Agriculture and livestock economy in the context of aged people

There are two relevant socioeconomic implications of the ageing process: on the one hand, the decrease in workforce occupied in agriculture, with its possible productive impacts; on the other hand, the increase in the load of economic dependents in rural families³ (^{FAO, 2014}; ^{Yúnez-Naude and Mora-Rivera, 2010}), unchaining social effects. The possible consequences of this situation are accentuating the levels of precariousness of senior citizens and affecting the production generated by this age group.

Land is one of the main factors of agricultural and livestock production and part of this productive factor is found primarily in the ownership of producers in transition to the old age stage. Of the 29 million hectares of the national territory, 49.6 % are devoted to agricultural activity (^{FAO-SAGARPA, 2012}), property of producers between 49 and 65 years of age, while scarcely 3 % of agricultural lands belong to the younger producers, between 14 and 31 years of age⁴. The differences between these age groups are also found in the average land extension for each producer. The young ones have 3.5 ha in average, in contrast with their opposites who have 6 ha in average.

The volume of agricultural production is not always directly proportional to the size of the surface on which it is produced. The calculations performed⁵, however, indicate that the production of certain basic grains and legumes by age stratum of the producers tends to respond to the size of the surface cultivated. Those who are older than 49 years generated between 58 % and 70 % of the volume and value of maize, sorghum, bean, and wheat. It stands out that 35 % of the total production of wheat, bean and sorghum, and of its value, was produced by farmers between 49 and 65 years of age⁶.

The increase in life expectancy provides the possibility of more generations of families coexisting around the producer, originating the fragmentation of plots, but also that the lands remain in the hands of aged producers for longer, as their sole family patrimony to face the needs of this stage of life (^{Warman, 2003}). Land transference is key in the life strategy of producers once their physical condition makes it impossible to continue working and developing their economic activities. Therefore they opt for the temporary and non-definitive transference of lands to the next generation, potential receptors of property rights, with which they seek to maintain their property rights and benefit from their exploitation indirectly.

Share-cropping and rent as forms of temporary transference of cultivation lands are the means by which aged men and women continue to benefit, primarily in the cases when they cannot perform or supervise the work carried out in the lands, they are occupied in economic activities outside of the farm or have economic restrictions (^{Colin, 1997}; ^{Robles, 2005}).

In share-cropping the land owner can participate or not in the production process and payment of the usufruct from the land is proportional to the harvest, which, according to the agreement established, can be in half, a third, a fourth, etc. (^{Colin, 1997}; ^{Robles, 2005}). Share-cropping is usually carried out among the members of the same family. ^{Colin (1997)} found that four out of every ten of the cases studied in Oaxaca resorted to this form of land exploitation.

Land leasing or renting is specified, generally, as a contract that establishes the agreement between the parties involved within the legal framework (^{Robles, 2005}). In practice, this contract can be formal or informal; in the latter case, when there is trust between the parties and the land, the rental is through “verbal” agreement. The amount paid for the usufruct from the land is generally annual and established at the beginning of the agreement.

Between share-cropping and land leasing, there is a difference that could influence in one of the producers leaning more towards one or the other. In the first form of land transference, both parties share the risk in the production up to a certain level; therefore, the exact amount of payment is not known until the moment of harvesting, while in leasing the retribution is independent of the results.

Characteristics of the producers

The results obtained when applying the Correspondence Analysis to the sample, as previous step to the Conglomerate Analysis, conclude (with a p<0.05 value) that the producers who do not transfer their lands have statistically significant characteristics that confirm their differences with regards to those who do. The results also indicate that the second dimension contributes with 92.3 % to the total inertia, which is a measure similar to the total variation in the case of principal components. Two clearly defined groups are formed, one by the producers who work their lands themselves and the other by those who transfer them temporarily (Figure 1).

Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from the field research.

Figure 1 Producers Dendrogram. 

The conglomerate analysis was performed with the aim of validating the objectivity of the segmentation and of ratifying the groups mentioned.

It is estimated that 38.5 % of the producers from the sample takes advantage indirectly of their lands by transferring them provisionally to third parties; the rest continues developing the agricultural activity.

From the approach of the variable of chronological age, the producers who transfer their lands temporarily to third parties are older than those who continue farming their lands on their own (t=-2.015, p<0.05). Those who do not eventually transfer their asset are 70 years of age in average compared to their peers who do; for these, the median age is 74 years and up to 80 years (Table 1).

From a gender perspective, it is women who mostly do not farm their lands directly on their own (91.3 % of them).

