private owners. For decades, different governmen-

tal programs favored the expansion of agricultural

and pasture lands. The main pattern of transfor-

mation of TDF includes clearing forests by com-

pletely removing vegetation, using fire to burn

remnant material and thereby incorporating nutri-

ents to the soil, and then cultivating maize, beans or

sorghum (De Ita 1983). After a few years, produc-

tivity declines as a result of soil degradation (Maass

1995; Maass and others 2002). Non-native grasses

are then introduced and cattle production is con-

ducted which can last many years depending on the

type of management (Burgos and Maass in press).

Since the 1950s, federal and state governments,

as well as local stakeholders, have recognized the

potential for tourism development along the coastal

areas. Based on a vision of both promoting tourism

development and preserving the environment, the

Ecological Land Use Planning Program for the

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 631

Coast of Jalisco was established by the state gov-

ernment in 1999. The area included in the program

covers over 1,450,000 hectares in 10 municipalities

(SEMADES 1999).

UNDERSTANDING THE RURAL

MANAGEMENT OF TDF

In Mexico, peasant communities are one of the most

important decision-making groups with regard to

ecosystem management (Toledo 1997). Conse-

quently, they were an important focus in this study.

Ejidos (managed by ejidatarios) are one of the two

types of communal land tenure systems in Mexico.

Members of this system have the capacity to allocate

and enforce their own rights to resources. Ejidos

were formed through the Agrarian Land Reform for

the provision of land to thousands of land-less

peasants after the 1910 Mexican Revolution. For

more than seven decades, ejidatarios have managed

their lands under this communal scheme. In 1992

the law was modified and at present, ejidatarios can

claim individual parcels or transfer ownership of

their lands (Warman 2001). This has implications

for the country�s ecosystems because the communal

property rights system has acted as a protective shell

for ecologically sound productive practices (Toledo

1996; Alcorn and Toledo 1998).

In the Chamela-Cuixmala region, ejidos are of

recent origin, most of them created between 1950

and 1970. Adjacent to the reserve, between the

Purificacion and San Nicolas rivers (see Figure 1),

there are less than 50 human settlements with a

population of about 10,000 people (INEGI 2001).

Seventeen ejidos have been identified (accounting

for about 19% of total population) encompassing

70% of the territory (http:/jal.inegi.gob.mx). The

remaining communities are divided between tour-

ist developments, private properties and avecinda-

dos, that is people who possess no land but work in

private farms or in the tourism industry. Avecinda-

dos account for 80% of the rural population in the

Chamela-Cuixmala region (INEGI 2001) and were

also considered a relevant group in the study. Ini-

tial questions about these two groups included how

local people have used and perceived local ecosys-

tems, how much they currently depend upon such

ecosystems and how they perceived conservation

interventions, particularly the existence of an

Ecological Land-Use Planning program, a Bio-

sphere Reserve, and the role of the Biological Sta-

tion and the NGO involved in scientific studies and

in managing the protected area. In seeking answers

to these questions we used three analytical tools

that allowed us to construct an initial understand-

ing of the linked system of people and ecosystems

in the Chamela-Cuixmala region:

Stakeholder Identification

Analysis of stakeholders is an approach used in

relation to policy or project formulation and

implementation. It allows the identification of

stakeholders and the assessment of their interests in

a particular system (Grimble and Chan 1995). It

helps in recognizing the wide range of stakeholders

that affect or are affected by particular interven-

tions. In the case examined here the interest was to

identify social groups that make decisions affecting

local ecosystems or are affected by the decisions

made regarding ecosystem management.

Environmental History

The analysis of how humans have been affected by

their natural environment through time and how

they have affected that environment is the essence

of environmental history (Worster 1988). To

understand the transformation of the landscape in

the Chamela-Cuixmala region, and to obtain an

idea about how it will change in the future, we

initiated an environmental history through con-

struction of a timeline and recordings of the expe-

riences of local people whose livelihoods have been

directly related to ecosystems.

Social Perceptions

Understanding how human groups construct ima-

ges about the environment and how they give

meaning to their experiences with ecosystems and

with other actors involved in environmental deci-

sion making, is the essence of the study of social

perceptions (Arizpe and others 1993; Lazos and

Pare 2000). Through the study of social percep-

tions, the multiple visions of local actors regarding

their relationships with ecosystems can be brought

to light and used for planning and implementing

social development and environmental conserva-

tion interventions.

METHODOLOGY AND METHODS OF

RESEARCH

An interpretative paradigm was selected as the

main research approach ‘‘to make sense of, or

interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings

people bring to them’’ (Denzin and Lincoln 2000).

This social science approach stresses the socially

constructed nature of reality in trying to

understand how social experience is created and

632 A. Castillo and others

given meaning. Qualitative research methods,

therefore, such as semi-structured interviews and

participant observation were used (Fontana and

Frey 2000). Surveys were also used to collect

descriptive socio-economic and attitudinal data.

Information gathered in the form of texts was

analyzed using the Atlas.ti software version 4.2 for

qualitative analysis (http://www.atlasti.de).

To begin the process of meeting and getting ac-

quainted with local dwellers we talked and listened

to people in the villages during our first visits.

Three ejidos and one community of avecindados

adjacent to the Biosphere Reserve were selected to

initiate the investigation. Table 1 shows features of

the study sites and the research subjects. A total of

150 people participated in the study.

