Study area

The study area covered 13 municipalities in DDR 005 Fortín, Veracruz, México: Córdoba, Chocamán, Tepatlaxco, Tlaltetela, Comapa, Huatusco, Ixhuatlán del Café, Sochiapa, Tenampa, Tlacotepec de Mejía, Tomatlán,To tutlaand Zentla. Of these municipalities, Comapa, Huatusco, Zentla and Córdoba are the ones with greatest expanse of production units (26 944.02 ha; 18 580.96 ha; 15 631.70 ha and 13 838.79 ha; respectively). The principal land use is Agricultural, Livestock, Industrial and Urban (^{INEGI, 2009}).

Statistical survey and analysis

According to the objective of the study a questionnaire was designed to capture, systematize and analyze the data in a simple, economic and timely manner. The formula by ^{Scheaffer et al. (1987}) generated a sample of approximately 200 coffee producers in the region, from a population of63 635 producers based on the Veracruz coffee producers' census, with a reliability of 95 % and accuracy of 10 %. The size of the sample was calculated in the following way:

where: n: sample size N: population size = 63 635; Mean = 0.792 ha; D: disposition of minimal error = B²/4; B: x- (10%)=0.792 (0.10)=0.0792 ha; s ² : exploratory variance =0.55² ha²

Then, once the formula is substituted, it was as follows:

Considering financial aspects, and because the variability of the information was reduced in function of the increase of field information, it was decided to interview 145 producers. The decision corresponds to the suggestion by ^{Scheaffer et al. (1987}) that their models are built with 95 % confidence.

The questionnaire included open and closed questions; it was applied during the months of June to December 2014, for which there was a need to train pollsters.

Specifically, the typification was built on the basis of information from ^{CEPAL (1989)}. Four basic variables were considered, which are: percentage of capitalized income (investment), percentage of family work without payment, percentage of auto-consumed production value, and technological level. The ECLAC (^{CEPAL, 1989}) proposes this typology for maize cultivation, and for the purpose of this typology, coffee is mostly cultivated with the aim of commercialization and not consumption, which is why the basic variable of auto-consumption was substituted by that of surface and the number of paid cutters substituted unpaid family work, because in coffee cultivation cutting includes one of the most important activities within the production process.

Definition of variables

Capitalized Income Variable. It is the incoming money from selling coffee minus the money used in household and plantation expenses. The expenditure on the household was calculated through the sum of the percentage between expenses in food, health, education and infrastructure of the household. The total expenditure in the plantation was calculated through the sum of expenses in fertilization, cleaning, pruning, resowing, cutting and payment for product transport, and it is calculated in pesos.

Then, the variable Capitalized Income was calculated through the equation:

IС = IT - GV + GF

where IT: Total Income, GV. Household Expenses, GF: Plantation Expenses.

Technological Index Variable. It was obtained from the sum of the practices carried out of cleaning, fertilization, digging holes, pruning, shade regulation, soil conservation practices, and sale. For its calculation, the following equation was considered:

IT = LI + FE + AH + PO + RS + PCS + VE

where Cleaning (LI): weeding with machete, with mattock, with weeding machine, and with liquid. Fertilization (FE): organic, chemical and lime. Digging holes (AH): hole-digger, driller, claw, tlalacha, digger, pick, hoe, shovel, spade, and digging stick. Pruning (PO): machete, chainsaw, serrote, scissors and hook. Shade regulation (RS): planting trees, pruning, knocking down dry trees, tree felling, inga jinicuil sowing, and grow on their own. Soil conservation practices (PCS): weeding not at level, sowing cane grass, not using chemicals, not using hoe, scarce liquid, live fences, reforestation and picking up inorganic garbage. Sale (VE): dust, parchment, dry and cherry

Each one of the forms in which each practice is performed was assigned a "Yes", if the activity was carried out and a "No", if it was not carried out. Yes = 2 and No = 1.

Coffee Surface Variable. It is the number of hectares (ha) that the producer destines to producing coffee.

Number of Paid Cutters Variable. It was calculated through the total number of cutters, minus those without payment.

