Interactions Between Agroecosystems and Rural Communities - Chapter 8 potx

Transhumant Communities and Agroecosystems in Patagonia 1 Monica Bendini CONTENTS Background The Rural Community of the Crianceros Development of Transhumance Practices The Community Transhumant Agroecosystem Postoralism and Landscape:Images and Perceptions Perceptions of the Landscape State Policies Peasants’Poverty and Survival Conclusions Control and Resistance On Problems and Potentiality References BACKGROUND In the northwest of the Argentine Patagonia, peasants, who call themselves criaceros, move sheep and goats in seasonal patterns on the southern Andes Mountains and val- leys. That transhumant style of production is very fragile because it depends on (1) the rural community to establish norms of resource use, (2) annual and seasonal vari- ations in the pasture and forage available, and (3) national and international fiber mar- kets. 8 1 A version of this article was presented as a paper in the 4th European Symposium on European Farming and Rural Systems Research and Extension into the Next Millennium, Enviromental, Agricultural and Socioeconomic Issues held in Volos, Greece, April 3–7, 2000. © 2001 by CRC Press LLC THE RURAL COMMUNITY OF THE CRIANCEROS The crianceros move their sheep and goats through valleys of the southern Andes mountains, mountain slope, woodland, and arid steppes in the Patagonian plateau (Bendini and Tsakoumagkos, 1994). The territory extends from the south of the province of Mendoza to the center of the province of Chubut. Most of the crianceros population is concentrated in the provinces of Neuquén and Río Negro. Approximately 7,500 crianceros and their livestock—mainly sheep and goats, with some horses and cattle—live on this landscape. Their herd size, measured in sheep units, averages 250 to 500. Sheep shearing and the sale of sheep wool, mohair, and goat meat provide income to these households. Some meat and wool are used by the family, but the majority goes to the market. Local, extraprovincial and interna- tional brokers buy the wool and mohair. They seek specific quantities and character- istics they seldom reveal to the crianceros, so there is little feedback regarding selection and pricing on which the crianceros can base future production practices. The meat produced is primarily for local markets. The Neuquen ´ provincial govern- ment implemented marketing programs and a new sales approach for added value, but support for these programs declined after 1985. Between the arid and semi-arid plateau and the cordillera (Andes mountain chain), the region under study, crianceros and puesteros (livestock companions) are 90% of the rural population. The majority are fiscaleros (occupants of government land) and are different from the typical Argentine agricultural producer in other parts of the country. There are three basic types of crianceros: (1) the transhumance crianceros, or nomad sheep and goat raisers, who move their animals from the lower arid fields in the winter to the high valleys for the Andean summer; (2) the sedentary crianceros from the arid fields in the plateau; and (3) the agricultural crianceros or farmers oper- ating around small creeks and brooks where livestock raising is supplemented with some precarious produce cultivation: pasture, cereal, vegetable. For all three types of crianceros, tending the flock determines the social organi- zation of the local communities. Ethnically, the communities are indigenous (with or without legal recognition and different degrees of recognition of indigenous rights), Creole, or a combination of the two ethnic groups. In all of the communities, animal raising and land management are based on behaviors and conventions built on tradi- tional social bonds. The largest of the three types as regards numbers of people and animals, the tran- shumance crianceros or nomad breeders is the focus of this chapter. They have the strongest sense of community identity, which has been strengthened over the years as they have resisted outside pressures in order to maintain their way of life. DEVELOPMENT OF TRANSHUMANCE PRACTICES Seasonal migration of livestock, or transhumance, as a way of life and work goes back to the early settlers, who brought exotic small ruminants to lands previously grazed by an indigenous small ruminant, the llama. Because of the harsh environmental © 2001 by CRC Press LLC conditions involving extreme temperatures and limited precipitation, the early settlers adopted the transhumant practices of the region’s indigenous people, organizing households and communities around livestock activity. Accessability to Chilean mar- kets added to the attraction of land availability, drawing immigrants from other parts of Argentina and abroad to settle in large extensions of state lands. The rich resources from the cordillera for summer grazing and the accessibility