IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i4d10.1007_s10668-023-04281-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability evaluation of contrasting milpa systems in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos E. González-Esquivel

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • Cecilia Briones-Guzmán

    (Grupo Interdisciplinario de Tecnología Rural Apropiada AC)

  • Eduardo Tovar-López

    (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT))

  • Santiago López-Ridaura

    (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT))

  • Esperanza Arnés

    (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México)

  • Tania Carolina Camacho-Villa

    (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT)
    University of Lincoln)

Abstract

The milpa agroecosystem is an intercropping of maize, beans, squash and other crops, developed in Mesoamerica, and its adoption is widely variable across climates and regions. An example of particular interest is the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, which holds highly diverse milpas, drawing on ancestral Mayan knowledge. Traditional milpas have been described as sustainable resource management models, based on long rotations within a slash-and-burn cycle in forest areas. Nevertheless, due to modernization and intensification processes, new variants of the approach have appeared. The objective of this study was to evaluate the sustainability of three milpa systems (traditional, continuous, and mechanized) in four case studies across the Peninsula, with emphasis on food self-sufficiency, social inclusion and adoption of innovations promoted by a development project. The Framework for the Evaluation of Agroecosystems using Indicators (MESMIS, for its Spanish acronym) was used for its flexible, participatory approach. A common group of indicators was developed despite regional differences between study cases, with a high level of farmer participation throughout the iterative process. The results show lower crop yields in traditional systems, but with lower inputs costs and pesticide use. In contrast, continuous milpas had higher value in terms of crop diversity, food security, social inclusion, and innovation adoption. Mechanized milpas had lower weed control costs. Profitability of cash crops and the proportion of forest were high in all systems. Highly adopted innovations across milpa types and study cases included spatial crop arrangement and the use of residues as mulches. However, most innovations are not adapted to local conditions, and do not address climate change. Further, women and youth participation is low, especially in traditional systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos E. González-Esquivel & Cecilia Briones-Guzmán & Eduardo Tovar-López & Santiago López-Ridaura & Esperanza Arnés & Tania Carolina Camacho-Villa, 2025. "Sustainability evaluation of contrasting milpa systems in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 9233-9255, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:4:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04281-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-04281-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-04281-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-04281-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frédéric Zahm & Philippe Viaux & Lionel Vilain & Philippe Girardin & Christian Mouchet, 2008. "Assessing farm sustainability with the IDEA method - from the concept of agriculture sustainability to case studies on farms," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(4), pages 271-281.
    2. Tomasz B. Falkowski & Adolfo Chankin & Stewart A. W. Diemont & Robert W. Pedian, 2019. "More than just corn and calories: a comprehensive assessment of the yield and nutritional content of a traditional Lacandon Maya milpa," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(2), pages 389-404, April.
    3. Hilary Silver, 2015. "The Contexts of Social Inclusion," Working Papers 144, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    4. Santiago Lopez-Ridaura & Luis Barba-Escoto & Cristian Reyna & Jon Hellin & Bruno Gerard & Mark Wijk, 2019. "Food security and agriculture in the Western Highlands of Guatemala," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(4), pages 817-833, August.
    5. Ivonne Acosta-Alba & Hayo M. G. Van der Werf, 2011. "The Use of Reference Values in Indicator-Based Methods for the Environmental Assessment of Agricultural Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Darmody, Merike & Smyth, Emer, 2018. "The goals and governance of the social inclusion and community activation programme (SICAP) 2015-2017: a mixed methods study," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS68.
    2. Giang N. T. Nguyen & Tapan Sarker, 2018. "Sustainable coffee supply chain management: a case study in Buon Me Thuot City, Daklak, Vietnam," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Michel Juarez & Carlos Dionicio & Neftali Sacuj & Waleska Lopez & Ann C. Miller & Peter Rohloff, 2021. "Community-Based Interventions to Reduce Child Stunting in Rural Guatemala: A Quality Improvement Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-13, January.
    5. Thanh Ngo & Hai‐Dang Nguyen & Huong Ho & Vo‐Kien Nguyen & Thuy T. T. Dao & Hai T. H. Nguyen, 2021. "Assessing the important factors of sustainable agriculture development: An Indicateurs de Durabilité des Exploitations Agricoles‐Analytic Hierarchy Process study in the northern region of Vietnam," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 327-338, March.
    6. Jaume Freire-Gonz lez & Ignasi Puig-Ventosa, 2015. "Energy Efficiency Policies and the Jevons Paradox," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 5(1), pages 69-79.
    7. Gökçe Koç & Ayşe Uzmay, 2024. "Construction of a Farm-Level Food Security Index: Case Study of Turkish Dairy Farms," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 687-714, November.
    8. Inês Costa-Pereira & Ana A. R. M. Aguiar & Fernanda Delgado & Cristina A. Costa, 2024. "A Methodological Framework for Assessing the Agroecological Performance of Farms in Portugal: Integrating TAPE and ACT Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Olaf Erenstein & Moti Jaleta & Kai Sonder & Khondoker Mottaleb & B.M. Prasanna, 2022. "Global maize production, consumption and trade: trends and R&D implications," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(5), pages 1295-1319, October.
    10. Zhang, Can & Su, Bo & Beckmann, Michael & Volk, Martin, 2024. "Emergy-based evaluation of ecosystem services: Progress and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    11. Marcelo Luna & Luciano Barcellos-Paula, 2024. "Structured Equations to Assess the Socioeconomic and Business Factors Influencing the Financial Sustainability of Traditional Amazonian Chakra in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Norman Siebrecht, 2020. "Sustainable Agriculture and Its Implementation Gap—Overcoming Obstacles to Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-27, May.
    13. Amer Ait Sidhoum & K Hervé Dakpo & Laure Latruffe, 2022. "Trade-offs between economic, environmental and social sustainability on farms using a latent class frontier efficiency model: Evidence for Spanish crop farms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Paula Trivino-Tarradas & Manuel R. Gomez-Ariza & Gottlieb Basch & Emilio J. Gonzalez-Sanchez, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of Annual and Permanent Crops: The Inspia Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, January.
    15. Maria G. Lampridi & Claus G. Sørensen & Dionysis Bochtis, 2019. "Agricultural Sustainability: A Review of Concepts and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-27, September.
    16. Galdeano-Gómez, E. & Aznar-Sánchez, J.A. & Pérez-Mesa, J.C. & Piedra-Muñoz, L., 2017. "Exploring Synergies Among Agricultural Sustainability Dimensions: An Empirical Study on Farming System in Almería (Southeast Spain)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 99-109.
    17. Trigo, Ana & Marta-Costa, Ana & Fragoso, Rui, 2023. "Improving sustainability assessment: A context-oriented classification analysis for the wine industry," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    18. Afsaneh Kaghazchi & Seied Mehdy Hashemy Shahdany & Alireza Firoozfar, 2022. "Prioritization of agricultural water distribution operating systems based on the sustainable development indicators," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 23-40, February.
    19. Alessandro Magrini & Francesca Giambona, 2022. "A Composite Indicator to Assess Sustainability of Agriculture in European Union Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1003-1036, October.
    20. Kayla Stajkovic & Alexander D. Stajkovic, 2024. "Ethics of Care Leadership, Racial Inclusion, and Economic Health in the Cities: Is There a Female Leadership Advantage?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(4), pages 699-721, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:4:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04281-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.