Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

DOI 10.1007/s11250-011-9881-6

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

The role of working equines to livelihoods in current day

campesino hill-slope communities in central Mexico
Leon G. Velzquez-Beltrn & Ernesto Snchez-Vera &
Eufemio Gabino Nava-Bernal &
Carlos M. Arriaga-Jordn

Accepted: 22 May 2011 / Published online: 3 June 2011

# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract Small-holder campesino agriculture is based on

the diversified use of resources and off-farm work. Working
equines have a multifunctional character and sustain the
diversification of livelihoods having different values as
assets or providing services. The objective was to identify
the role of working equines in current diversification
strategies in the livelihoods of campesino families in a
hill-slope community in central Mexico within livelihoods
analysis. Thirty-one variables related to ownership and use
of working equines were analysed by cluster analysis and
descriptive statistics contrasting the presence of equines in
the diversification of livelihoods. Four groups were
identified, determined mainly by age of farmer and number
of family members who utilise equines. Results show these
systems diversify in response to conditions of risk or to take
advantage of opportunities, such that a balance is reached
by resorting to off-farm activities without the total loss of
components of the farming system. Two main situations
were found in relation to working equines: the disappearance and change of functions of the large equines (mules),
and the adaptation of small equines (donkeys) to the new
conditions. It is concluded that there is a process of
adaptation in hill-slope campesino farms such that large
equines are less present in farms that have moved towards
more diversification, but are kept in those farms less
diversified. The use of equines for draught force in
agricultural production and as pack animals continues, as
L. G. Velzquez-Beltrn : E. Snchez-Vera : E. G. Nava-Bernal :
C. M. Arriaga-Jordn (*)
Instituto de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Rurales (ICAR),
Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico,
Instituto Literario 100, C.P. 50000,
Toluca, Estado de Mxico, Mexico
e-mail: cmarriagaj@uaemex.mx

is the presence of small livestock (sheep and poultry)

irrespective of the context of the farm.
Keywords Small-holder hill-slope agriculture .
Working equines . Livelihoods . Diversification . Mexico

Introduction
Agriculture in developing countries is characterised by the
utilisation of local inputs, both in crops as in animal
production (Aganga and Tsopito 2004). In the central
highlands of Mxico, this means the maize crop and the
presence of criollo livestock or their crosses with improved
breeds that are adapted to local conditions of small-holder
campesino farming systems (Arriaga-Jordn et al. 2005a)
that represent over 80% of total farms (INEGI 2007), which
are characterised by the small size of farms usually under
rainfed conditions, with the integration of farm animals mostly
for self-consumption but with some level of commercialisation (Arriaga-Jordn et al. 2005a). Mexico has over two
million equines (horses, mules and donkeys) (INEGI 2007)
and the vast majority are used for agricultural and rural
activities.
In spite of recurrent crisis of the farming sector, campesinos
still undertake their agricultural activities explained in part by
the diversified use of their resource allotment as well as by offfarm work; developing strategies over time that enable them to
face adverse scenarios. Off-farm work has been shown as
crucial in supporting rural livelihoods and enabling agricultural
intensification and improved incomes from farm activities
(Savadogo et al. 1998).
The presence of farm animals is particularly relevant by
their multifunctionality, as they can be sold or consumed in

1624

the household, and work animals provide draught animal

force for agricultural and non-agricultural activities, which
explains the presence of working equines given their
multifunctional character and are common in all of central
Mexico used for tilling the land (Pulido and Bocco 2003)
and other uses (Arriaga-Jordn et al. 2005b).
In this context, the utilisation of working equines in
campesino hill-slope agriculture is meaningful given the
restrictions of their systems, being fundamental for the
agricultural tasks as well as other associated activities
within the farm, sustaining their livelihoods (ArriagaJordn et al. 2005a, b). This is the case in most developing
countries in South Asia as Pakistan (Herani 2008), or in
East Africa as in Kenya (Kibwage et.al. 2009).
If it is true to consider maize production as the axis of
agricultural activities in campesino communities in the hillslope and mountain areas of the highlands of central
Mexico, there is a range of other activities both in
agriculture and off-farm. In the framework of livelihood
analysis these are strategies towards diversification, complemented with a process of migration out of the communities and, in a lesser extent, the intensification or
expansion of their agricultural activities (Hussein and
Nelson 1999).
In this context, working equines are a local input
integrated into their livelihood strategies, taking different
values within the capital categories, either as assets in
themselves, or through providing services by their use. This
adaptation characteristic in a range of scenarios enables a
different value level in specific categories, or to change that
value at different times. This is conditioned by external
factors both in terms of pressures or to take advantage of
opportunities (Bebbington 1999).
Despite the importance that working animals still have at
present in the developing world, there is little recent
information regarding the contribution of draught animal
power to rural societies and to national economies and it is
published mainly in grey literature of non-government
development organisations (Pritchard 2010).
Thus, the objective of this work was to identify the
contribution of working equines both as assets and as
providers of services within the diversification strategies in
the livelihoods of campesino families in a hill-slope
community in the highlands of central Mxico.