to markets resulting from free commerce with Chile favored the advancement of tran- shumance livestock production. Livestock fattened in the summer were sold in Chile, providing capital for development in the region. For centuries, the settlers of the region (Mapuche Indians, Chileans, and Creoles) responded to the ecosystem and the market through extensive nomadic livestock raising by family units. At the end of the 19th century, settlement increased pressure on lands south of the Colorado River as a consequence of new land distribution policies at the national level. The best lands to the south of the Pampas region were taken away from the orig- inal inhabitants through military expeditions and the “Conquest of the Desert” (Gasteyer and Flora, 2000). Land with access to water and natural pasture most of the year is located in the longitudinal strip at the foothills of the cordillera. That north–south strip, suitable for raising cattle year round, is located between the arid fields of winter grazing and the summer grazing camps in the cordillera. Low-density Indian populations occupied the territory before the military invasion, but were exter- minated or removed from the more productive lands through federal decrees and legal machinations of large landowners interested in expanding into the area. The best land for sedentary livestock raising was purchased by large farmers. That land is between the winter and summer grazing lands of the crianceros. Furthermore, much of the grazing takes place on government land, which is in the process of privatization. These policy decisions have greatly hampered access to the natural resources neces- sary for livestock production. By the middle of the 20th century, tariff barriers and greater border control, inspired by the Argentinean and Chilean industrial development model, destroyed the regional wool and hair market, transferring its control to the national agroindustrial capital. At the same time, national and provincial government instituted a spectrum of policies intended to control livestock raising in transhumance. These policy- induced limitations on production and marketing increased financial insecurity. Grazing permits to access governmental pastures in the cordillera during the key period of animal growth are temporary and nontransferable. Without a permit, live- stock cannot be moved to government lands. THE COMMUNITY Family transhumance animal production persists because of its internal logic, family labor intensification to maximize income (Cucullu and Murmis, 1980), and the logic of an economic system that provides little access to capital for local commercial and agricultural development (Tsakoumagkos, 1993). These communities of loosely knit household production units are extremely attached to the land and the animals. They work hard to maintain their way of life, as © 2001 by CRC Press LLC defined by nomadic animal production. There is substantial continuity between gen- erations. The son or sons, whom the father generally picks at 18 years of age or upon marriage, solicit the signal ticket and the pasture permit, indicating inclusion in the production cycle. The criancero communities, as a result of unequal access to resources and lack of market negotiating power, have developed pluriactivity, a combination of on-farm and off-farm income generation as a survival strategy. During crisis periods, the fam- ily unit acts as a refuge. The family survival strategy depends on those who migrate and those who permanently reside in the family home place. Since the middle of the 20th century, an increasing dependence on wage labor to generate household income has converted the crianceros into peons, workers, or employees. The perseverance of the crianceros during the processes of social differentiation (Bendini and Tsakoumagkos, 1994; Cucullu and Murmis, 1980) depends on large extensions of government land and the fact that the Argentina economic system is unable to absorb them in alternate activities. Currently, government plans to privatize the grazing lands through a new land-titling program threatens the production sys- tem and further undermines community stability. That titling has privileged large landowners. Criancero communities have two modes of access to the land and several degrees of legal formalized property rights. Indigenous communal properties are recognized in legislation for indigenous reservations, with varying degrees of ownership title for- malization. Users of government lands (fiscaleros) gain access through acqusition of a grazing permit from the provincial government. At the center of these commu- nities are a community-determined number of shepherds that use specific grazing lands. “The Tragedy of the Commons” (Hardin, 1968) draws on a similar situation: the herding on common land. Hardin describes a situation in which utility maximization includes