Axis 1. Territorial anchoring of products

The differentiated products that are made in Rural Agroindustries that belong to a SIAL are characterized by their territorial anchoring. This means that the production is carried out exclusively in defined geographical spaces. This link happens, to a great extent, because of the effect that the territorial environmental conditions produce on the processing variables. Likewise, due to the particularities that tradition incorporates into food, to the degree that producers have transmitted the knowledge associated to the elaboration techniques (knowhow) throughout the generations. In this regard, it must be considered that the knowhow process, or learning by doing, has to do with the increase in the efficacy of production factors that occurs as a result of a continuous and historical learning process, consequence of intergenerational practice (^{Sanz Cañada, 2014}; ^{IICA, 2013}).

Axis 2. Collective action in the territory

Collective action is the means that allows detonating the activation of territorial resources and the use of exogenous resources, with the aim of increasing the competitiveness of the AIRs and of the multisectorial and multifunctional activities with which they are linked.

The capacities of producers, the support of their family members, the levels of trust, interaction, cooperation and organization between actors, and the institutional participation for the generation of clear action rules in the territorial processes are indispensable for activation processes to take place (^{Boucher, 2007}).

Axis 3. Link between the quality of the product and the territory

An aspect that should be permanently confirmed is the relationship between the territory and the quality of the product, insofar as this is where the management of qualification and certification processes takes on great importance. In this sense, while the first is associated to the analysis of characteristics of the product and establishes guidelines for its production, the second has the purpose of labeling, which is indispensable in markets of monopolistic competition, especially at the time of establishing benefits over differentiation and added value for the producer, as well as authenticity guarantees for the consumer (^{Vandecandelaere et al., 2010}).

Axis 4. Constitution and conservation of territorial patrimony

The dietary heritage also occupies an important place in the SIAL; therefore, the historical recognition and symbolic value that agrifood products have from residents of the territory turn out to be defining (^{Giménez, 2000}).

The conservation of territorial patrimony becomes a strategy for community reproduction to the extent that this is expressed, in some territories, as a special added value when it incorporates “…knowhow that has been transferred from generation to generation; this aspect […grants…] it a special symbolic value which is recognized by the inhabitants of the territory, reaching the point of making it part of its cultural heritage” (^{Grass Ramírez and Aguilar Ávila, 2013}).

Instruments proposed to improve the SIAL methodological approach

The instruments should have the potential to identify the territorial anchoring of products and their degree of appraisal, to recognize the processes of knowhow transmission in the communities, to understand the way in which the relationships between actors and institutions are consolidated to establish networks and the way that the assurance of the quality of local products is managed, and to guarantee their specificity to the territory and their authenticity and originality as attributes for the consumer. The use of these instruments must be carried out according to the information that each axis demands, and the capacity of interaction there is with the others to respond in an integral way to the objective of the SIAL.

Figure 1 presents, in the first place, the four theoretical axes that make up the SIAL (territorial anchoring, collective action, link between quality and territory, and constitution and conservation of territorial patrimony), and then shows the methodological instruments suggested to obtain information required by each axis (Oral History, Genealogical Method, Technological Trajectory, Qualification and Certification of Products, Network Analysis, and Agrifood Chain Analysis).

Source: authors’ elaboration, 2013.

Figure 1 Relationship between theoretical axes and instruments proposed to improve the SIAL approach. 

The methodological instruments suggested are detailed next.

Oral History

This instrument seeks to support the SIAL in the determination of appraisal of products and local resources. The patrimony is defined as the heritage of material and immaterial goods that our parents have left us throughout the local history and which forge the identity of a territory in the present (^{Geertz, 1996}). Its inclusion demands a historical recognition of the geographical space which is the study object. Unfortunately, local history has tended to be researched and written under the terms that national or regional politics of a country mark; social history is used much less to explain the circumstances that surround the development of technology or science, aspects which are all directly involved in the study of territorial agroindustry systems.