Variables of second order were also used to characterize and typify the producers: land ownership, material from roof to household, number of economic activities, years of experience with the crop, practice of the traditional "widow", reasons to produce coffee, willingness to abandon coffee cultivation, and changes in management of their coffee producing agroecosystems. Data analysis consisted in descriptive analysis, variance analysis, and frequency tables. It was performed with the software Statistica Version 7.1.

Socioeconomic characteristics

In the DDR 005 of Fortín, Veracruz, among the coffee producers interviewed, 84.13 % are men and 15.86 % are women. The average age of the coffee producers is 53 years. According to ^{Hernández (2006}), ^{Escamilla et al. (2005}; ²⁰¹²) and ^{Benítez-García et al. (2015}), the age of the coffee producer is between 49 and 56 years. The mature age of these people is considered a limitation to transmit the favorable aspects of a practice or technique, which makes them more attached to their traditional methods, which is why producers in the study zone are not willing to change the way in which they produce their coffee. These results coincide with those obtained by ^{Ortega et al. (2010}), who found that 92 % of their interview respondents were not willing to change crop despite the low prices that the aromatic presents.

On the other hand, schooling of interview respondents is of basic level. The mean is 5-64 years. This piece of data coincides with ^{Benítez-García et al. (2015}), who reported a mean of 5-6 years for coffee producers of the state of Puebla. Even in the region studied, some of the interview respondents do not have any degree of schooling. However, they consider that this is not an obstacle to manage better their coffee producing agroecosystem. In fact, some mentioned that the level of study does not help them to improve their production, which is why having studied they would be carrying out activities that professionals do.

The producers of this District have an average yield of 4.04 t ha^-1; the ones that harvest most are those from the municipality of Tomatlán with 5-87 t ha^-1, followed by those from Córdoba and Huatusco (5-24 and 5-19 t ha^-1, respectively). Producers from the municipality of Tlaltetela are the ones that have lowest yields (2.61 t ha^-1); however, the yield of the latter is higher than the 2.02 t há¹־ that ^{SIAP (2013)} reports for this District and the national average, of 1.92 tons per hectare. The differences between production and yield of coffee plantations depends, in addition to the weather, on the technological level, as well as the type, form of application of their agricultural practices and scale of production (^{Castillo, 2013}).

Of these producers, 97-24 % sell their coffee in cherry and of this percentage, 6.20 % also sell it in parchment or dry ^{Martinez (2012}) mentions that these actions cause for producers to remain at the mercy of the transnational trading companies implemented in the region, with AMSA and NESTLÉ being the large hoarders, to which Martinez (2012) attributes the instability in coffee prices, because the sale to reach these is carried out through local intermediaries.

Types of producers

In this District, three types of producers were identified: subsistence, transitional and entrepreneurial, based on the analysis of conglomerates, and variance analyses were applied later.

In this way, analyzing the variable "capitalized income" statistical differences were found between the three types of producers identified (p = 0.00001) (Figure 1); the subsistence ones with capitalized income below 30 000 pesos in the cycle, the transitional with 30 000 to 110 000 pesos, and the entrepreneurial with 110 000 pesos and more, with the entrepreneurial being the ones with greatest access to capitalizing their income, results that coincide with ^{Bacon and Guharay (2011}) and ^{Rizzo (2012}) by indicating that these producers have enough income to capitalize, contrary to the subsistence ones, whose income is barely enough to afford their basic needs.

Figure 1 Types of coffee producers per capitalized income. 

Although ^{Bacon and Guharay (2011}) and ^{Rizzo (2012}) contribute a typology of producers, they only identify those of entrepreneurial and subsistence type in it, placing entrepreneurial agriculture as the one directed at the market, such as monoculture with use of agrochemicals and synthetic insecticides for pests. These typologies are important in the analysis; however, they differ in stratum because they only classify two types of producers, contrary to this study which contributes a further stratum, the transitional type, which are subsistence producers on the pathway to entrepreneurship or, in contrast, returning to subsistence.