a positive component, the economic gains obtained through the increase in livestock, and a negative component, the environmental costs generated by the same increase via overgrazing. According to the author, the tragic characteristics of the unavoidable ruin from the unlimited increase of the existing livestock could be explained by the individual freedom to use the public goods. Hardin’s solution includes an ethical aspect, the “reciprocal coercion” agreed on by the majority affected, which includes the suffering from a common agreement on coercion, and a legal aspect, private individual property attached to a legal inheritance. Public pastureland is cited regularly as a particular case of “public property resources” or “free access resources.” Its basic characteristic is “no exclusion.” The consequences are abuse of resources and the associated social inefficiency, lack of incentives to invest in production improvement, and the improbability, difficulty, or violability of agreement on use reduction. The solution to environmental degradation, according to this logic, is land privatization. Common property is different from government property. Common property means that the community holds some property rights, with the state holding resid- ual property rights. Public (government) lands belong to all and are the responsibil- © 2001 by CRC Press LLC ity of no one. Thus, they are assumed to be open to free access, with destructive impli- cations according to Hardin. In fact, governments seek to control the usage of public lands by controlling a variety of usufruct rights. With public lands, common property lands, and private lands, the users and the owners must come to an agreement on how the resources may be used. The World Bank differentiates “common property resources” from the “free access resources” (BIRF, 1992). In both cases, resource organizations are crucial. The Bank identifies communities as the resource organizations with authority to deter- mine who has access and the conditions of access. Problems arise when the “com- munal properties” become “free access resources” as a consequence of their nationalization. The World Bank urges use of the local organizations’ (village or shepherds’ associations) potential for improved land management. The local communities (crianceros in indigenous communities or crianceros fis- caleros) constitute traditional organizations with strong social bonds that enforce the behavior and conventions linked to the common shepherding. These communities are closely connected to the spatial allocation of land and have developed reciprocal mutual agreements at the local level on livestock management. These local communities attempt to access a determined territory and bar the access to all “noncrianceros” from the local area or other areas. Shepherding, as prac- ticed by the Patagonia crianceros, differs from free access to resources. TRANSHUMANT AGROECOSYSTEM Livestock movement is regulated by the cyclical rhythm of the seasons, and house- hold activities adjust to these cycles. Each year, a temporary change of settlement fol- lowed by a return marks the beginning of a new cycle. The transhumant system is attached to the landscape and weather, which determine grazing possibilities. Where- as the crianceros previously moved their livestock four times a year in response to forage availability, the privatization of the river valley land has reduced the cycle to moves in the summer (to the mountains) and the winter (to the desert). The circuit consists of the summer pasture, the winter forage, and the livestock trail that connects them. In the summer season, the livestock are moved to high moun- tain valleys, 1,200 m above sea level. This environment provides pasture and water to the flock during the summer days. The length of stay varies from 3 to 5 months, based on the distance from the winter fields and the altitude of the summer fields. In the winter season, the livestock move to the plateau and lower valleys. Water and pasture availability are very limited by the end of the winter. Transhumance efficiency declined drastically with the formation of large farms in the best precordillera fields. The distances involved in the circuit vary considerably, from a few kilometers to more than 200 km. Livestock feeding, livestock composition, number of livestock, and landscape characteristics determine the cycle length. The crianceros accom- pany the migration on horseback, with cargo animals (mules saddled with cargo bas- kets), or with old-model, deteriorated pickup trucks (Bendini and Tsakoumagkos, 1994). © 2001 by CRC Press LLC Community norms and traditional transhumant practice were insufficient to counteract the deterioration of pasturelands and depopulation. The crianceros’ stan- dard of living has deteriorated. Many have taken work on the large ranches, which occupy the best lands, because