Material and methods

The work was undertaken in 2008 in the campesino villages
of La Era and Santa Cruz, which represent 27% of all farms
in the community of San Pablo Tlalchichilpa, in the
municipality of San Felipe del Progreso in the highlands
of the State of Mexico. These two villages are characterised

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

as of high marginality and social poverty. They are located

at 1943 North and 9957 West at a mean altitude of
2,650 m in the northwest of the State of Mexico within the
neovolcanic mountain range that crosses Mxico from East
to West. The climate is sub-humid temperate with a mean
temperature of 12C and between 800 and 1,000-mm
rainfall per year. The area and the farming systems have
been characterised elsewhere (Arriaga-Jordn et al. 2005a),
featuring difficult agricultural conditions where farmers rely
on working equines for agricultural activities (ArriagaJordn 2005b).
The methodology followed was the analysis of livelihoods
(Perondi et. al. 2008; Phu 2008), which combines qualitative
and quantitative methods.
Information was collected in two stages. Firstly, general
information was collected on agricultural and nonagricultural activities in relation to the presence and
utilisation of working equines, following a participatory
appraisal, informal semistructured interviews and participatory
observation. A livestock inventory was also collected to
identify farms with, and numbers of, working equines.
There is a total of 304 farms in the two villages, of
which 62% own working equids. These constituted the
sampling framework for a non-probabilistic intentional
sample of 68 farms owning working equines and willing
to participate in the study, representing 36% of the 189
farms with working equines.
The contribution of working equines to the strategies for
the diversification of agriculture in participating farms was
identified taking in consideration their multifunctionality, as
a financial asset which may be considered as not having a
trascendental economic contribution; and for their complementary utilisation (Dorward et.al. 2006), which although it
may not correspond to financial issues, is related with the
diversification strategies of farms.
The second stage of the study was undertaken with the
family members of the 68 participating farms in the two
villages, and two key informants, one per village. Informal
interviews were undertaken and structured questionnaires
were applied, and time lines were elaborated. The objective
was to identify the importance of equines in their livelihoods
following Phu (2008).
Thirty-one variables were analysed (Table 1), out of
more than 100 identified by Starkey (2000) that are
considered constant in different parts of the world.
Information on 11 demographic characteristics was also
obtained as proposed by Bawa and Bolorunduro (2008),
with emphasis on the distance to the main urban centres,
available infrastructure and access to services in both
villages taking as reference the municipal seat of San
Felipe del Progreso.
Due to the large variability among farms, previous to the
analysis of data and in accordance with a cluster analysis

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

Table 1 Grouping of demographic variables and those related to
working equines
Farm characteristics
Members, migrants, age, schooling, off-farm work, distance
to urban centres
Presence of animals
Species, equines, proportion, distribution, time at farm, reasons
for keeping, restrictions, pens, animal health
Predominant use
Use by species, management, advantages, disadvantages
Main farming systems
Predominant systems
Cropping activities
Activities related to cultivation of crops
Work implements for animals
Implements used per activity
Workload distribution
Family members that use equines, age, gender distribution
and schooling of family members that use equines

with the 68 farms was undertaken following Ward's method

with squared euclidean distances and validation by the Kmean method, utilising 13 variables related with present
equine species and their utilisation as assets or as providers
of services (Table 2), using the Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS) v. 10, in order to identify common
farmer groups (Hair et al. 2008).
Lastly, the information of the identified groups was
analysed by descriptive statistics through frequencies,
means and percentages following Bawa and Bolorunduro
(2008), contrasting the integration of working equines as
assets in the strategies for the diversification of livelihoods
(Bebbington 1999), particularly of the primary activities

1625

that contribute importantly in their social reproduction

processes.