It demands, then, the construction of the territorial history by the researcher. In this sense, oral history offers a dynamic and simple alternative for scientist to identify the symbolic value that some products have for residents and how they are considered a legacy from our ancestors (^{Hinojosa Luján, 2013}). The main resources of oral history are, in consequence, the memories and the account that the subject makes for the researcher when the latter interviews him/her and carries out a series of questions about the affinity that has been present, throughout time, between the agrifood products and their territory, so that the degree of appraisal can be evidenced (^{Mariezkurrena Iturmendi, 2008}).

The in-depth interview is the principal means through which the researcher can reconstruct the history that links the inhabitants and the products with their geographic space. However, there is also the alternative of the collective interview; in it, a dialogue of experiences it is sought to be produced between the researcher and a group of people that belong to the same community. Through it, the perspective of the collective (community) about a specific issue is recognized.

In the particular case of SIAL, this instrument must recognize the historical context that allowed the rise of the agrifood products, highlighting approximate dates, sites and communities that participated in the process. Later, the research must evolve into schemes that allow identifying the way in which products acquired their symbolic value through time, recognizing their influence on gastronomy, cultural events and other events of local importance, until finally reaching the current moments where the patrimonial value that was built from the history of the product in the territory is consolidated (^{Grass Ramírez et al., 2012}).

Genealogical Method

The knowhow that is transmitted through generations constitutes part of the intangible patrimony of the territory; as consequence, it is an element of relevance in the SIAL approach. The study of the kinship relationships can be done through the application of interviews, as ^{Rivers (1910)} suggests in his definition of the Genealogical Method, or using the genealogical survey under the perspective suggested by ^{Héritier (1981)}. The possibility of systematizing the surveys and evolving towards a quantitative analysis determines the main differentiating element.

In practice, the genealogical study is carried out through the application of the instrument (survey or interview) to a single actor (company, person) or to one or more families, with the goal of collecting information about its members (both ancestors and descendants) around the central subject being studied. This information is systematized and represented graphically in a document called Genealogy; in it, the way in which certain knowhow is transmitted can be recognized through the individuals that have kinship in common, and in addition, it provides the possibility of analyzing the information collected at the quantitative and qualitative levels.

The elaboration of genealogies can be done through a direct interview with the members of families that are the study object, with the aim of gathering their perception regarding the way in which knowledge associated to the elaboration of agrifood products has managed to evolve through the family structure, to identify which causes derived into rupture (or also, technological changes) of the transmission process of knowhow or certain type of productive or technical tradition. Another alternative consists in inquiring with people outside the family, with the purpose of collecting elements that are private or which were not directly considered.

In the particular case of SIAL, this instrument must recognize the way in which knowledge passed through the generations, the way in which inhabitants teach and learn the techniques for product elaboration, and the factors that have stimulated or limited these processes.

Technological Trajectory

With this instrument, it is sought to identify the innovations that the productive units have incorporated through time. The technological adoptions are supported by entrepreneurial strategies that seek to improve competitiveness, to adjust the demands of the market and to comply with the current regulation. In this regard, ^{Jasso (2004)} indicates that the technological trajectory has been broadly used for the analysis of innovation, because it is a component that is related to the life cycle of companies and technological development, with this being a complex and growing process that is not composed solely of the technological dimension, but rather is expressed also in the constitution of the market and the production systems.

In it, an analytical-conceptual approach is developed to capture relationships, processes and technological and socio-technical trajectories, and sustained on concepts created from two disciplinary matrices. The first is based on the Economy of Technological Change, which allows them to analyze the learning processes as the result of various technological trajectories (^{Pérez, 2001}). The second takes up again the suggestions set out by Sociology of Technology, and therefore, explores aspects such as the socio-technical trajectories, the problem-solution dynamics, and the socio-technical working styles (^{Pacheco, 2013}).

In the particular case of SIAL, the technological trajectory allows verifying the degree of persistence of the “technological tradition” in the elaboration of the agrifood products through the valuation of the effects that innovations have had throughout time in the preservation or loss of their authenticity.

