Enabling poor rural people
to overcome poverty



In the summer of 1996, the author conducted a survey of 241 rural households in eight communities in the area covered by two of IFAD’s projects in Guatemala – the Proyecto de Desarrollo Rural para Pequeños Productores en Zacapa y Chiquimula (PROZACHI) (FIDA-251-GM) and the Proyecto de Desarrollo Rural de la Sierra de los Cuchumatanes (PCUCH) (FIDA-296-GM).5

These eight communities6 were selected on the basis of the following criteria: (i) a long period of project presence in each community, (ii) a high degree of household participation in the project activities; (iii) the presence of a representative mix of production systems; and (iv) apparent differences in exposure to food insecurity. Suchiquer, for example, was selected to reflect a subsistence production system characterized by low yields, water scarcity, low income opportunities, high food market dependency, high temporary migration, low assets, poor access to natural resources and high transaction costs. This was named the pure subsistence (PS) production system. San Nicolas was selected to reflect a subsistence production system with food surplus, higher yields and proximity to markets; this was called the surplus subsistence (SS). Tituque was included to reflect a more diversified subsistence system, where traditional food crops are grown together with coffee and bananas; it was referred to as diversified subsistence (DS). On the PCUCH side, Chochal, Torlón, and Chichalum, al located on the slopes of the Cuchumatanes Mountains, were selected to reflect communities where non-traditional agro-exports such as broccoli and cauliflower coexist with the more traditional subsistence production; this group of commodities was called non-traditional exports (or the NTX group). Finally, the communities of Buena Vista and San Martín Capellania, located on the plateau of the Cuchumatanes, were selected to reflect a high-altitude production system, characterized by potato cultivation and small livestock (sheep) raising, and is referred to as the small livestock (or SL group).

In each community, a random sample of households was selected among project beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries alike. The sample was balanced, when possible, to keep the control group of non-beneficiaries to at least 30% of the total number of households selected in each community, and to avoid under-representation. A total of 118 households (77 beneficiaries and 41 non-beneficiaries) were selected in the PCUCH communities and 123 (81 beneficiaries and 42 non-beneficiaries) in the PROZACHI group. The sample, by production system and by the share of beneficiaries in each group is as follows:

Box 2. Survey sample



Beneficiaries

Non-beneficiaries

Total

Non-traditional exports (NTX)
Includes: Chochal, Torlón, Chichalum

32

22

54

Small livestock (SL)
Includes: Buena Vista, San Martín

45

19

64

Pure subsistence (PS)
Includes: Suchiquer

21

15

36

Surplus subsistence (SS)
Includes: San Nicolas

33

10

43

Diversified subsistence (DS)
Includes: Tituque

27

17

44


5/ See Appendix 2 for the maps showing the location and geographical coverage of the two projects.

6/ Three of the communities were in the PROZACHI project area (Suchiquer, San Nicolas and Tituque). The other five (San Martín Capellania, Buena Vista, Chochal, Torlón and Chichalum) were in the PCUCH area.