Results and discussion

Livelihood strategies in rural communities are a response to
external conditions for each specific situation, both in time
and in space, so that the weight of each relates to the
specific context of each community and each farm. These
strategies are materialised in different arrangements within
each household, which must be taken into consideration
when discussing results; since even though the work is on
the contribution of working equines to the livelihood
diversification strategies, these take place together with
migration out of the community and the specialisation or
intensification of agricultural production, which also affect
relations within and between households.
The cluster analysis undertaken with 13 variables
corresponding to demographic characteristics (Table 3),
and the presence of equines in farms (Table 4), yielded four
farmer groups.
The four clusters are explained by the arrangements of
the analysed variables in terms of the relationships
established between the presence of working equines and
the activities related to their utilisation by family members,
as well as by the distance of farms from the main urban
centres which give rise to a context of differentiated
opportunities.
The integration of the four groups identified is affected
mainly by the age and the number of family members that
utilise working equines; as well as by a strong influence
from the main urban centres. When these are related to the
complementary demographic characteristics (Table 5), they
enable a better understanding of the forms of organisation
of the participating farms.

Table 2 Features used in the cluster analysis

Variables
Farm

Equines

Number of members
Age
Women
Men
Species
Proportion of equines
Reason for keeping equines
Time equines have been in farm
Animal health (illness or lesions)
Welfare (existence of pen)
Predominant use
Workload distribution
Agricultural activities

Group 1
Most farms in this group (90%) are located in Santa Cruz
which is nearer to the main town. They are formed basically
by young farmers under 40 years old (53.84%), predominantly with off-farm non-agricultural work in 76.9% of
household heads. Activities include commerce, services
(taxi drivers) and waged employment in the nearby urban
centres and even in their own village (taxi drivers).
This is related to the schooling they have, where more
than 50% have concluded their primary education which in
the region means the feasibility of finding a job in nearby
urban centres, which also reduces the need for migration far
from their home village.
In a smaller proportion of farms (23.1%), only the
household head undertakes agricultural work in their farm.

1626
Table 3 Demographic characteristics of four groups of farmers
(total n=68 farms) using equine
animals for work in the
campesino villages of La Era and
Santa Cruz, San Felipe
de Progreso, Mexico

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

Groups

Number of farms

13

33

13

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Number of family members with activities related with equines

1
3
23.1
6
18.2
2
3
23.1
15
45.4
3
6
46.1
3
9.1
>3
1
7.7
9
27.3
Age of family members with activities related with equines
<20
1
7.7
4
12.1
2140
8
61.5 13
39.4
4160
3
23.1 12
36.4
>60
1
7.7
4
12.1
Number of women with activities related with equines
0
1
7.7
4
12.1
1
7
53.8
16
48.5
2
5
38.5
10
30.3
3
0
0.0
2
6.1
>3
0
0.0
1
3.0
Number of men with activities related with equines
0
3
23.1
5
15.1
1
7
53.8
20
60.1
2
2
15.4
6
18.2
3
1
7.7
2
6.1

Nonetheless, they receive remittances from family members

who have migrated outside the community to the cities of
Toluca, capital of the state of Mexico, or Mexico City
mostly, although a few have gone to the USA.
Women, whether household heads or family members,
undertake activities using working equines in similar
proportion as men, so that there is no difference between
genders. This is due to the possibility of obtaining external
jobs and income, which although does not mean migration
away from the village, does imply that men spend most of
the day outside so that women take charge of the farms.
In 98% of households, between one and three family
members undertake activities that involve the use of
equines. However, agricultural work requires only short
periods of time, so that the main use of equids is as pack
animals to cover the lack of services so that there are
donkeys in all farms in this group particularly to carry water
for drinking and washing since there is no piped water so
that families must do frequent trips to the water supply
points.
The possibility of obtaining paid jobs enables these
families to depend less from agricultural activities; although
agricultural production does not disappear from these

0
4
3
2
0
3
5
1

Frequency

0.00
44.4
33.3
22.2
0.0
33.3
55.5
11.1

6
4
1
2
0
6
3
3

46.1
30.8
7.7
15.4
0.0
46.1
23.1
23.1

0
5
3
1
0

0.01
55.5
33.3
11.1
0.0

6
6
0
1
0

46.1
46.1
0.0
7.7
0.0

0
7
1
1

0.0
77.8
11.1
11.1

0
12
1
0

0.0
92.3
7.7
0.0

households, there is a lower number of family members

involved in agriculture, so that there are no large equines
(mules) which have either been sold or in more recently
established households, were never bought. Families in this
group hire in draught team owners from nearby villages to
do agricultural tasks; or may even hire a tractor wherever
that is feasible.
These farms are therefore characterised by a lack of large
equines and the presence of donkeys to undertake a
function as pack animals to provide a specific service
(carry water). Owning a donkey provides autonomy in their
water supply, but donkeys are not fundamental for the farm
since they are easily replaced. Their low cost and hardiness
result in minimal care for donkeys.
Group 2
Farms in this group correspond in 79% to the village of La
Era, and 21% to Santa Cruz. Household heads in 78% of
farms are 60 years old or less, and 63% have agriculture as
their main activity. They have a higher schooling level than
group 1 since 45% of household heads have secondary
education. Nonetheless, non-agricultural work is important,