Qualification and Certification of Products

It is based on the territorial anchoring, especially in the particularities of the territory that can be transformed into features of the agrifood products. As a result, the foods attain a quality associated to the territory that must be evaluated (Qualification), and taken advantage of to generate labels (Certification). This process leads to a qualitative and quantitative distinction of foods between those that are generic and those that are specific to the territory (^{Grass et al., 2012}).

The first can be found in several localities, while the specific ones are territorially anchored, so that the latter have competitive potential through strategies of differentiation and it is in them where the SIAL approach is pertinent. The qualification requires identifying the characteristics of the product, which in addition to coming from the territory, transfer elements of distinction to it with regard to their similar ones (^{Vandecandelaere et al., 2010}).

In turn, certification seeks to credit the link between quality and territory. For this, labeling strategies are negotiated which are associated to Geographic Indicators (GI), such as the Collective Brand (CB) or the Denomination of Origin (DO). This process is found in the community organization and institutional support, resources that are indispensable to confirm the territorial link of foods. Clearly fixing the regulations that each country has to credit this type of product is also defining, as well as the transparency and agility in the procedures that allow consolidating the processes (^{Boucher and Reyes, 2013}).

^{Bowen and Valenzuela (2009)} recognize that the certification is a labeling mechanism in markets of monopolistic competition, so benefits associated with the differentiation of producers compared to the rest of makers that are part of the community, are produced; therefore, this is an element that guarantees the territory-quality link and which derives into safety and satisfaction for the consumer.

Qualification and certification also incorporate some risks associated to imitations and adulteration of the original process, and the concentration of benefits in a few actors throughout the chain; thus, also, when participating in more demanding markets, select and small, there must be high capacity of reaction in face of market trends.

Network Analysis

The trust, interaction, cooperation and associative processes between residents of a territory, in addition to a greater presence and institutional management, sustain one of the defining elements of the SIAL approach, such as collective action.

Its importance derives from its capacity to activate local resources and take advantage of the external ones, which is of great relevance to increase the competitiveness of rural agroindustries and multisectorial and multifunctional activities that integrate the basked of products and services.

The application of network analysis is of great value, since it makes the visibility of the links established between the different actors and institutions in a territory possible. This resource is constructed from the knowledge of the lattice of relationships (social, technical and commercial) that are created between actors (people and institutions) (^{Castañeda Martínez et al., 2012}).

Therefore, the analysis unit in the network approach is not the individual, but rather the network of links. Network theory offers a concrete idea of the landscapes of relationships in a territory; it corresponds to a series of lines bound by points where the last ones are the nodes or study units (people, groups, institutions), and the lines are the interactions between them. For the network analysis, the central element would not be, necessarily, the different nexus that connect individuals among themselves, but rather the way in which these are consolidated and transformed into relationships “that connect social positions” (^{Herrero, 2000}).

The data can be obtained from surveys or interviews and through observation. In the first case, the questions are designed to test the type of relationship that is of interest (social, technical or commercial), so that the presence of contacts, businesses, links and other types of nexus can be confirmed, which may exist between the units.

In the case of SIAL, it is of interest to understand the links there are between residents of a territory to transfer the knowhow related to the techniques for the elaboration of traditional products, and the exchange of prime materials and inputs between producers, to share information about market trends, credit options and innovation processes, among many others. From the information gathered, the study of the network is carried out; this process requires labeling each informant and the actors who have links with him/her to later classify them in form of matrix or text (^{IICA, 2013}).

Once the information is available, a specialized software for network analysis is used (for example, UCINET) to graph the network, generate indicators to perform its analysis and to elaborate proposals geared towards consolidating the links between actors. This last aspect is of great importance in the case of the SIAL to strengthen the structural collective action and, from it, to design strategies that allow taking advantage of territorial resources.

Analysis of Agroindustrial Chains

Many of the studies with the SIAL approach use the Analysis of Agroindustrial Chains as a methodological basis. This aspect allows characterizing each one of the links that make up the chain, recognizing the way in which they function and identifying the links there are between actors and the various elements that integrate it. Also, it is an effective way to analyze the levels of competitiveness of each link and of the chain as a whole; indeed, it is a means to measure the effect of public policies within the territorial context (^{Cuevas et al., 2004}).

