occupying ourselves now with a detailed description of the diverse and emerging
scenarios that exist between one position and another, in this section we intend to
observe the transformation of the use and management of natural resources and its
implications for the rural areas of the country.
From that imperious need to achieve rural development through the planned
exploitation of water and soil, until to the assessment of the damages caused by
this desire, a wide range of various works has been implemented throughout the
Republic of Mexico. In the case of water, the construction of dams, levees, and
irrigation canals is the overwhelming evidence that speaks to us of the type of
action taken by institutions in regard to the countryside; it was possible to provide
water to the vast rural landscape of the country. This is understandable, since most
farming in Mexico depends on rainfall, and the production of this system tends to
fail in economic terms due to the uncertainty that exists regarding the weather and
the amount of precipitation that falls during the production cycle. And if to this we
add the effects that climate change has had on the country, we are able to perceive
that droughts, hurricanes, and storms are a product of the extractive and erosive
relationship that humans have established with nature.
Water has been used as the means to achieve an increase in productivity;
however, the use of soil and vegetative cover also has its effects on the determination of productive success or failure. During the years of the modernization of the
countryside, the use of agrochemicals and pesticides was a recurring element in the
stimulation of the mineral composition of the soil and thus in the generation of
plants capable of producing good results from harvest and better dividends in the
market. In the early 1970s in some places of the country, such as the Comarca
Lagunera region in the North of the Republic, this was true; there was a flourishing
production that indicated a healthy condition of the Earth. There was an exceptional
production corn and beans, but no good bid prices. From within this disjuncture
between the production and the market arose one of the first fundamental water
management breakdowns. How was it possible that, despite all the water and the
technology, the rural sector in Mexico could fail to develop as planned? Another
consequence of this situation was the formation and emergence of various groups of
political bosses who, in addition to governing the control of resources, instituted a
form of colonization through paid work involving most of the population of the
rural areas.
In the end, these practices for the modernization of the countryside interrupted
the endogenous process of each soil according to its characteristics. The breakdown
of this process generated a codependency of technological supplies that had been
acquired largely from government subsidies, and when the technological supplies
were released on the market, their prices were too far above the purchasing power
of the producers, which resulted in eroded soils. It is also important to mention the
impact of the loss of traditional knowledge and practices related to the endogenous
processes of restoration, the addition of which deepened poverty.
Along with these differences seen from an economic perspective, there was the
establishment of a social and environmental project that saw the market as its
central factor. This situation generated a transition, in that the inhabitants were
16 When Modernity is Not Enough
463
scenarios that exist between one position and another, in this section we intend to
observe the transformation of the use and management of natural resources and its
implications for the rural areas of the country.
From that imperious need to achieve rural development through the planned
exploitation of water and soil, until to the assessment of the damages caused by
this desire, a wide range of various works has been implemented throughout the
Republic of Mexico. In the case of water, the construction of dams, levees, and
irrigation canals is the overwhelming evidence that speaks to us of the type of
action taken by institutions in regard to the countryside; it was possible to provide
water to the vast rural landscape of the country. This is understandable, since most
farming in Mexico depends on rainfall, and the production of this system tends to
fail in economic terms due to the uncertainty that exists regarding the weather and
the amount of precipitation that falls during the production cycle. And if to this we
add the effects that climate change has had on the country, we are able to perceive
that droughts, hurricanes, and storms are a product of the extractive and erosive
relationship that humans have established with nature.
Water has been used as the means to achieve an increase in productivity;
however, the use of soil and vegetative cover also has its effects on the determination of productive success or failure. During the years of the modernization of the
countryside, the use of agrochemicals and pesticides was a recurring element in the
stimulation of the mineral composition of the soil and thus in the generation of
plants capable of producing good results from harvest and better dividends in the
market. In the early 1970s in some places of the country, such as the Comarca
Lagunera region in the North of the Republic, this was true; there was a flourishing
production that indicated a healthy condition of the Earth. There was an exceptional
production corn and beans, but no good bid prices. From within this disjuncture
between the production and the market arose one of the first fundamental water
management breakdowns. How was it possible that, despite all the water and the
technology, the rural sector in Mexico could fail to develop as planned? Another
consequence of this situation was the formation and emergence of various groups of
political bosses who, in addition to governing the control of resources, instituted a
form of colonization through paid work involving most of the population of the
rural areas.
In the end, these practices for the modernization of the countryside interrupted
the endogenous process of each soil according to its characteristics. The breakdown
of this process generated a codependency of technological supplies that had been
acquired largely from government subsidies, and when the technological supplies
were released on the market, their prices were too far above the purchasing power
of the producers, which resulted in eroded soils. It is also important to mention the
impact of the loss of traditional knowledge and practices related to the endogenous
processes of restoration, the addition of which deepened poverty.
Along with these differences seen from an economic perspective, there was the
establishment of a social and environmental project that saw the market as its
central factor. This situation generated a transition, in that the inhabitants were
16 When Modernity is Not Enough
463