they can no longer pasture their own herds there. But because international demand for animal fiber is low and ranches have been trans- formed into hunting reserves, that alternative too has declined. PASTORALISM AND LANDSCAPE: IMAGES AND PERCEPTIONS The major institutions making decisions affecting land use in the 1970s and 1980s viewed the crianceros as poor rural residents engaged in extractive subsistence activ- ities, which, because of open access, degraded the environment. Criancero sheep and goat grazing was viewed as particularly environmentally destructive. Crianceros were treated as a social problem. Concern centered around their apparently exploi- tive, environmentally destructive activities. The identification of the desertification risk in vast parts of the state of Neuquén at the end of the 1980s produced strong pressure on the transhumant herders. The ter- ritory to which they had winter access was steadily decreased and limited to the most arid corridors. Each summer they were obliged to go higher and higher into the mountains. The wire fences built around the fields previously used by the crianceros and government reoccupation of land that had been abandoned for many years are indicators of a strong environmentalism from various government agencies. Sectoral policies influenced by this discourse promoted practices that appeared to be less environmentally destructive. Silviculture was highly promoted. Because of the need for land title and the long period between planting and harvest, credit and technical assistance promoting it favored the larger producers with a strong financial base. As government lands became titled, the crianceros fiscaleros, whose livestock grazed on public lands, were further displaced, as the lands were privatized to those who had the money and connections to access lawyers and the land tenure bureau- cracy. The environmentalist discourse, which began with a legitimate concern about natural resource use, became an ideological support for a new process of resource appropriation, completing that begun at the beginning of the 20th century. The settlement of the crianceros in the more fragile lands of the arid and semi- arid plateau and areas of the cordillera made land management even more important than it had been previously. PERCEPTIONS OF THE LANDSCAPE Crianceros and the large cattle ranchers perceive the process of desertification and the transhumant system very differently. The testimonies of both groups are relevant because they manifest different logics of production and reproduction. The large cat- tle ranchers, who represent less than 10% of the population in the area, attribute pas- © 2001 by CRC Press LLC ture deterioration to the crianceros. They use this causal model to legitimize them- selves as enforcers of exclusion, keeping the crianceros from grazing on any lands. This causal model makes the crianceros even more vulnerable. The transhumant producer relates to resources by deciding on the number of ani- mals to graze in a particular area and on the management of financial resources. The crianceros do not recognize the term “desertification.” They do not refer to the area where they carry out their livestock raising activities as a desert, nor to the process of degradation and erosion as desertification. They do recognize that there is a “prob- lem,” attributing the process to natural conditions: loss of the pastures’ fertility or decreased forage availability. Their own actions do not, in their view, have an impact on either of these natural conditions. The large ranchers, in contrast, refer explicitly to the process of desertification, but see it as a situation unrelated to themselves. They view it as a process associated with the crianceros, originating in the concentration of population and overstocking. They particularly pinpoint overgrazing and the predominance of goats in the herds of the poor peasants as the source of desertification. Both the crianceros and the large ranchers consider the problem of desertifica- tion in the context of their respective global production orientations (Nogués et al., 1993). The crianceros do not have a universal perception about the causes of deserti- fication. Most of them refer to prolonged cycles of drought, and only a few refer to overgrazing or continuous grazing. The thing is that the fields don’t have a chance to rest. (criancero in an indigenous com- munity) There has been so much drought. There isn’t any water, and this is the cause . . . the lack of water. . . . The summer pastures of this place, on these dry years which have come, have been going downhill. They get worse each year, and this is because of the drought in these pastures. . . . Before, it wasn’t like this; the pastures did not ever fail. . . . Yes, they are recupriable [sic]. If it rains for us, the pasture will recuperate a lot. (criancero in a Creole