RESULTS

Identification of Stakeholders

Based on participant observation and open inter-

views with key informants in the rural communi-

ties and with scientists and technicians involved in

the research and conservation institutions present

in the region, a diagram of the system of stake-

holders in the Chamela-Cuixmala region was

constructed (Figure 2). As recognized previously,

communities of ejidatarios were considered relevant

decision makers regarding ecosystems. They own

most of the territory and consequently the way in

which they conduct their productive activities

determines the destiny of ecosystems. Although

avecindados possess no land, they constitute an

important portion of rural people in the region and

were also identified as having direct interactions

with ecosystems through activities such as hunting,

fishing, and collection of fuel wood and other

plants used as medicines or food. Private farmers

were considered stakeholders because, although

few in number in the region, they each own larger

pieces of land than ejidatarios. By law one ejidatario

can own 5% of an ejido�s area (average in the re-

gion 40 ha/ejidatario) whereas a private individual

can own up to 100 ha of irrigated agricultural land

or its equivalent, which can range up to 800 ha for

forested areas or for cattle production in arid zones

(Congreso Constituyente 1917, law currently in

force). Families, however, may have larger areas.

Scientists of the Biological Research Station and

other research groups are considered relevant

stakeholders because their presence in the region

Figure 1. Location of the Chamela-

Cuixmala region on the Pacific coast of

Mexico.

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 633

influenced the establishment of the Biosphere Re-

serve. The NGO responsible for the administration

of the protected area and the Reserve as such were

also considered a stakeholder. Different levels of

government were recognized as crucial stakehold-

ers, not only for their responsibility for enforcing

policies but also for their influence on ideas for

development among communities. Tourism is a

source of jobs and because the industry has ex-

panded in the region it plays an important role in

real property trade. In this paper, an assessment of

stakeholders� interests, particularly of ejidatarios and

avecindados, are presented as part of their social

perceptions. Findings regarding the interaction

between rural communities and the research and

conservation institutions are reported at the end of

the results section.

Environmental History

Based on interviews conducted with elders, their

relatives and other key members of the communi-

ties, and using the few documents found (primarily

a recovery of local oral history), an environmental

timeline of the Jalisco coast (Figure 3) and an initial

panorama of the region�s environmental history

were constructed. A first transformation of ecosys-

tems occurred when haciendas were established

during 1858 and 1872. The Hacienda Cuixmala, for

example, included a total of 90,000 hectares, with a

4 hectare orchard and 30 hectares cleared for agri-

culture. Cattle ranching was a relevant activity and

animals roamed free in the forests (Lara and Tabo-

ada 1996). Another important activity that affected

forests was timber extraction. There were saw-mills

Table 1. Features of the Rural Communities Studied in the Chamela-Cuixmala Region

Community and year

of foundation Population Productive activities

Ejido Emiliano Zapata 118 ejidatarios Cattle raising / agriculture

(1960) (993 dwellers) Provision of services: hired agriculture workers, car mechanics,

drivers, builders

Commerce and tourism industry employees (administrators, maids)

Ejido La Fortuna 113 ejidatarios Agriculture / cattle raising

(1961) (1085 dwellers) Provision of services: hired agriculture workers, house builders

Commerce and tourism industry employees

Ejido San Mateo 69 ejidatarios Cattle raising

(1967) (600 dwellers) Provision of services: house builders, car mechanics, plumbers

Commerce and tourism industry employees

Community of 133 dwellers Fishing

Avecindados Chamela (1960) Provision of services: hired agricultural workers, builders, drivers

Commerce and tourism industry employees

Figure 2. Identification of stakeholders

in the Chamela-Cuixmala region. Boxes

represent stakeholders identified as

being involved in ecosystem

management and arrows indicate the

interactions between them.

634 A. Castillo and others

that exploited fine woods such as caoba (Swietenia

humilis) and granadillo (Platymiscium lasiocarpum),

particularly from tropical semi-deciduous forests.

Even more recently, ejidatarios of La Fortuna re-

ported that large trees of fine-quality woods from

their area were cleared and then processed in a saw-

mill that operated between 1963 and 1969. The

ejidatarios maintained that they never received their

rightful payments for the wood.

According to locals, the slash and burn pattern of

land use was promoted by policies and programs

implemented by the government. During the 1970s

a governmental program for clearing lands and

opening them for agricultural activities was

implemented at the national level (Gerez 1998). In

the mid 1970s economic support was given to

people along the coast of Jalisco to cut down TDF

and use the newly cleared land to raise cattle. Local

testimonies referred to the use of machinery and

extensive burns, and indicated that credits and

economic support were provided by several gov-

ernmental programs.

The establishment of ejidos was a painful enter-

prise for people. Although a few settlements had

been established since the mid-nineteenth century,

most people arrived in the area from different states

of Mexico during the 1960s and 1970s. Tropical dry

forests were perceived as an obstacle to agricultural

activities. People talked about their arrival when

they were children and said that there were no

roads or settlements. They came with their families

carrying bags with clothes and utensils and people

cleared spaces for the construction of shelters using

tree branches and palm leaves. Scorpions, snakes

and cats such as pumas (Puma concolor) or jaguars

(Panthera onca) were some of the dangers faced by

the settlers. Opening out areas for cultivation was

hard work which took years to carry out. People

were clear, and still are, that they were given the

land to work and that the government promoted

the development of agriculture and cattle raising.

The first crops were maize, beans and sesame seeds.

People worked in the remaining haciendas in

mango cultivation. People also raised chickens,

pigs, and ducks and practiced fishing to comple-

ment their diet. At present people are proud of

their productive systems, whether agricultural

fields on plain lands or grasslands on hills, and of

the existence of towns provided with basic services.

Communities, nevertheless, have serious problems

including water provision and sewage disposal,

provision of health and education and high rates of

migration to the U.S.