Although this instrument allows obtaining extensive information about the functioning of the chain, unfortunately when it is used as the sole alternative, it robs attention from several of the theoretical axes.

^{Machado (1998)} and ^{Machado Cartagena et al. (2000)} state that the analysis of agroindustrial chains must contemplate vital elements such as the understanding of the structure, functioning and set relationships of the group of actors, and the activities related with the product. The importance of this resource to recognize market failures and to value the competitiveness of chains also stands out.

To gather the information, surveys, interviews and participative diagnosis instruments must be used, with the aim of characterizing the links of the chain and the connections between them. More detailed studies make it mandatory to stratify the actors based on reference variables; for example, the volumes of production, technological level, location and type of chain that they are connected to.

The information from each link is divided into quantitative and qualitative. The first seeks to detail aspects such as the size of the production units, the age of the producer, and the years of study of the actors, among others. The information that is related to the operation costs, income, profits and degree of competitiveness is also relevant. The qualitative part is directed at discovering the links there are between the actors that make up the chain, which allow understanding the problems, information asymmetries, impacts of public policies and institutional presence.

Recognition of the theoretical axes and selection of the methodological instruments for support

The first thing is to recognize the theoretical axes that define this approach: territorial anchoring, collective action, link between quality and territory, and construction and conservation of the territorial patrimony. Then, a partial or total selection of the set of support methods must be done: oral history, genealogical method, technological trajectory, network analysis, qualification and certification of products, and analysis of agroindustrial chains.

Application of instruments selected and diagnosis of territorial resources

The application of methodological support instruments allows bringing together information to evaluate collective action and the potential of territorial resources that it is possible to activate. Therefore, they are a means to validate the real possibilities for progressing from a concentration of rural agroindustries to a context of consolidation of the localized agrifood system.

In this manner, the basic information to be generated must stem, in the first place, from the degree in which customs for food elaboration are conserved, as well as from being able to identify the existing potential for their qualification and certification, and the levels of trust, interaction, cooperation and organization that there are between actors and institutions. Likewise, determining the level of appraisal of the resources and the products that sustain the level of productivity in the AIR is required. Another factor to be highlighted is the competitiveness in these, and the understanding of multisectorial and multifunctional activities that are related to them. In sum, all the previous aspects that allow making a diagnosis must be considered.

Elaboration of strategies for the activation of territorial resources

The formulation of strategies seeks to bring the reality of the territory closer to the expectations of the SIAL approach; that is, it attempts to develop a valuation of the territorial resources and to locate the increase in competitiveness of the AIRs, through an activation process.

To carry out the activation strategies, it is fundamental to reinforce structural collective action. For this purpose, there is a need to encourage the development of producers’ abilities, the participation of family members, the formation of leaders, as well as to improve the levels of communication among actors and institutions and to secure organizational processes in the communities.

SIAL Activation

Taking the strategies all the way to their use in the SIAL’s activation process demands several factors; among them, the aptitude for management of the community and institutions stands out, as well as identifying the duties of actors and having the funds to finance the process. Here, the value of collective action and funding are reiterated as vital factors to secure the strategies. The spaces where the State must participate to stimulate the local development of the AIRs are also made evident, and the strategies that can be channeled to design public policies that promote local improvement are defined (^{IICA, 2013}).

Evaluation and feedback

Changes in the market, processes of innovation and fears that constant changes of policies and regulatory frameworks produce require a constant process of evaluation and feedback from the SIAL. The first has to be performed in an ex-ante and ex-post manner to the activation of resources, and should allow the participation of various actors in these processes. In addition, indicators will need to be designed that make it possible to measure the advance and integrate mechanisms of systematization of experiences that allow constant feedback.

The SIAL consolidation must manage to combine two aspects that seem contradictory. On the one hand, to foster the care of territorial patrimony, and, on the other, to select those innovations that allow them, without detriment to the territorial anchoring, to adjust to the requirements that the market demands, the technological developments, the public policies, and the current regulations.