community.) Their identification of climate as the only cause for the decline of the pastures and their recuperation is associated with a concept of recurrent cycles and a fatalist response to the actions of nature. Cutting and selling firewood has been very important in the mountain area. But, with the increased use of natural gas in the urban centers, the demand has decreased. Firewood consumption is now restricted to rural households, rural service centers, and poor urban areas. For the large ranchers, desertification is a result of overgrazing and cutting firewood. It is important to note that the ranchers’ herds are primarily cat- tle, although they also have a few sheep and goats. The cause of desertification is the use of goats and overgrazing, . . . and firewood is another factor. (large rancher in the central valley at the foot of the Andes) Although goats comprise 10% of his animals, the rancher attributes environmen- tal decline only to the goats of the crianceros. © 2001 by CRC Press LLC The large ranchers recognize the problem of pasture availability and stocking rates, stating that this is the principal problem of the indigenous reserves, where the poorest crianceros live. They perceive the importance of soil conservation practices as a way to achieve greater efficiency and profitability in their enterprise. In contrast, the crianceros’ soil conservation practices are strategies of social reproduction. Although they are pressured to adopt technologies for the prevention and control of desertification, they do not adopt the recommended practices. In the criancero com- munities, differential access to resources (land and capital) conditions the perceptions and orientations of the households and the communities. STATE POLICIES In the 1970s two policy directives made an impact on criancero communities: wool commercialization and agricultural extension to increase technology adoption. Beginning in 1974, a new commercialization system was implemented by aggregat- ing crianceros’ wool and hair production through a livestock growers’ association. This further integrated the marketing chain. The government was not only an agent for technical training (for shearing machines), but also absorbed some expenses and financed others. These programs helped to increase the relatively weak negotiating power of the crianceros. The pro- gram’s production and marketing objectives were to improve the quality of each cri- ancero’s product for its later aggregation and sale, and to increase the producers’ income, obtaining a better price by eliminating the intermediaries. These policies were incorporated into a global development strategy for income redistribution. Peasant development was not part of that strategy. The agrarian policy in the 1970s stemmed from the notion of the state government as benefactor, a role not questioned by the traditional agrarian commercial bourgeoisie (Pescio et al., 1993). This general improvement in the standard of living and in community income widened the income possibilites of the propertied classes in Neuquén, as new consumers entered the for- mal market economy through increased income and rapid demographic growth. These programs of extension and marketing expanded until 1983 and 1984. At that point, they stagnated. Despite the reinstitution of a democratic government in those years, programs aimed at the crianceros did not receive renewed support. The provincial government cut subsidies, producing social and spatial redistribution of income to the urban middle-class areas of Neuquén. Because the provincial govern- ment depended on local commercial capitalists for its support, the marketing program did not expand to new producers. Instead, the program became more complex, involving everything bought, sold, and consumed by those in the program, including basic services. There was only one marketing chain that integrated marketing with inputs and consumption. Paternalism, welfarism, and voluntarism in the execution of the program restricted its general expansion. By the end of the 1980s, there was ongoing debate on the viability of these pro- ducers becoming self-sufficient. Unresolved structural issues around land access and control resulted in an increase in private appropriation of government lands occupied by crianceros, who were unable to take advantage of existing laws to legalize their © 2001 by CRC Press LLC title. The debate around resource deterioration attributed to transhumant practices diverted the attention away from social conflicts, which forced the crianceros either to reduce their herds to nonprofitable levels or to overgraze. The implementation of national structural adjustment policies resulted in a pro- found crisis during the 1990s in the province of Neuquén, which lost its main source of revenue: direct national government transfers and federal coparticipation. The provincial