Although the development of productive activi-

ties resulted in the complete transformation of

forests, people saw this as something needed. The

distribution of lands, however, was not as the

people had expected. Although in official decrees

Figure 3. Environmental timeline of the Chamela-Cuixmala region.

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 635

ejidatarios were granted between 10 and 15 hectares

of humid plains land, they claimed that only half of

the land could be used for productive activities, the

rest consisted of steep slopes (Magana 2003). When

questioned about present conservation of forests,

people considered this important for ‘‘maintaining

natural surroundings’’ but as not concerning them.

They understand their task as making their lands

productive; forests need to be preserved on some-

one else�s land.

Tourism development constitutes another driver

of economic development in the Chamela-Cuix-

mala region (Figure 3). In 1943, the Mexican

government created the program, March to the

Sea, to colonize uninhabited and isolated coasts,

and to promote tourism (Ortega 1995). On the

Jalisco coast, communication roads were built and

financial support for basic services to towns was

provided. The tourism industry, nevertheless, has

developed slowly and has not yet caused major

ecological or social disturbances (Godinez 2003).

Local people still believe, however, that tourism is

the potential element that ‘‘can bring in progress’’

to the coast.

Social Perceptions about TDF andEcosystem Services

The main themes we studied included 1) how

people perceived ecosystems, 2) their understand-

ing of ecosystem transformation for development

activities on one hand, and 3) ecosystem conser-

vation on the other. These themes were analyzed

in two ejidos (Emiliano Zapata and La Fortuna).

Closely related was the theme of ecosystem services

which was investigated in two contrasting com-

munities (Chamela and San Mateo) (see Table 1).

In the ejido La Fortuna, people were asked what

were the advantages and disadvantages of living

surrounded by monte (Spanish for hill and local

word for land with vegetation including some

TDF). While 22% of 49 interviewees saw no

advantage in living near monte, the rest perceived

a utility. Of these, 26% perceived a direct economic

utility related to agriculture and cattle raising and

45% associated forests with provision of air or life

fulfilling functions. Only 29% of the men recog-

nized the provision of ecosystem services such as

air or life fulfilling services, whereas 60% of the

women recognized such services. Also, 24% of

women recognized the provision of agricultural

products and cattle raising yielding direct economic

benefit. Of the rest of men, 29% considered no

utility of monte, although another 29% recognized

the provision of services related to productive

activities. Regarding the disadvantages of living

surrounded by monte, 64% of people found several

disadvantages, mostly concerning agricultural pro-

duction, presence of harmful animals and difficul-

ties for the reproduction of the family unit.

In relation to perceptions regarding environ-

mental conservation and the transformation of TDF

areas into pasture-lands and agricultural fields, an

attitude survey was used in the ejido Emiliano Za-

pata. Table 2 shows the statements used and the

results obtained (the statements were constructed

from the information gathered through semi-

structured interviews with six key informants that

covered the themes of family subsistence and

people�s relationships with TDF). Although families

exhibited positive attitudes towards nature con-

servation (answers to statements 1, 3, 4, 7, 8 and

9), when a dilemma was presented contrasting

ecosystem conservation and implementation of

productive activities, they answered negatively

(answers 2, 5 and 6). It seems that people believe

that conserving forests can jeopardize their liveli-

hood (Magana 2003).

Another theme of interest was the recognition

and valuation of ecosystem services by local people.

A qualitative analysis of the interviews was con-

ducted in the community of Chamela and in the

ejido San Mateo. Table 3 was constructed to show

the perceptions of people about production of eco-

system goods (identified as tangible or intangible),

regulating and stabilizing processes and life fulfilling

services (Daily 1997). Interesting results include the

recognition as services provided by ecosystems, of a

‘‘work provision’’ as an opportunity to develop

economic activities such as productive activities.

Provision of shade and ‘‘environmental freshness’’

were also identified as important services. Regulat-

ing and stabilizing processes were difficult to rec-

ognize by people in both communities. Processes

such as pollination were better explained in San

Mateo; this may be related to their condition as

rural producers (Martınez 2003).

Interactions between Rural Stakeholdersand Conservation Institutions

Information was collected from the four rural

communities under study about their

understanding of the presence of the Biosphere

Reserve and about the institutions involved in its

management: the Biological Station of UNAM and

the NGO Fundacion Ecologica de Cuixmala. Ta-

ble 4 shows the results. The Biosphere Reserve was

not widely known among communities but people

seem to recognize its function as a place for con-

636 A. Castillo and others

servation. Data for Emiliano Zapata showed that

most women (70%) did not know about the exis-

tence or function of the reserve. Regarding the

Biological Research Station, most people recog-

nized its existence and its main function as a sci-

entific institution. Although people accepted the

value of the station and of the studies carried out,

its utility seemed unclear and there were expres-

sions about the need for a more direct use of the

information generated: ‘‘it would be nice to see if

there are improvements that can be effected here’’;

‘‘they have never come around, but if their studies

could remedy what can be remedied, that would be

good’’. Most people knew about the existence of

the NGO, but its function was not clear to them. Its

function was overlapped by that of the reserve and

the station ‘‘as places assigned for conservation’’,

although its purpose is the administration of the

protected area. Another idea from the communities

was a private farm providing jobs for people. This

idea seems to have occurred because the family

owning most lands in the reserve also has a

‘‘ranch’’ that employs between 200 and 300 local

people. Because the owners are rich, Europeans,

and have a luxurious way of life, people have

associated being rich with being involved in con-

servation and having more power, economical or

political.