When analyzing the "technological level" variable significant differences are also observed (p = 0.00001). Those of subsistence type present lower technological level than those of transitional and entrepreneurial type (Figure 2), which is reflected in the type of tools they use to carry out management practices in their coffee plantations. At some point in México this technification of coffee plantations was promoted through agrarian policies and institutions like INMECAFE with the objective of driving productivity making use of external inputs, such as specialized or genetically modified varieties, like monocrops, application of inorganic fertilizers, etc., which in turn produced drastic changes in the nature of the crop. The technological level of each producer can be related to factors such as yield per hectare and the extension of the surface used; however, when the production areas are larger, modern technology is used, with entrepreneurial mentality, value is added for the product and competitiveness is improved, always seeking higher profitability (^{Salinas, 2004}; ^{Benítez-García et al, 2015}).

Figure 2 Type of producers per technological level. 

On the other hand, when analyzing the variable "surface of coffee", three types of producers were also obtained: subsistence (less than 5 ha), transitional (six to 20 ha), and entrepreneurial (21 to 63 ha); significant statistical differences were found between them (p = 00.00001) (Figure 3). ^{Macip (2007}) mentions that producers of the lowest level have small cultivation lands farmed by themselves and only hire workforce few times during sowing and harvesting time; likewise, they tend to sell their labor during the period of "dead work", that is, on those days when their land does not demand much labor, contrary to what happens with those of higher level (entrepreneurial). ^{Damián et al. (2011}) reported that maize producers with larger surface use better technology and, therefore, generate higher yield.

Figure 3 Type of producer per coffee surface. 

When analyzing the variable "paid cutters", in the same way, significant differences are observed (p = 00.00001) between subsistence, transitional and entrepreneurial producers (Figure 4). The harvesting phase is the one that requires greater demand of workers; however, it is slow and originates greater family cohabitation (^{Vázquez, 2010}). For this purpose, producers of entrepreneurial type hire a higher number of cutters (30 to 150) than those of subsistence type (0 to 11), locating the transitional type between these two types. According to the opinions of the interview respondents, qualified labor has shown reductions because it has been substituted by machinery; just in cleaning practices, when weeding used to be done with machete, now the weeding machine is used, with which the work is made more efficient.

Figure 4 Type of producer per number of paid cutters. 

^{Rodriguez and Castro (2012}) mention that in order to avoid this substitution of unqualified work by machines, it is necessary for the cost of unqualified labor expressed in efficiency units not to exceed the cost of capital, which in recent decades has shown a permanent reduction, since the greater use of technology and its complementarity with qualified work have an influence on the productivity of this type of labor when it is decreased in the cultivation practices.

The distribution of these three types of coffee producers in the DDR 005 Fortín takes place in the following way: in the municipalities of Huatusco, Totutla and Comapa we find the highest percentage of coffee producers of entrepreneurial type (six, four and four producers, respectively), and in municipalities like Totutla, Comapa and Tenampa the highest number of subsistence producers are found (29, 13 and 12 producers, respectively). In their turn, those of transitional type are located in Totutla and Comapa (eight and seven, respectively) (Table 1). In addition, it was observed that most of the producers of entrepreneurial type are descendants from Italian or German migrants; ^{Tarrio and Concheiro (2006}) confirmed this, when reporting that since 1927 there was a high percentage of the population that was descendant of migrants in Huatusco and Zentla, where 73-4 % of the plantation owners devoted to coffee production were foreigners, with 34 % of them being German.