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

1627

Table 4 Features on working equine presence in four groups of farmers (total n=68 farms) in the campesino villages of La Era and Santa Cruz, San
Felipe de Progreso, Mexico
Groups

Number of Farms

13

33

13

Frequency

Proportion of equines/total farm animal species

0.00.25
0
0.0
0.260.50
9
69.2
0.510.75
0
0.0
0.761.0
4
30.8
Number of equine species in farm
1
13
100
2
0
0.0
3
0
0.0
Use of mules
Does not apply
13
100
Draught
0
0.0
Pack
0
0.0
Saddle
0
0.0
Use of horses
Does not apply
13
100
Draught
0
0.0
Pack
0
0.0
Saddle
0
0.0
Use of donkeys
Does not apply
1
7.7
Draught
0
0.0
Pack
12
92.3
Saddle
0
0.0
Reason of keeping equines
Other
0
0.0
Autonomy
13
100
Timeliness in work
0
0.0
Quality of work
0
0.0
Income
0
0.0
Time of keeping equines in farm
<10
5
38.5
1120
7
53.8
2130
1
7.7
>31
0
0.0
Health care of equines
No attention
10
76.9
Owner
3
23.1
Neighbour
0
0.0
Veterinarian
0
0.0
Pen for equines
Without pen
13
100
With pen
0
0.0

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

5
22
0
6

15.1
66.7
0.0
18.2

0
4
5
0

0.0
44.4
55.5
0.0

1
11
1
0

7.7
84.6
7.7
0.0

30
3
0

90.9
9.1
0.0

0
7
2

0.0
77.8
22.2

9
4
0

69.2
30.8
0.0

33
0
0
0

100
0.0
0.0
0.0

2
7
0
0

22.2
77.8
0.0
0.0

6
7
0
0

46.6
53.8
0.0
0.0

30
3
0
0

90.9
9.1
0.0
0.0

5
1
0
3

55.5
11.1
0.0
33.3

3
5
0
5

23.1
38.5
0.0
38.5

0
0
33
0

0.0
0.0
100
0.0

0
0
9
0

0.0
0.0
100
0.0

13
0
0
0

100
0.0
0.0
0.0

0
32
1
0
0

0.0
97.0
3.0
0.0
0.0

0
5
3
0
1

0.0
55.5
33.3
0.0
11.1

0
10
2
1
0

0.0
76.9
15.4
7.7
0.0

11
15
7
0

33.3
45.4
21.2
0.0

1
3
2
3

11.1
33.3
22.2
33.3

2
6
3
3

15.4
46.1
23.1
23.1

13
17
2
1

39.4
51.5
6.1
3.0

0
5
0
4

0.0
55.5
0.0
44.4

5
5
0
3

38.5
38.7
0.0
23.1

0
33

0.0
100

0
9

0.0
100

0
13

0.0
100

1628

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

Table 5 Complementary demographic characteristics of the four groups of farmers (total n=68 farms) using equine animals for work in the
campesino villages of La Era and Santa Cruz, San Felipe de Progreso, Mexico
Feature

Number of farms

Groups
1

13

33

13

Frequency
Gender of household head
Male
Female

6
7

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

46.1
53.8

22
11

66.7
33.3

9
0

100.0
0.0

12
1

92.3
7.7

23.1
61.5
15.4

21
8
4

63.6
24.2
12.1

6
3
0

66.7
33.3
0.0

3
9
1

23.1
69.2
7.7

53.8
30.8
15.4

10
16
7

30.3
48.5
21.2

2
3
4

22.2
33.3
44.4

1
6
6

7.7
46.1
46.1

7.7
38.5
38.5
15.4

3
10
15
5

9.1
30.3
45.4
15.1

2
1
3
3

22.2
11.1
33.3
33.3

3
3
2
5

23.1
23.1
15.4
36.5

46.1
23.1
15.4
7.7

11
13
6
1

33.3
39.4
18.2
3.0

4
4
1
0

44.4
44.4
11.1
0.0

6
2
3
2

46.1
15.4
23.1
15.4

>3
1
7.7
2
Number of permanent migrants that contribute remittances to farm
1
3
13
2
2
6
3
1
1
4
2
5
6
1