The final theme regarding people�s perceptions

about conservation policies related to the imple-

mentation of the Ecological Land-Use Planning

Program for the coast of Jalisco. This program is

responsible for the promotion of economic activi-

ties, importantly tourism, that also maintain eco-

systems. According to interviews conducted in the

ejido San Mateo, people felt this program was not

designed with their needs and views in mind. The

initial study was carried out at a university outside

the region and the people complained that the

scientists in charge ‘‘did not even come to get ac-

quainted with the land’’. A process of social par-

ticipation was included and organized in the form

of workshops carried out in different sites of the

region under the regulation. Although rural people

were invited and they expressed their ideas, they

perceived that the policy had already been decided

upon and that it mainly favored the interests of the

tourism entrepreneurs and the rich family owners

of coastal lands with tourism potential. The people

in the communities contend that the program is

invalid and unfair because it infringes upon their

livelihoods (Pujadas 2003).

DISCUSSION

Our research clarified important dimensions of the

human system linked to the TDF ecosystem. Fea-

tures of the significance, domination and legitimat-

ing structures (Westley and others 2002) of the social

system in the Chamela-Cuixmala region have now

begun to be documented. The case study also rein-

forced the notion that setting aside land to be pro-

tected without considering local people�s needs and

perspectives does not contribute to ecosystem con-

Table 2. Attitudes towards Forest Conservation in the Ejido Emiliano Zapata

Attitude statement Agree Partially agree Disagree Don�t know

1 Conservation of nature implies that my children

will know what I know now

49 0 0 1

2* I like monte (TDF) with plants and animals, but

I must grow pasture for cattle

37 2 6 5

3* Wild animals cause damage and destruction,

it is not necessary to conserve them

11 19 20 0

4 When I am in the forest I like to listen to birds singing and

the wind through the trees

50 0 0 0

5* The monte is conserved because it is expensive and

difficult to clear

29 5 16 0

6* I prefer an orchard with different varieties of

fruits than the forest

20 25 5 0

7 If all rattlesnakes were killed crops would be infested by rats 44 0 3 3

8* I don�t go to the monte because it threatens me 24 1 25 0

9 Animal and plant protection in the region could

represent a business in the future

38 5 4 3

N = 50 informants (24 males + 26 females). Questions marked with * have a negative connotation in relation to conservation, the rest have a positive connotation.

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 637

servation but may provoke rejection and conflict

among stakeholders (Pretty and Pimbert 1995). The

way in which scientific research had been conducted

at the site (mostly biological and ecological studies)

was also questioned, reinforcing the need for more

integrated analysis of linked social and ecological

systems.

Worlds Apart

Realization of the ‘‘multiple realities’’ (Denzin and

Lincoln 2000) experienced in the region was

revealing. The social perceptions (that is, the

understandings and sensibilities of a society

regarding its environment) from the stakeholders of

(Lazos and Pare 2000) the Chamela-Cuixmala ter-

ritory are widely divergent with deep which have

historical roots. From the scientific point of view,

the region is important for its biodiversity, levels of

endemic species and fragility of the TDF ecosystem

(Ceballos and Garcıa 1995; Maass 1995). In con-

trast, for rural producers, lands (and their own in

particular) are important for agricultural or cattle

raising production. It should be stressed that ejidos

covered most of the Chamela-Cuixmala territory

and that the views and institutional arrangements

of ejidatarios very much determine the ways in

which ecosystems are used. This sector strongly

recognizes that lands were given to them for their

use and that the government was the principal

promoter of their transformation. In terms of rec-

ognition of ecosystem services, although local peo-

ple (both ejidatarios and avecindados) recognize life

fulfilling services they mainly identify the provision

Table 3. Perceptions about Ecosystem Services in Chamela and Ejido San Mateo

Service Community of Avecindados Chamela Ejido San Mateo

Provision of tangible goods Food provision (27) Food provision (19)

(direct provision of Medical use elements provision (19) Medical use elements provision (9)

material benefits) Water provision (6) Water provision (9)

Combustible provision (1) Construction materials provision (4)

Combustible materials provision (1)

Provision of intangible goods

(indirect provision of

non-material benefits)

Primary productive capacities

(agriculture and cattle raising) (23)

Work provision (8)

Work provision (8) Air provision (5)

Shade provision (22) Shade provision (9)

Environmental freshness provision (22) Environmental freshness provision (2)

Health provision (1)

Regulating processes Erosion control (related to damping and

inundation control processes) (3)

Erosion control (4)

Oxygen production (related to air purification) (7) Oxygen production (6)

Rain generation (7) air purification (6)

Soil fertility maintenance (12)

Water retention (1) Rain generation (3)

Waste degradation (5) Soil fertility maintenance (15)

Pollination (1) Soil conservation (maintenance of

soil structure) (8)

Water retention (2)

Waste degradation (1)

Pollination (3)

Biologic / population control (7)

Life fulfilling services Aesthetic appreciation (beauty) (32) Aesthetic appreciation (beauty) (24)

Spiritual welfare (related to Catholic God) (10) Spiritual welfare (2)

Tranquillity and memories (7) Tranquillity (10)

Joy (8) Joy (4)

Peace (3)

A total of 28 semi-structured interviews were conducted in Chamela and 23 in San Mateo. Numbers in brackets correspond to the number of times a ecosystem service wasreferred to by interviewees.

638 A. Castillo and others

Tab

le4.