government was no longer a major investor in public work. That activity in the 1980s had created employment and economic growth. Social policies to redis- tribute economic growth weakened in the face of a new accumulation model (Barsky, 1992). In the agrarian sector, institutional and political transformations emphasized control of livestock activities and the use of resources, mainly the land, within a frame of general deregulation. These controls revealed a creeping policy of exclud- ing the fiscaleros from government lands. The expansion of the local landowners was predominantly speculative. Privatization of land is framed as care for the environ- ment. With this approach, expensive technologies were required for erosion control. The high cost of the “environmentally friendly” land meant it was not available to most crianceros. At the beginning of the 1990s, groups with ready access to capital gradually gained control of land use, although there was some resistance from crianceros, espe- cially from the indigenous organizations. Neuquén government policy oscillated dur- ing those years as it responded first to landed vested interests, then to peasant and indigenous organizations, and then to environmentalists. The general situation in the province worsened with the general increase in unemployment and poverty. Social programs were channeled to urban sectors where major emergencies and social eruption concentrate (Murmis, 1997). In such a con- text, there is less inclination to implement social policies in rural areas. Concomitantly, a new player appeared: the transnational corporation. These cor- porations had an industrial base and integrated backward to raw material production. Land previously occupied by the peasant crianceros was made available to the mar- ket. More than 8 1 / 2 million hectares of provincial land in the north of the Patagonia became available for purchase on speculation, despite a rhetoric stressing that title provision must be “mindful of the occupants’ legitimate rights.” The real estate mar- ket was privileged over peasant rural development. Provincial policies, which had limited crianceros’options since the 1950s, further limited these options with the land titling of the 1990s. The privatization of land releases the government from guaran- teeing the permanence of the crianceros as viable producers. Criancero communities became increasingly poor and excluded (Murmis, 1994). PEASANTS’ POVERTY AND SURVIVAL Table 8.1 compares Creole and Mapuche criancero communities at the beginning of the 1980s and middle of the 1990s on the basis of primary data gathered in the begin- ning of the 1980s and middle of the 1990s. These households maintained their peasant character despite indicators of aging (reduced household size and a higher percentage of income from pensions) and © 2001 by CRC Press LLC decreased market participation. The crianceros’ goal is to balance, while possible, what they buy with what they sell. The criancero tries to obtain the maximum income through the use of all family labor available with three ends in mind: production for the market, production for personal use, and off-farm labor. In this manner, the house- hold achieves maximum satisfaction of needs compatible with sparse resources (Wettstein, 1982). Traditionally, as prices fell, the crianceros increased their stock to ensure mini- mum income. In many cases the stock population reached the saturation threshold of land and pasture resources. Efforts of government and nongovernment agricultural extension to improve livestock management has partially reversed that response. The change in the relationship between those who sell and those who buy is marked. In the 1980s, 76% of the total production went to market, whereas only 47% was sold in the 1990s. The increased household consumption of the total production expresses the impoverishment process defined as downward social decomposition. However, the peasants do not disappear because they have no employment alterna- tives. Yet young people are expelled from the community, as seen in the household size decreasing from 7 to 4.8 individuals. The strategy of combining family labor inside and outside the household production unit explains the capacity for perserver- ance of these producers. The crianceros participate in different markets. In the product market, they par- ticipate as sellers. In the retail market, they participate as buyers. In the labor market, they participate as permanent sellers or as a temporary work force. Their participa- tion in the bank credit and real estate markets has been almost nonexistent, because they receive only small amounts of subsidized credits. Although some form of pay- ment in kind exists, these crianceros are immersed strictly in a mercantile economy. The scarce circulation of money has a greater relationship with the general poverty that goes beyond the rural areas than with the supposed nonmonetary character of such an economy. Total income for peasant households, as indicated by the number of basic salaries, declined only slightly. Decrease in income resulting from the fall in the TABLE 8.1 Conditions in Criancero Communities, 1981 and 1995 1981 1995 Household size 7 4.8 Family labor/total labor employed 0.80 to 0.98 0.78 to 0.90 in the family unit Gross value for market/gross 79 47 production value (%) Basic salaries generated by 2.2 1.8 production Most important source of income Agriculture Retirement and livestock income and pensions © 2001 by CRC Press LLC [...]