6.1

0.0

0.0

Main activity of household head

Agriculture
3
Non-agricultural local
8
External work
2
Age of household head
<39
7
4059
4
>60
2
Mean schooling of family members
No schooling
1
<3 years
5
<6 years
5
<9 years
2
Farms with temporary migrants
0
6
1
3
2
2
3
1

which is explained by the remittances received from

migrating family members. More farms in this group
(66%) have at least a family member who has migrated
outside the village, and they are an important economic
support for their farming family.
Activities that require the use of equines are undertaken
by two family members in 45% of farms. Activities are
differentiated, with women using donkeys to carry water
and clothes while men use large draught equines (mules
and horses) for cropping activities. Also, in 36% of farms,
three or more family members undertake activities that
require the use of equines and which refer to a larger
number of young female family members.

4
1

2
3
2

Given the larger number of migrating men in this group,

equines present are mainly donkeys used by women in their
activities. Also women are more involved in agricultural
activities than in group 1 since more men are away from the
village. Young men and women, sons and daughters of
migrant adult men, have also an active role in agricultural
activities helping their mothers.
The presence of animals in these farms does have a
higher importance than in group 1 since these are more
integrated farming systems, where the ownership of
working equines dates back up to 30 years. Also, their
strategies involve the use of all available resources to
sustain their farms.

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

In this context and given the role they play in group 2,

working equines have a higher value for farmers, reflected
in the existence of holding pens as well as careful attention
by the farmers to minor health problems in their equines
and the reliance on professional veterinary care for more
serious ailments.
Group 3
Farms in this group are located 88% in the village of La Era
and the rest in Santa Cruz. Household heads in 55% of
farms are between 40 and 60 years old, and 66% of farms
rely on agriculture as their main activity, although 33% of
farm heads are also involved in off-farm work, which is
carried out in their own village so that they do not move out
of their community.
In terms of schooling, only 22% of household heads
have some type of study. These are older farmers, although
66% of their children have at least secondary education.
More than 50% of farms have at least one family member
who has migrated out of the community.
Since agriculture is the main activity in these households,
there is a larger presence and diversity of domestic animals
coupled with a larger participation of family members in
agricultural activities, such that in 77.6% of farms between
two and three family members are involved in agricultural
activities. Mules and donkeys are predominant in these farms,
although in some farms horses are also found.
Mules are the preferred equine for ploughing teams;
being Group 3, the farms with the highest number of
draught equines and consequently represent the larger
number of farms that hire out their ploughing teams to
other farms that can be in the village or in other villages in
the vicinity and even in other communities within the
municipality.
Farmers in group 3 have the most number of draught
equines since they seek autonomy in their agricultural
activities (55%) and to be able to undertake agricultural
tasks in due time (33%). However, when they hire out their
ploughing teams, the income obtained has priority over
undertaking agricultural activities in their own farms.
Donkeys are ever present in all farms in group 3
undertaking the same function as in the other two groups,
mainly as pack animals for carrying water and goods.
Large equines are used only for draught activities for
tilling the land, although this function may have different
meaning since they can provide autonomy in their own
farm or become a seasonal income-generating asset by
using them to plough other farms for a fee.
The importance of large equines for these farmers is
shown by the fact that ploughing teams may live up to
30 years in the farm; with good health care for their equines
either by their own attention or by calling in veterinary