Un

ders

tan

din

gof

Sci

en

tifi

can

dC

on

serv

ati

on

Inst

itu

tion

sin

the

Ch

am

ela

-Cu

ixm

ala

Regio

n

Ru

ral

com

mu

nit

yE

xis

ten

ceof

BR

Noti

on

sab

ou

t

fun

ctio

nof

BR

Exis

ten

ceof

BS

Noti

on

sab

ou

t

fun

ctio

nof

BS

Exis

ten

ceof

NG

O

Noti

on

sab

ou

t

fun

ctio

nof

NG

O

Eji

do

Em

ilia

no

Zapata

Kn

ow

:32

(64%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:9

(18%

)

Kn

ow

:43

(86%

)Pla

cefo

rbio

logic

al

rese

arc

h:

42

(84%

)

Kn

ow

:30

(60%

)Pri

vate

farm

:

6(1

2%

)

n=

50

(24

male

26

fem

ale

)

Not

kn

ow

:

18

(36%

)

Pla

cew

here

an

imals

are

bre

d:

4(8

%)

Not

kn

ow

:7

(14%

)N

ot

kn

ow

:

20

(40%

)

Con

serv

ati

on

an

dre

searc

h:

7

(14%

)

Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

pri

vate

hu

nti

ng:

3(6

%)

Pla

cew

here

an

imals

are

bre

d:2

(4%

)

Pla

cefo

rbio

logic

al

rese

arc

h:

8(1

6%

)

Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

tou

rism

:1

(2%

)

Eji

do

La

Fort

un

aK

now

:

14

(29%

)

Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

(main

noti

on

acc

ord

ing

toqu

ali

tati

ve

data

)

Kn

ow

:38

(78%

)Pla

cefo

rbio

logic

al

rese

arc

h(m

ain

noti

on

acc

ord

ing

toqu

ali

tati

ve

data

)

Kn

ow

:24

(49%

)Pri

vate

pla

ceof

rest

rict

ed

acc

ess

(main

noti

on

acc

ord

ing

to

qu

ali

tati

ve

data

)

n=

49

(24

male

25

fem

ale

)

Not

kn

ow

:

29

(59%

)

Not

kn

ow

:6

(12%

)N

ot

kn

ow

:

14

(29%

)

No

an

swer:

6(1

2%

)

No

an

swer:

5(1

0%

)N

oan

swer:

11

(22%

)

Eji

do

San

Mate

oK

now

:12

(52%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:3

(13%

)

Kn

ow

:23

(100%

)Pla

cefo

rbio

logic

rese

arc

h:

5(2

2%

)

Kn

ow

:18

(78%

)W

ork

pla

ce:

4

(17%

)

n=

23

(11

male

12

fem

ale

)

Not

kn

ow

:

11

(48%

)

Not

kn

ow

:0

(0%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:

10

(43%

)

Not

kn

ow

:5

(22%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:4

(17%

)

Pla

cew

ith

an

imals

(kin

dof

zoo):

2(9

%)

Com

mu

nit

yof

Ave

cin

da

dos

Ch

am

ela

Kn

ow

:7

(25%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:

4(1

4%

)

Kn

ow

:28

(100%

)Pla

cefo

rbio

logic

al

rese

arc

h:

16

(57%

)

Kn

ow

:27

(96%

)Pla

ceass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:8

(29%

)

n=

28

(13

male

15

fem

ale

)

Not

kn

ow

:

21

(75%

)

Not

kn

ow

:0

(0%

)Lan

dass

ign

ed

to

con

serv

ati

on

:5

(18%

)

Not

kn

ow

:1

(4%

)W

ork

pla

ce:

8(2

9%

)

Recr

eati

on

al

cen

tre

for

an

imals

:2

(7%

)

Pla

cefo

r

rese

arc

h:2

(7%

)

BR

mea

ns

Bio

sph

ere

Res

erve

,B

SB

iolo

gica

lR

esea

rch

Sta

tion

an

dN

GO

the

non

-gov

ern

men

tal

orga

nis

ati

onin

volv

edin

the

adm

inis

trati

onof

the

Bio

sph

ere

Res

erve

.F

orev

ery

state

men

t,th

eabso

lute

an

dre

lati

ve(i

npare

nth

esis

)fr

equ

enci

esare

pre

sen

ted.

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 639

of economic benefits through transforming TDF

into agricultural and pasture fields. They also

identify related services such as maintenance of soil

fertility. Local people have been peasants for gen-

erations, and although at present the majority of

their incomes may come from other sources (work

in private farms or in commerce), their peasant

identity is deeply rooted. People prefer to have a few

cattle on their parcels rather than to abandon them

completely.

Also relevant to consider is that conservation

practices, in particular the existence of a protected

area and the implementation of an ecological land-

use program, are perceived by local people as

impositions. People do not understand why for

decades the government promoted policies for the

transformation of forests to make them productive

and now these activities are condemned in the

name of ecosystem conservation. They argue that

only private owners or the government should be

responsible for ecosystem conservation. Peasants,

they claim, do not have alternative economic

activities. It should also be noted that according to

our socio-economic surveys, large proportions of

their lands (49% of total area in the ejido San Mateo,

45% in La Fortuna and 25% in Emiliano Zapata)

have not been used or have been abandoned and

remain as monte (Magana 2003; Pujadas 2003). Al-

though these lands may present different levels of

perturbed forests intermingled with primary TDF,

their relevance in terms of ecosystem services

should not be dismissed. In this sense, issues like the

valuation of services such as water provision for the

tourism industry may allow for the development of

alternate economic opportunities for the local peo-

ple. More direct shares by rural dwellers in the po-

tential benefits of tourism development may be an

important step toward alternative ecosystem man-

agement scenarios. In this sense, although tourism

development has been at the center of govern-

mental policies and programs (along with agricul-

tural development), it has not yet produced major

transformations. The idea of developing the tourism

industry and obtaining benefits from the landscapes

and beaches is still considered important by both

governmental authorities and local people. How-

ever, the way in which the industry is developed

will determine the destiny of the socio-ecological

system in the region. Analysis of tourism develop-

ment in Mexico has shown that when an area is

recognized as an investment opportunity, even in

areas with low impact tourism, market dynamics

lead to massive developments that can have high

social and ecological costs (Dachary and Arnaiz

2001).