Agricultural and livestock producers of 60 years and more remain farming their lands until their physical conditions allow them. This is shown by the direct relation there is between number of producers who transfer their lands for farming and those who mentioned being sick (Rho=0.310, p< 0.05). It should be mentioned, however, that 20.38 % of the total producers pointed out not being ill, but did decide to transfer their lands for some time.

The average schooling of producers is five years, without there being statistically significant differences between those who transfer their lands and those who continue farming them on their own (t=0.235, p<0.05). The behavior is similar with regards to the average size of land surface that these two groups have χ²=5.529, p<0.05).

Mechanism of land transference

In the temporary transference of lands there are two actors: one, the owner of the asset, who is the one who transfers land, and another, the land receptor.

The main mechanism of temporary transference of land practiced by the producers interviewed was loaning, with 43 %. In other forms share-cropping was carried out by 20 % of the total producers and the rent was chosen by 37 %.

There are differences in form and content in the operation of the leasing, share-cropping and loan of land. When the producer chooses to rent his asset, he allows temporarily the usufruct and administration of land of his ownership, for an annual amount of money that is fixed by the parties. In the case of transference by share-cropping, the producer receives a percentage of the production generated in the land, previously agreed upon. Additionally, in this case the producer allows the share-cropper to exploit his land, but in the administration of this resource the owner can intervene in the decision regarding the crop to be sown. In contrast, when the producer chooses to lend his asset, he generally does not establish a monetary agreement or about the amount of production that the owner should receive; in this case there may also be an implicit or explicit agreement with regards to intervening or not in the administration of the plot.

The transference of lands via loan is carried out preferably by women owners; 52.17 % of their total. Another characteristic is that the women producers pass their lands temporarily only to family members, primarily their sons. The trend of transferring to family members was also present in the cases of share-cropping, in 71.4 % of the total of this modality. On the contrary, in land leasing, 84.6 % of the producers who use this modality rent their lands to people with whom there is no family relation.

The meaning of land transference to family members, whether the owners of the land live alone or with those family members, is reflected in the need of the owner to maintain or strengthen their support network and with the expectation of family members participating in the payment of services for the household or family care.

What causes producers to transfer their lands?

In contrast with other economic activities, in agriculture people involved withdraw gradually from field work. The circumstances that force producers to stop farming their lands and eventually transfer them to third parties are related primarily to health, economy and life strategies of the family.

The main cause that motivates producers to leave the temporary farming of their lands in the hands of third parties is their health decline (52 % of the total interviewed). Health deterioration of producers is not only associated to ageing, but also to accidents that limit their mobility, which forces them to put in charge of other people the farming of their plots.

Another cause for the transfers is related to the imbalance between the income obtained from land production and the production costs of the agricultural activity. Of the producers, 17 % who transfer their lands temporarily do it to reduce the costs related to the use of agricultural tools and 20 % to avoid costs in inputs and agricultural tools.

The rest of the producers who transfer their lands consider this mechanism to be a life strategy and a way of continuing the existence of the production unit. The production obtained in the land transferred can be devoted to covering the dietary needs of members of the owner producer’s family and of whoever carries out the production in the land transferred; it is also destined as an input for the production of backyard animals such as birds and other small livestock (Figure 2).

Source: Authors’ elaboration with field research data.

Figure 2 Motives of the producer for transferring land temporarily. 

Why do producers transfer their lands temporarily and not definitely?

The meaning of land for producers influences their decision of giving temporary access to it, through a transfer. The aged producer continues seeing land as a productive resource, which by transferring temporarily also allows him to obtain foods and occasional income from the sale of the product. Also, land ownership provides its owner the opportunity to benefit from the support of government programs.

The composition of the income of producers who transfer land is permeated by their age and by the meaning of land in their old age. The aged producer in the last stage of life considers land to be the mechanism to negotiate with family members the care required. This situation is reflected in the differences of income structure of those 60 to 74 years of age who transferred their lands and those 75 years and older (Figure 3). The first age subgroup obtains 7.3 % of the total income from concept of land transfer, while the second receives 34.0 %. It should be pointed out that the percentage is the sum of the concepts of income from the value of auto-consumption, the income obtained from agricultural sales and from PROCAMPO, and from land rental.

Source: Authors’ elaboration with field work data.

Figure 3 Composition of the income of producers who transfer land, according to age group. 

The difference in percentages between both age subgroups is explained by the form of transference. The producers from 60 to 74 years did it through share-cropping, that is, in exchange for a total proportion of the production, which can vary between half and a third of the production. Meanwhile, producers of more than 75 years did it mostly through land loan to family members, meaning that the production becomes integrated to the household economy. In addition, 42.7 % of the income of producers of the youngest age subgroup comes from the rent of locals, occasional jobs and commerce.