1629

assistance. Also, more family members participate in

feeding and looking after the working equines.
Group 4
Seventy six percent of these farms are located in the village
of La Era and 24% in Santa Cruz. Most farmers are
40 years old or more (92%) with a trend towards older ages
since 46% of household heads are over 60 years old.
This is a mixed group of farmers of two generations.
Forty-six percent of household heads have no schooling or
incomplete primary education, whilst the younger farmers
are better educated since 51% of them have at least
secondary education. These are younger farmers who did
not migrate and got involved in agricultural activities in
their own farms, contract out their ploughing services and
may get involved in local off-farm work.
Off-farm work undertaken locally is important for these
farmers, and 92% of household heads combine agricultural
activities on farm and off-farm work. Agriculture for this
group represents a heavy seasonal work with the use of
large equines in all farms with no donkeys. These farmers
represent those who initially changed draught bovines for
mules in the 1970s given their faster speed of work, and
due to the multifunctionality, large equines are used for
ploughing and both as pack animals and for transport as
saddle animals (horses). Therefore, these farms are traditionally headed by men who use and look after their large
equines, with less participation of women in feeding and
even less in water transport.
The presence and use of ploughing teams in group 4
shows two trends. The first one is represented by older
farmers who keep their large equines to undertake agricultural activities in their own farms, since they are not hired
any more by other farmers for ploughing and cultivation.
These farmers have moved towards undertaking local offfarm work, and their farms are strongly supported by
remittances from family members who have migrated to the
cities. One possible outcome in these farms is the sale of
the ploughing teams in the future to younger farmers, or the
possible reintegration of migrant family members to take
over the family farm.
The other trend is represented by younger farmers who
did not migrate nor did they seek off-farm work outside
their villages and who have integrated into the local
agricultural dynamics as new farmers, who base their
livelihood strategies in diversifying their agricultural
activities and by engaging in local off-farm work.
Diversification
Results of this work correspond to the definition by Ellis (1998)
of livelihood diversification in terms of processes developed

1630

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

main town which enables their inclusion in the regional

labour markets.
There is a dual arrangement in the use of large equines,
since they meet a function as draught animals within the
farm to undertake agricultural activities independently and
on time. They also represent an element for diversification
since they contribute to generate incomes by providing
draught animal power services to other farmers.
The hiring out of ploughing teams is documented as an
important source of income for farming families in several
countries, and equines have the advantage of providing
other support for rural families through transport of goods
and people (Pritchard 2010), whether to their owners or as a
service provided to others.
In exception to group 1, hiring out the ploughing teams
is the main external service provided to the community,

by farming families who engage in diverse activity portfolios

and capacities for social support in their effort to subsist and
aimed towards improving their living standards.
In the study area, the integration of cropping and
livestock activities has resulted in mixed farming systems
where the diversification strategies are triggered by perceived
risks or to take advantage of opportunities achieving a balance
such that no component of their systems is displaced, whether
crops or animal components.
The diversification process in the studied villages tends
towards off-farm activities, both locally as well as towards
target urban centres without representing migration away
from the villages for extended periods of time (Table 6).
Distance to the main urban centres in the region is
important mainly to group 1 that is conformed by farms
with better access to roads and is nearer to the municipal

Table 6 Activity diversification of family members of the four groups of farmers (total n=68 farms) using equine animals for work in the
campesino villages of La Era and Santa Cruz, San Felipe de Progreso, Mexico
Feature

Farms

Groups
1

13

33

13

Frequency
Activities of family members
Agriculture
Agriculture+Local non-agricultural work
Local non-agricultural work
Agriculture+External non-agricultural
External non-agricultural
Without activity
Type of local non-agricultural activity
Commerce
Craft
Service
Construction
Unskilled helper
Type of external work
Unskilled helper
Construction
Employee
Commerce
Technician
Professional
Location of external work
Municipal main town (<15 km)
Atlacomulco (30 km)
Mexico City (90 km)
Rest of country