Knowledge and the Construction ofAlternative Management Strategies

Regarding the utility of the scientific work carried

out in the region, rural people suggested that ‘‘it

would be good if the studies could be used in the

rural communities’’ but they did not seem to ex-

pect much from the scientific community.

Although disseminating knowledge and estab-

lishing linkages with people from adjacent areas of

the Biosphere Reserve are recognized as funda-

mental tasks (Sarukhan and others 1979; Ceballos

and others 1999), only occasional environmental

education activities such as public lectures con-

ducted in surrounding schools were reported by the

station and the NGO. The establishment of links

between scientists, the reserve�s administrators and

the different stakeholders in the region therefore

emerges as an essential element that must be

developed and permanently reinforced. For the

Biosphere Reserve in particular, this is extremely

important because the maintenance of strong

interactions between a protected area and the

communities living adjacent or inside its bound-

aries is central to this type of conservation effort

(Batisse 1982; Pretty and Pimbert 1995). A relevant

aspect would be the participation of the NGO and

the research station in the construction of man-

agement alternatives that increases the resilience of

the socio-ecological system (Berkes and Folke

1998).

A profound shift in the way ecosystems are

managed in the region is needed and although

specific mechanisms are difficult to define, identi-

fication of challenges may help make such man-

agement changes possible:

1) Stakeholders in the region such as ejidatarios,

administrators of the protected area and the tourist

industry make decisions about landuse and use of

ecosystem services as separate and unrelated enti-

ties, and based on different understandings about

the management of ecosystems. Differences in

political and economic power among stakeholders

have also played a part in the social interactions

between these actors. Any attempt to facilitate the

development of sustainable ecosystem manage-

ment in the Chamela-Cuixmala region should

consider these differences.

2) Thirty years of scientific research in the region

has resulted in an important body of biological and

ecological information. This knowledge should be

an important base for developing alternative

ecosystem management strategies. Scientists in the

region should start disseminating what they know

regarding local ecosystems and about their rele-

640 A. Castillo and others

vance as providers of services to human societies.

Understanding the social system, however, is still in

the initial stages and many relevant subject areas

are yet to be developed. Of particular interest is

understanding the current dynamics of ejidos as the

institutions that communally own most of the land

covered by TDF in the Chamela-Cuixmala region.

An important question is whether the ejidos, as

institutions that were developed to clear TDF for

the purpose of raising cattle, can now become

institutions for sustainable ecosystem manage-

ment. Understanding problems of ‘‘institutional

misfit’’ (Brown 2003), or the identification of dif-

ficulties that institutions face in relation to the

ecosystems they manage (in relation to particular

structure and functional features) or regarding

other institutions (different interests and perspec-

tives among different stakeholders), may provide

useful information for designing appropriate

interventions that integrate ecosystem conserva-

tion and social development.

3) Conservation policies have been developed

and implemented without an understanding of lo-

cal peoples needs, views and expectations (partic-

ularly of ejidatarios) and without their participation

in policy formulation. The biosphere reserve, and

particularly the land-use planning program, should

not only disseminate the regulations they try to

enforce regarding ecosystem management but

should also make an effort to allow stakeholders to

participate in environmental decision making.

4) A widespread acceptance among all stake-

holders in the Chamela-Cuixmala region of an

alternative management scheme is urgent. Conse-

quently, the creation of arenas for the exchange of

information, perspectives and ideas regarding this

alternative scenario is a crucial step. Although wide

participation of stakeholders is needed, a question

arises regarding leadership of specific groups. The

role of local authorities, the municipality in partic-

ular, is fundamental. In this sense, Mexican law al-

lows for the establishment of Municipal

Commissions of Ecology as social entities formed by

members of governmental, non-governmental,

academic, private and rural productive sectors,

whose function is to supervise and to serve as an

organization for the development of agreements in

relation to environmental affairs (Esteva and others

2002). In the state of Jalisco, environmental

authorities have been supporting the work of these

commissions and although the corresponding com-

mission for the Chamela-Cuixmala region once ex-

isted but was dismantled in recent years, it could be

reinstated and made relevant. Stakeholders such as

scientists and those connected to the protected area

should help to strengthen the abilities of such com-

missions so that their goals can be met. Nevertheless,

building consensus among stakeholders in the re-

gion, developing incentives for changing manage-

ment practices and sharing a vision for continuous

learning and the construction of strategies remain as

the greater challenges that require a commitment

that neither sector in the region has yet accepted.

FINAL REMARKS

Apart from monitoring and ecological understand-

ing, successful ecosystem management requires an

institutional capacity to respond to environmental

feedback and the political will and perception to

make such management possible (Berkes and Folke

1998). Understanding how ecosystems are man-

aged by human groups has also been recognized as

fundamental (Holling 1995). In this sense, in the

Chamela-Cuixmala region there is a vast body of

biological and ecological knowledge as well as

information regarding the impact of human activ-

ities on the structure and functioning of ecosys-

tems. By examining the human dimension of

ecosystem management, our analysis seeks to

strengthen the overall understanding of the region.

