According to various scholars (Warman 1984; Bartra 2011; Lazos 2011; among
others), the territorial and demographic composition of the country has changed
structurally; ‘‘in 1900 almost three-fourths of the population lived and worked in
rural areas, 72 %. In the year 2000, rural Mexicans represent 25.3 % of the
population’’ (Warman 1984, p. 9). This transformation leads us to devote our
attention to the conditions of the current Mexican countryside.
In the context of a postrevolutionary period, when the Government needed to
establish a new administration of the territory, it conducted various ‘‘operational
(construction of infrastructure for production, distribution, and means of collective
consumption) and regulatory (financial, agricultural, industrial, and environmental
policy) interventions’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 9) in order to regionalize,
organize, and sectorize the production activities of the population.
Between 1934 and 1940, Lázaro Cárdenas, through his agrarian policy effected
‘‘a major relocation of populations and economic activities such as the lower part
of the River Yaqui, La Laguna, the Mexicali Valley, among others’’ (AguilarRobledo 1995, p. 14). Along with various legal and administrative measures, in
this Administration numerous agricultural activities were promoted; ‘‘Agrarian
policy instruments included credit resources through specialized institutions, the
establishment of guaranteed prices, and in particular, investments in irrigation and
communications in rural areas. By the end of the Cárdenas Administration, agricultural investment accounted for almost 30 % of the total public investment’’
(Gollás 2003, p. 10).
Starting with the presidency of Ávila Camacho (1940–1946), the issue of rural
Mexico became a means for procurement of the nation’s economic development.
In his 6-year term, for example, tropical agriculture was promoted, generating the
mobilization of populations to such territories in order to carry out agricultural
activities aimed at marketing and the opening of new markets. Thus, in Mexico,
from this administration on structural reforms at the level of the national economy
generated various strategies and policies for the sector in order to give rise to
foreign investment by encouraging the entry of technologies, industries, and
knowledge related to the efficiency of the farms. It was conceived as a priority that
the country’s demographic growth should become comparable to its economic
growth; and, to this end, the continuity of agricultural activities in conjunction
with the generation of government policies for the promotion of their implementation became a strategy to encourage centralized growth and social control.
However, the decade of the 1950s structurally transformed the various social
and economic policies found throughout the world. With the ascension of the
capitalist model, the discourse of modernity based on development and scientific
knowledge was positioned internationally, as stated in Harry Truman’s inaugural
address as President of United States in 1949:
‘‘More than half the people of the world are living in conditions approaching
misery. Their food is inadequate. They are victims of disease. Their economic life
is primitive and stagnant… What we envisage is a program of development based
on the concepts of democratic fair-dealing… Greater production is the key to
prosperity and peace. And the key to greater production is a wider and more
458
A. Vázquez-Estrada and A. Terven-Salinas
others), the territorial and demographic composition of the country has changed
structurally; ‘‘in 1900 almost three-fourths of the population lived and worked in
rural areas, 72 %. In the year 2000, rural Mexicans represent 25.3 % of the
population’’ (Warman 1984, p. 9). This transformation leads us to devote our
attention to the conditions of the current Mexican countryside.
In the context of a postrevolutionary period, when the Government needed to
establish a new administration of the territory, it conducted various ‘‘operational
(construction of infrastructure for production, distribution, and means of collective
consumption) and regulatory (financial, agricultural, industrial, and environmental
policy) interventions’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 9) in order to regionalize,
organize, and sectorize the production activities of the population.
Between 1934 and 1940, Lázaro Cárdenas, through his agrarian policy effected
‘‘a major relocation of populations and economic activities such as the lower part
of the River Yaqui, La Laguna, the Mexicali Valley, among others’’ (AguilarRobledo 1995, p. 14). Along with various legal and administrative measures, in
this Administration numerous agricultural activities were promoted; ‘‘Agrarian
policy instruments included credit resources through specialized institutions, the
establishment of guaranteed prices, and in particular, investments in irrigation and
communications in rural areas. By the end of the Cárdenas Administration, agricultural investment accounted for almost 30 % of the total public investment’’
(Gollás 2003, p. 10).
Starting with the presidency of Ávila Camacho (1940–1946), the issue of rural
Mexico became a means for procurement of the nation’s economic development.
In his 6-year term, for example, tropical agriculture was promoted, generating the
mobilization of populations to such territories in order to carry out agricultural
activities aimed at marketing and the opening of new markets. Thus, in Mexico,
from this administration on structural reforms at the level of the national economy
generated various strategies and policies for the sector in order to give rise to
foreign investment by encouraging the entry of technologies, industries, and
knowledge related to the efficiency of the farms. It was conceived as a priority that
the country’s demographic growth should become comparable to its economic
growth; and, to this end, the continuity of agricultural activities in conjunction
with the generation of government policies for the promotion of their implementation became a strategy to encourage centralized growth and social control.
However, the decade of the 1950s structurally transformed the various social
and economic policies found throughout the world. With the ascension of the
capitalist model, the discourse of modernity based on development and scientific
knowledge was positioned internationally, as stated in Harry Truman’s inaugural
address as President of United States in 1949:
‘‘More than half the people of the world are living in conditions approaching
misery. Their food is inadequate. They are victims of disease. Their economic life
is primitive and stagnant… What we envisage is a program of development based
on the concepts of democratic fair-dealing… Greater production is the key to
prosperity and peace. And the key to greater production is a wider and more
458
A. Vázquez-Estrada and A. Terven-Salinas