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

22
5
0
6
1
19

41.5
9.4
0.0
11.3
1.9
35.8

69
9
0
14
4
57

45.1
5.9
0.0
9.1
2.6
37.2

20
5
0
4
0
6

57.1
14.3
0.0
11.4
0.0
17.1

23
6
0
3
7
17

41.1
10.7
0.0
5.3
12.5
30.3

2
2
1
0

40.0
40.0
20.0
0.0

1
2
3
1

11.1
22.2
33.3
11.1

1
0
4
0

20.0
0.0
80.0
0.0

1
2
3
0

16.7
33.3
50.0
0.0

0.0

22.2

0.0

0.0

1
2
2
1
0
1

14.3
28.6
28.6
14.3
0.0
14.3

4
4
6
4
0
0

22.2
22.2
33.3
22.2
0.0
0.0

0
2
1
1
0
0

0.0
50.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
0.0

0
1
1
5
1
2

0.0
10.0
10.0
50.0
10.0
20.0

4
2
1
0

57.1
28.6
14.3
0.0

6
1
10
1

33.3
5.5
55.5
5.5

1
1
2
0

25.0
25.0
50.0
0.0

3
1
4
2

30.0
10.0
40.0
20.0

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

followed by working in local mechanical garages. The main

off-farm activity for farmers in group 1 is as taxi drivers.
There is also the engagement in local petty commerce
(small shops) and some craftsmanship in the villages many
times undertaken within their own farm. However, they are
not always the best options. It may be concluded that group
2 represents the better-structured and -integrated farms that
implement the larger number of activities, having the best
options both to improve their quality of life and well-being,
as to resist times of crisis due to external factors.
Each group has its trends in terms of non-agricultural
work outside their communities, being the most common
working as unskilled labour. However, it is interesting to
note that the two most contrasting groups (groups 1 and 4)
have an important engagement in technical and specialised
professional work. This is attributed to the fact that in group
1 there are older offspring and household heads that have a
higher schooling and may access better job options and
even develop professional activities on their own. In group
4, the elder children have migrated temporarily, and engage
in agricultural activities while in the farm, and contribute
with remittances from their work off-farm. This coincides
with the findings of Reardon et al. (2004) who mention that
farms with more education are in a better position to assign
a family member to waged work off-farm.
Each identified group has a predominant off-farm
activity and place of work. Members of group 1 prefer to
work in the area, which is possible given the opportunity
they have to obtain employment. Their interest is to remain
in their farms so that work nearby enables them to go back
to their homes every evening. Non-specialised family
members from other groups hire themselves as unskilled
labour (usually as construction labourers) so that their
opportunities are similar in any large urban centre of the
country, being their first option Mexico City.
Migrants from group 4 have taken commerce as their main
activity, working in the main food market of Mexico City,
where they have established a strong communication and
social network, the result of the number of village members
who work there both temporarily as well as permanently.

Conclusions
The diversification strategies through undertaking nonagricultural activities that were identified in the two study
villages enable campesino families to continue their
agricultural activities which would otherwise be very
difficult to sustain. Even in farms where agricultural
production has been displaced to a secondary level of
importance, it is maintained not as a productive objective
that provides resources, but more out of tradition and
considering the possibility of having access to resources

1631

(food) that may complement their livelihood strategy

although if it failed it would not harm the family (group 1).
There are also a number of permanent migrants who do
not participate in the farm activities but who send
remittances that enable family members who remain in
the villages to continue farming and with a stronger
capability to overcome risk conditions, and even take
advantage of favourable opportunities.
There is no abandonment of agricultural activities, contrary
to reports by Bryceson (1996) who mentions that diversification may lead to deagrarianization. Results show a process for
the optimisation of resources, particularly family labour, in the
logic that non-agricultural work enables economic resources
to cover agricultural production. Migrant remittances enable
campesino agriculture to subsist.
In this context, there are two trends in relation to the
contribution of working equines to campesino livelihoods.
Firstly, there is a process of elimination or substitution and
change of function of the large equines; and the adaptation
of small equines (donkeys) to the new conditions. The other
trend is the permanence of large equids in the other three
groups where agriculture is still the stronghold of their
livelihood whether out of tradition in households headed by
older farmers as in those farms that have been taken up by
the younger generation.
It is concluded that in the current conditions faced by
campesino farms on hill-slope agriculture, farms more diversified towards off-farm work have a lower presence of large
working equines, and in farms less diversified with preponderant
agricultural activities, there are more large working equines.
The presence of donkeys is stronger since their contribution does not correspond to agricultural activities, but as pack
animals that meet the needs for transport of water and goods
given the topography and the lack of services (piped water) in
the villages; services that are responsibility of external agents
and that local farmers may not change in the short term.
Acknowledgments The authors express our gratitude to the campesino
families of the villages of La Era and Santa CruzSan in Pablo
Tlalchichilpa in the municipality of San Felipe del Progreso, State of
Mexico, for their participation in the project, their kindness, hospitality
and their disposition to share their knowledge and experience. This work
was possible thanks to research grant 2465/2007U of Universidad
Autnoma del Estado de Mxico for which we are thankful. Our
gratitude also to the Mexican National Council for Science and
Technology (CONACYTConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologa)
for the grant that enabled Leon Velzquez-Beltran to undertake his
doctoral studies.

References
Aganga, A.A. and Tsopito, C.M., 2004. Donkey power technology in the
Gaborone Region. In: P. Starkey and D. Fielding (eds), Donkeys,
people and development: web version, (ATNESA Publications:
http://www.atnesa.org/donkeyspeopledevelopment.htm).