We hope this effort will contribute to further

integrated analysis of the social-ecological system

and aid in the development of sustainable ecosys-

tem management strategies for the Mexican tropi-

cal dry forests.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project received financial support from the

Lucille and David Packard Foundation through the

project Capacity building in conservation and res-

toration ecology in Mexico co-ordinated by Dr. Jose

Sarukhan. The Fondo Sectorial SEMARNAT/CO-

NACYT contributed also through the project Man-

agement of tropical forests in Mexico (SEMARNAT-

2002-C01-0597) co-ordinated by Dr. Miguel

Martınez-Ramos. We are most grateful to the rural

communities of the Chamela-Cuixmala region who

kindly opened their homes and lives for us to learn.

We thank very much the anonymous reviewers for

their valuable and challenging critique, Dr. Manuel

Maass, Dr. Mauricio Quesada and Dr. Kathy Stoner

for their fruitful observations, and Heberto Ferreira,

Raul Ahedo and Salvador Araiza for technical

support.

REFERENCES

Alcorn JB, Toledo VM. 1998. Resilient resource management in

Mexico�s forest ecosystems: the contribution of property

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 641

rights. In: Berkes F, Folke C. Eds. Linking social and ecological

systems. Management practices and social mechanisms for

building resilience. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University

Press. p 216–49.

Arizpe L, Paz F, Velazquez. M. 1993 Cultura y cambio global:

percepciones sociales sobre la deforestacion en la selva

Lacandona. Mexico DF (Mexico): Centro Regional de Inves-

tigaciones Multidisciplinarias UNAM, Grupo Editorial Miguel

Angel Porrua.

Batisse M. 1982. The biosphere reserve: a tool for environmental

conservation and management. Environ Conserv 9(2):101–

11.

Berkes F, Folke C, Eds. 1998. Linking social and ecological sys-

tems. Management practices and social mechanisms for

building resilience. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University

Press.

Brown K. 2003. Integrating conservation and development: a

case of institutional misfit. Front Ecol Environ 1(9):479–87.

Burgos A, Maass M. 2004. Vegetation change associated with

land-use in Tropical Dry Forest areas of Western Mexico.

Agroecosystems 19:475–481.

Ceballos G, Garcıa A. 1995. Conserving neotropical biodiversity:

the role of dry forests in western Mexico. Conserv Biol

9(6):1349–56.

Ceballos G, Szekely A, Garcıa A, Rodrıguez P, Noguera F. 1999.

Programa de manejo de la Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-

Cuixmala. Mexico DF (Mexico): Instituto Nacional de Eco-

logıa, SEMARNAP.

Challenger A. 1998. Utilizacion y conservacion de los ecosist-

emas terrestres de Mexico. Pasado, presente y futuro. Mexico

DF (Mexico): CONABIO, UNAM, Sierra Madre.

Congreso Constituyente. 1917. Constitucion Polıtica de los Es-

tados Unidos Mexicanos (vigente en 2004). (http:www.sena-

do.gob.mx).

Dachary AC, Arnaiz SM. 2001. El turismo y el desarrollo sostenible

en el Caribe Hispano y Centroamerica. In: Arnaiz SM, Fern-

andez JS, Dachary AC. Eds. Desarrollo sustentable y turismo.

Guadalajara (Mexico): Universidad de Guadalajara. p 43–66.

Daily. Eds. 1997. Nature�s services. Societal dependence on

natural ecosystems Washington DC (WA): Island Press.

De Ita C. 1983. Patrones de produccion agrıcola en un ecosis-

tema tropical estacional en la costa de Jalisco. [dissertation].

Mexico DF (Mexico): Universidad Nacional Autonoma de

Mexico. p 87.

Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. 2000. Introduction. The discipline and

practice of qualitative research. . In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS.

Eds. Handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications

Thousand Oaks (CA). p 1–28.

Descola P, Palsson G. 2002. Nature and Society Anthropological

perspectives London (UK): Routledge.

Endter-Wada J, Blahna D, Krannich R, Brunson M. 1998. A

framework for understanding social science contributions to

ecosystem management. Ecol Appl 8:891–904.

Esteva J, Marquez D, Cipirano H. 2002. Ambiente y ciudadanıa

en la region de Patzcuaro, explorando el futuro. Des/Encu-

entros 2(5):36–51.

Fontana A, Frey JH. 2000. The interview: from structured

questions to negotiated text. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Eds.

Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage

Publications. p 645–72.

Gentry AH. 1995. Diversity and floristic composition of neo-

tropical dry forests. In: Bullock SH, Mooney HA, Medina E.

Eds. Seasonally dry tropical forests. New York (NY): Cam-

bridge University Press. p 146–94.

Gerez FP. 1998. Aprendizaje de dos estrategias aparentemente

contradictorias hacia los bosques: manejo forestal y proteccion

de la biodiversidad. Foro Intergeneracional del Programa de

Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable (LEAD-Mex)

Colegio de Mexico.

Godinez C. 2003. Percepciones del sector turismo sobre el

ambiente, los servicios ecosistemicos y las instituciones

relacionadas con la conservacion del ecosistema de selva

baja caducifolia en la costa sur de Jalisco. [dissertation].

Morelia (Mexico): Universidad Nacional Autonoma de

Mexico. p 117.

Grimble R, Chan MK. 1995. Stakeholder analysis for natural

resource management in developing countries. Nat Resour

Forum 19(2):113–24.

Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Light SS, Eds. 1995. Barriers and

bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. New

York (NY): Cambridge University Press.

Holling CS. 1995. What barriers? What bridges? . In: Gunderson

LH, Holling CS, Light SS. Eds. Barriers and bridges to the re-

newal of ecosystems and institutions. New York (NY): Cam-

bridge University Press. p 3–34.

Holling CS. 1998. Two cultures of ecology. Conserv Ecol 2(2):4.