Types of coffee producers according to sociocultural aspects in the DDR 005 Fortín, Veracruz, México

The variety of productive practices in plantations are related to the specific modes of conceiving coffee, where the forms of thought and practice have been building socially within the framework of a historical-social, local and regional, context from the experience and position of producers in the productive chain (^{Ejea, 2009}). The appropriation of the coffee crop has generated a great wealth of knowledge and adaptations for its management that are important to be valued (^{Bolaños and González, 2008}). All economic and productive practice, such as cultivating coffee and organizing work around it, implicitly implies a cultural dimension, understood as an allocation of meaning. Thanks to this culture, peasants incorporate coffee into their social and productive life in various ways, not just in a single one, even when it is small-scale producers who share similar production conditions, which is why it is important to be positioned in the local dynamics, those of each town within the region, and in the relationship that the producers and their families establish with the product (^{Ejea, 2009})·

Given this, a variable included within traditional practices that coffee producers conserve in their plantations is analyzed, the traditional "widow", which consists of a meal that the producer offers his cutters at the end of the harvesting season; this is used as a way of thanking and generating coexistence between family members, workers and everyone who participates in the production process, primarily during the cutting phase. Table 2 shows that it is entrepreneurial producers who conserve and practice this tradition most, and the subsistence ones who practice it less. According to the how the type of producer ascends, so does the percentage of number of producers who carry out this practice. This explains that most of the subsistence producers have small plots to cultivate coffee and do not hire a greater percentage of paid labor, and in fact sometimes they do not, and the people who support the producer are mostly relatives who do not receive any pay for their activities.

With regard to the cultural strength of coffee cultivation per type (subsistence, transitional and entrepreneurial), the percentages of those who would be willing to cease producing coffee and the ones who would not are somewhat similar (Yes = 78.57 %, 70 %, 76.47 %; N0=21.43 %, 30 %, 23.53 %) (Table 2). These results lead to defining that the type of producer does not matter in the preservation of the coffee producing culture, which, as ^{Ortega et al. (2010}) mention, continues to be rooted among their generations. These producers mentioned that they are willing to stop producing the aromatic species, with the condition of having the alternative of another crop that generates higher economic income. A percentage of 23-45 % manifested not abandoning the crop despite the bad situations present, such as low prices, because they cultivate it more because of the tradition inherited from their parents and because of the joy of it than in order to obtain economic profit, so that the generation of financial income is not the most important element for them. ^{Ortega et al. (2010)} found that 92 % of the coffee producers interviewed in Huehuetla, Puebla, would continue to be devoted to coffee production, regardless of the grain prices. Facing the possibility of these changes taking place or not, ^{Perea and Rivas (2008}) explain and make evident the difficulty in convincing people of it when they have grown accustomed to a certain lifestyle that allows them to solve their problems.

Similarly, more than 60 % of the producers interviewed are in favor of receiving training for the management of their coffee plantations; they consider this training as a benefit for their production, insofar as the person who offers it can show experience and higher capacities than theirs. Training for producers in México is offered in 70.8 % by technicians, 17-7 % by producers, 2.8 % by academic and research institutions, and 1.5 % by firms (^{Cuevas et al, 2012}). However, the same authors state that the coverage of technical assistance is low; 3 % of the national total of production units with agricultural and livestock activity have this service. Despite this deficiency, at the sector level, agriculture has a higher coverage of technical assistance (75 %), compared to the livestock sector, with 19-3 %, to the forestry sector with 3-2 %, and 2.5 % for another sector.

On the other hand, land ownership of subsistence coffee producers happens in the following percentages: 1.03 % rented, 26'53 % ejidal, 60.20 % private, 2.04 % private-federal, and 10.20 % private-ejidal.

For the transitional type, 6.67 % is ejidal; 80 %, private; 3-33 %, private-rented; and 10 %, private-ejidal. For the entrepreneurial type, 0.69 % is rented; 5-19 %, ejidal; and 94.12 %, private. Given this, it is observed that producers of the entrepreneurial type are the ones that have more private lands and that subsistence producers are the ones that have more land of ejidal type. ^{Tarrio and Concheiro (2006}) mention that the ejidatarios are product of land endowment given to the peasant population in the country, as a result of the 1910 Revolution. However, ^{Ibarra and Morales (1999}) do not find differences between these types of land ownership; they say that most of the private owners are in an economic and social situation equal to or more unfavorable than communal ejidatarios; however, the perception of this last type in this study was opposite to what these authors mention, finding a lower quality of life in producers with lands of ejidal type than those with private lands, outstanding aspect, for example, in the type of housing they have and some other material goods such as cars and businesses.