1632
Arriaga - Jordn, C.M., Pedraza - Fuentes, A.M., Nava - Bernal, E.G.,
Chvez - Meja, M.C. and Casteln - Ortega, O.A., 2005a. Livestock
agrodiversity of mazahua small-holder campesino systems in the
highlands of central Mexico, Human Ecology, 33, 821 845.
Arriaga-Jordn, C.M., Pedraza-Fuentes, A.M., Velazquez-Beltrn, L.G.,
Nava-Bernal, E.G. and Chavez-Mejia, M.C., 2005b. Economic
contribution of draught animals to Mazahua smallholder campesino
farming systems in the highlands of Central Mexico. Tropical
Animal Health and Production, 37, 589597.
Bawa, G.S. and Bolorunduro, P.I., 2008. Draught animal power
utilization in small holder farmsA case study of Ringim Local
Government Area of Jigawa State, Nigeria. Journal of Food,
Agriculture and Environment, 6, 299 302.
Bebbington, A. J., 1999. Capitals and Capabilities: a framework for
analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World
Development, 27, 20212044.
Bryceson, D.F., 1996. Deagrarianization and rural employment in subSaharan Africa: a sectoral perspective, World Development. 24,
97111.
Dorward, A., Anderson, S., Nava, Y., Pattison, J., Rushton, J. and
Snchez V.E., 2006. Gua de indicadores y mtodos para la
evaluacin de la aportacin de la crianza de ganado en los modos
de vida de los pobres, (Department of Agricultural Sciences,
Imperial College London and Livestock Production Programme,
Department for International Development, London, U.K).
Ellis, F. 1998. Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification.
Journal of Development Studies, 351, 138.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C., 2008.
Multivariate data analysis, Fifth Edition, International Edition.
(Prentice-Hall International Inc., New Jersey, USA).
Herani, G.M., 2008. Livelihood diversication and opinion polls'
analysis. Evidence from Tharpakar-Sindh (Pakistan). MPRA
Paper No. 8050, posted 18. Abril 2008/11:17. Online at http://
mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8050/
Hussein, K. and Nelson J., 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods and Diversification, IDS working paper No 69, (Institute of Development
Studies, Brighton).

Trop Anim Health Prod (2011) 43:16231632

INEGI - Instituto Nacional de Estadstica, Geografa e Informtica,
2007. Censo Agrcola, Ganadero y Forestal 2007. Instituto
Nacional de Estadstica, Geografa e Informtica, Mxico.
Accessed 28 August 2010. http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/
TabuladosBasicos/Default.aspx?c=17177&s=est
Kibwage, J.K., Odondo, A. J. and Momanyi, G.M., 2009. Assessment
of livelihood assets and strategies among tobacco and no tobacco
growing households in south Nyanza region, Kenya. African
Journal of Agricultural Research, 4, 294304.
Perondi M., A. Schneider S., Bonato A., A., 2008. Diversification for
development: Theorical basis for diversification of rural livelihoods.
(WHO meeting on economically sustainnable alternatives to
tobacco growing, May 2008, Mexico City).
Phu, P.X., 2008. Livelihood ways in the residential cluster and dyke
programme in Mekong Delta, Vietnam: A case study. Asia-Pasific
Journal of Rural Development, 18, 122.
Pritchard, Joy C., 2010 Animal traction and transport in the 21st
century: Getting the priorities right. The Veterinary Journal, 186,
271 274.
Pulido, J.S. and Bocco, G., 2003. The traditional farming system of a
Mexican indigenous community: the case of Nuevo San Juan
Parangaricutiro, Michoacan, Mexico. Geoderma, 111, 249265.
Reardon, T., Berdegu, J. and Escobar, G., 2004. Empleo e ingresos
rurales no agrcolas en Amrica Latina: sntesis e implicaciones
de polticas. In: Empleo e ingresos no agrcolas en Amrica
Latina, Serie Seminario y Conferencias, (Divisin de Desarrollo
Productivo y Empresarial, Unidad de Desarrollo Agrcola,
Santiago de Chile).
Savadogo, K., Reardon, T. and Pietolac, K. 1998, Adoption of improved
land use technologies to increase food security in Burkina Faso:
Relating animal traction, productivity, and non-farm income.
Agricultural Systems, 58, 441464
Starkey, P. H. 2000. Rapid appraisal methologies for animal traction.
In: Kaumbutho, P. G., Pearson R. A. and Simalenga, T. E. (eds),
Empowering farmers with animal traction. Proceedings of the
Workshop Network for Eastern and Southern Africa (ATNESA)
held 2024 September 1999. Mpumalanga, South Africa.