(http://www.consecol.org/Journal/).

INEGI. 2001. Principales resultados por localidad, Estados Unidos

Mexicanos. XII Censo de Poblacion y Vivienda 2000. Agu-

ascalientes (Mexico): INEGI.

Lara G. Taboada M, Eds. 1996 Historias de mis abuelos Mexico

DF (Mexico): Desarrollo Educativo y Cultural Costa Alegre,

A.C.

Lazos E, Pare L. 2000. Miradas indıgenas sobre una naturaleza

‘‘entristecida’’: percepciones del deterioro ambiental entre

nahuas del sur de Veracruz. Mexico DF (Mexico): UNAM,

Plaza Valdes Editores.

Maass JM. 1995. Conversion of tropical dry forest to pasture and

agriculture. In: Bullock SH, Money H, Medina E, Eds. Sea-

sonally dry tropical forests. New York (NY): Cambridge Uni-

versity Press. p 399–422.

Maass JM, Jaramillo V, Martınez-Yrızar A, Garcıa-Oliva F,

Sarukhan J. 1994. The Chamela Watershed Project. A study of

the structure and functioning of a tropical deciduous forest in

west Mexico. (leaflet).

Maass JM, Jaramillo V, Martınez-Yrızar A, Garcıa-Oliva F,

Perez Jimenez A, Sarukhan J. 2002. Aspectos funcionales

del ecosistema de selva baja caducifolia en Chamela,

Jalisco. In: Noguera F, Vega-Rivera JH, Garcıa Aldrete AN,

Quezada Avendano M, Eds. Historia Natural de Chamela.

Mexico DF (Mexico): Instituto de Biologıa UNAM. p 525–

42.

Magana MA. 2003. Actitudes y percepciones de productores

rurales y sus familias hacia la conservacion de la selva y el area

natural protegida: Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala,

Jalisco, Mexico [dissertation]. Morelia (Mexico): Universidad

Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo. p 217

Martınez L. 2003. Percepciones sociales sobre los servicios eco-

sistemicos en dos comunidades aledanas a la Reserva de la

Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala, Jalisco [dissertation]. Morelia

(Mexico): Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo.

p 174.

Murphy PG, Lugo AE. 1995. Dry forests of Central America and

the Caribbean islands. In: Bullock SH, Mooney HA. Medina E,

642 A. Castillo and others

Eds. Seasonally dry tropical forestsCambridge University

PressCambridge (UK)934.

O�Neill RV. 2001. Is it time to bury the ecosystem concept?

(with full military honors of course). Ecology 82 3275–84.

Noguera F, Vega Rivera JH, Aldrete Garcıa AN. 2002. Intro-

duccion. In: Noguera FA, Vega Rivera JH, Garcıa Aldrete AN,

Quesada Avendano, M. Eds. Historia Natural de Chamela

Instituto de Biologıa Universidad Nacional Autonoma de

Mexico p xv–xxi.

Ortega AT. 1995. El desarrollo socioeconomico de Jalisco. Per-

spectivas de recursos naturales. Revista Universidad de

Guadalajara (abril):41–48.

Pace ML, Groffman PMEds. 1998. Successes, limitations, and

frontiers in ecosystem science New York (NY): Springer.

Pretty JN, Pimbert MP. 1995. Beyond conservation ideology and

the wilderness myth. Nat Resour Forum 19:5–14.

Pujadas A. 2003. Comunicacion y participacion social en el

Programa de Ordenamiento Ecologico Territorial de la costa de

Jalisco y la Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala [dis-

sertation]. Morelia (Mexico): Universidad Nacional Autonoma

de Mexico., p 285.

Sarukhan J, Estrada A, Perez A. 1979. Plan de desarrollo de las

estaciones del Instituto de Biologıa UNAM. Manuscrito ine-

dito. Mexico DF (Mexico): UNAM.

SEMADES. 1999. Ordenamiento Ecologico de la Region Costa

del Estado de Jalisco. Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco (http://

www.semades.gob.mx/oe/).

Toledo VM. 1996. The ecological consequences of the 1992

agrarian law in Mexico. In: Randall L, Ed. Reforming Mexico�sAgrarian Reform. New York: M.E. Sharpe. p 247–60.

Toledo VM. 1997. Sustainable development at the village

community level: a Third World perspective. In: Smith, Ed.

Environmental sustainability: practical global applications.

Boca Raton (FL): St Lucie Press. p 233–50.

Toledo VM. 2001. Indigenous peoples, biodiversity and In: En-

cyclopaedia of biodiversity Volume 3. San Diego (CA): Aca-

demic Press, 451–63.

Toledo VM, Carabias J, Toledo C, Gonzalez-Pacheco C. 1989.

Mexico DF (Mexico): La produccion rural en Mexico: alter-

nativas ecologicas. Fundacion Universo XXI.

Trejo I, Dirzo R. 2000. Deforestation of seasonally dry tropical

forest: a national and local analysis in Mexico. Biol Conserv

94:133–42.

Warman A. 2001. El campo mexicano en el siglo XX. Mexico DF

(Mexico): Fondo de Cultura Economica.

Westley F, Carpenter SR, Brock WA, Holling CS, Gunderson LH.

2002. Why systems of people and nature are not just social and

ecological systems. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Eds. Pan-

archy Understanding transformations in human and natural

systems. Washington DC (WA): Island Press. p 103–19.

Worster D. 1988. Doing environmental history (Appendix). In:

Worster D, Ed. The ends of the Earth. Perspectives on modern

environmental historyCambridge University Press New York.

p 289–307.

People and Tropical Dry Forest in Mexico 643