... ambiental en las zonas rurales, 1992, p 141 Cuccullu, G and Murmis, M., Tipología de Pequeños Productores Campesinos en América Latina, PROTAAL, IICA-OEA, San José de Costa Rica, No 5, 1 980 Gasteyer, S and C B Flora (2000) Modernizing the Savage: Colonization and Perceptions of Landscape and Lifescape Sociologia Ruralis (40): 1 28 149 Hardin, G “The tragedy of the Commons Science 162: 1243, 19 68 Murmis, M.,... Current policies and programs threaten to worsen the survival crisis for criancero communities Until the 1990s, there was reciprocity between the best lands owned by the large ranchers and the government lands occupied by the crianceros, both Mapuches and Creoles This arrangement is ending, indicating capitalist expansion in a marginal area The perspective of incorporating grazing land into the market... placed on access to soil, pasture land, and water • institutional policies of land access that do not trust the behavior and conventions typical of the local communities • the impoverishment process in Argentina of the past two decades • lack of economic alternatives for the producers and their families The base for alternative development of the crianceros’ local communities in Patagonia lies in the... CONCLUSIONS CONTROL AND RESISTANCE Historically, the market participation of crianceros was not marginal, especially for those originally tending goat flocks which produced fine mohair However, the dynamics of the globalization and concentration, environmental policies, and land privatization in the hands of large landowners makes criancero participation in the product market more risky and restricts their... social networks maintained under conditions of poverty and resource scarcity, and resistance to external control REFERENCES Barsky, O., Políticas agrícolas y reformas institucionales en la Argentina en el contexto del ajuste, Ruralia 3 Buenos Aires, 1992 p 7 Bendini, M and Tsakoumagkos, P., Campesinado y Ganadería Trashumante, Editorial La Colmena-GESA, Buenos Aires, 1994 © 2001 by CRC Press LLC BIRF,... intensifies the differentiation between viable producers and nonviable producers, increasingly excluding the crianceros Impoverishment and desertification have not destroyed the social bonds at the local community level Community resistance to structural conditions and clientelistic policies reveal strong social networks organized around production practices ON PROBLEMS AND POTENTIALITY The main problems... Congreso Argentino de Antropología Social Panel de Antropología Urbana, Buenos Aires, Mimeo, 1997 Nogués, C., Bendini, M and Pescio C., Medio ambiente y sujetos sociales; el caso de los cabreros trashumante, in Debate Agrario, Lima, No 17, 1993 Pescio, C., and Bendini, M., El desarrollo rural alternativo desde la integración binacional, in Latinoamérica Agraria Hacia el Siglo XXI, (Centro de Planificación... Tsakoumagkos, P., Acerca de la descomposición del campesinado en la Argentina, in Sociología Rural Argentina: Estudios en Torno al Campesinado, Posada, M., Comp., Centro Editor de América Latina, Buenos Aires, 1993 Wettstein, G., Cambios agrarios en los Andes de Venezuela, in Comercio Exterior, Mexico, Volumen 32, No 6, 1 982 © 2001 by CRC Press LLC ... (40): 1 28 149 Hardin, G “The tragedy of the Commons Science 162: 1243, 19 68 Murmis, M., Algunos temas para la discusión en la sociología rural latinoamericana: reestructuración, desestructuración y problemas de excluidos e incluidos Revista Latinoamericana de Sociología Rural, Valdivia, Chile, No 2, 1994 Murmis, M., Pobreza y exclusión social; sobre algunos problemas teóricos y de medición y la situación . from the fall in the TABLE 8. 1 Conditions in Criancero Communities, 1 981 and 1995 1 981 1995 Household size 7 4 .8 Family labor/total labor employed 0 .80 to 0. 98 0. 78 to 0.90 in the family unit Gross. establish norms of resource use, (2) annual and seasonal vari- ations in the pasture and forage available, and (3) national and international fiber mar- kets. 8 1 A version of this article was presented. Neuquen ´ provincial govern- ment implemented marketing programs and a new sales approach for added value, but support for these programs declined after 1 985 . Between the arid and semi-arid plateau and the cordillera