Can indigenous transborder migrants affect environmental governance in their communities of origin? Evidence from Mexico

Abstract

Despite high rates of out-migration, Mexican indigenous communities play a crucial role in biodiversity conservation. However, little is known about migrants' role in environmental management. This research brief explores the case of the Purépecha of San Pedro Ocumicho, Michoacán, and its transborder community in the Coachella Valley of California. We find that migrants maintain strong cultural ties to their community of origin. However, many are undocumented, are unable to access steady and well-paid employment, and would be unable to return to California were they to visit Mexico. Furthermore, government structures in Ocumicho are weak, providing few opportunities for migrants to contribute. These factors currently preclude migrants from influencing environmental decision making in their home community. Our findings point to the need for more comprehensive and longitudinal studies to better document and explain the variations in migrant support for environmental governance in their communities of origin.

Migration and agrarian transformation in Indigenous Mexico

“…In Mexico, the rural populace, in response to limited livelihood opportunities in their communities of origin and the lure of work in regional and national urban centres, northern agricultural zones, and most recently the United States (US), has lost a significant proportion of adult men and women to out‐migration (INEGI census data, 1970–2010; see also Bada & Feldmann, ; Durand & Massey, ). The impacts have been far‐reaching and well reported in the literature; from shifts in rural household economies and village demographics to new patterns of land use and environmental governance (Binford, ; De Haas, ; Lira, Robson, & Klooster, ; Robson & Berkes, ; Rubenstein, ; Taylor, ). While US‐bound migration has fallen sharply over the past decade (Durand, ; Jardón Hernández, ; Passel, Cohn, & Gonzalez‐Barrera, ), Mexico's main sending regions, which include the country's strongholds of indigeneity, remain burdened by reduced and aging village populations—as first‐generation migrants remain absent (Bada & Feldmann, ; Massey, Durand, & Pren, ), fertility rates drop to historical lows (CONAPO ; INEGI ), and youth leave in large numbers to pursue education and other opportunities (Aquino Moreschi, ; Lynn Lopez, 2015, pers.…”

“…In this paper, we analyse processes of change and adaptation following an extended period of migration flows (1960–2015), in order to understand whether they may: trigger the so‐called “death of communalism” (after Otero, ) in Indigenous Mexican society; enable continued adherence to the communalist ideologies and labour relations that bind these communities together (after Klooster, ; Mutersbaugh, ); or signal a shift away from the traditional fulfilment of service obligations, to a reinvention of identity (see Grieshop, ) and the reimagining of community collectives through reconfigured practices, structures, and institutions. The work contributes to a growing body of literature that reveals the complex nature of the connections between migration and Indigenous collectives—how Indigenous communal life affects the decision to migrate (Mutersbaugh, ); how migration affects the self‐governance ability of Indigenous communities (Robson & Berkes, ; Robson & Wiest, ; VanWey, Tucker, & McConnell, ); how migration changes land use, which creates challenges and opportunities for Indigenous environmental governance and conservation (Klooster, ; Lira et al, ); and what migration means for Indigenous organization and commitment to local, collective projects of autonomy (Curiel, ; Hernández‐Díaz, ; Worthen, ).…”

The end of the rural/urban divide? Migration, proletarianization, differentiation and peasant production in an ejido, Central Mexico

“…In the global South, international circular labour migration and remittances have come to play an important role in peasant livelihoods generating processes of both ‘deactivation’ and ‘repeasantization’ (Sunam & McCarthy, 2016; Nyantakyi‐Frimpong & Bezner Kerr, 2017). While increased migration can be an outcome of agrarian transitions, it is also a driver of transformations in rural areas, influencing changes in terms of access to and use of productive land and water (Kelly, 2011), collective action (Klooster, 2013; Lira, Robson, & Klooster, 2016), territory and culture (Robson, Klooster, Worthen, & Hernández‐Díaz, 2018). In economic terms, remittances and other capital surpluses from labour migration can be invested as agricultural capital in the production process and its transformation (Bebbington & Batterbury, 2001; Gray, 2009a; Gray & Bilsborrow, 2014).…”

Pobreza y hogares receptores de remesas a veinte años del TLCAN: México 2010, 2012 y 2014

“…Prácticamente en los tres años de estudio y en los tres grupos de hogares, la proporción de jefes indígenas se encontraba cercana al 7 por ciento. A pesar del incremento en la migración indígena, este resultado está asociado al mayor grado de marginación y pobreza en que viven este tipo de hogares, lo que hace más difícil que puedan afrontar los altos costos asociados con la migración, especialmente la internacional (Lira et al, 2016).…”