The methodological question

To move from utopianism to agroecological utopia, the management of the milpa was first evaluated. To this end, information was collected regarding the specific and general conditions that converge in this management. A survey was applied to a sample of 60 and 77 producers from Cohetzala and San Nicolas, respectively, chosen from the PROCAMPO register, now productive PROAGRO. The evaluation implied knowing the radical and progressive technologies that they applied in said management, through the IATR and the GETP, respectively.

To evaluate the IATR that took as a reference the INIFAP technological package (Table 1). To do this, the production formulas exposed in the package were compared with the agricultural practices that the corn farmer did in situ. The package was assigned a nominal value of 100 points and was weighted according to the impact of each component on productivity: 10 sowing date, 20 variety, 15 plant density, 25 and 5, for fertilizer dose and application date, 6 and 4, for type and dose of herbicide, 6 and 4, for type and dose of insecticide and 5 to combat diseases.

Each weighted value was divided by two, where the first quotient corresponded to the use of the recommendation and the second to its proper management. For example, if a producer used the INIFAP fertilizer dose, he was assigned 25 points, if he used another dose, 12.5 units, and if he did not use fertilizers, his score was zero. This is because the INIFAP recommends production formulas, experimentally tested over several years, and not the use of just any fertilizer.

The GETP calculation corresponded to agricultural practices (association and rotation of crops, soil conservation) and inputs (native seed and manure) not suitable for the INIFAP, but that corn growers applied them commonly. Each technology was assigned 20 units.

With the calculation of the IATR and the GETP, a typology of producers was created, grouping them according to their value in low (< to 33.33), medium (33.34-66.66) and high appropriation of technology (> to 66.66 units), which allowed transit from empirical abstractions to constructive and reflective ones, which were essential for the construction of knowledge (^{Garcia, 2006}). Then the agroecological utopia was designed by grouping corn farmers by their yield. For this, the corn growers with the highest and lowest yields were chosen and the difference was assessed between three and the quotient was added to the lowest yield to create three ranges of types of producers: low (<33.33), medium (33.34-66.66) and high yield per hectare (> 66.66). This typology allowed us to analyze the dialogue of knowledge implied in the agroecological utopia.

Finally, the real and potential per capita corn consumption was estimated considering the real and potential yield (kg ha^-1), the harvested area and number of family members, assuming an intake of 500 kg (^{Warman, 2001}). The potential consumption derived from considering that the less efficient producers would apply the technological pattern of efficient corn growers.

Agroecological utopianism

When calculating the IATR it was found that: a) the use of these innovations was on average low: 26.7 units in Cohetzala and 40.6 in San Nicolas; b) differentiated, with a range that goes from 22.1-37.3 units for producers from Cohetzala with low and medium IATR and for San Nicolas of 28.3-44.1, respectively, and c) there was no relationship between the IATR and yield, despite the fact that in Cohetzala there were 15.2 units of difference in the IATR between low (745 kg ha^-1) and medium (748 kg ha^-1) corn growers. In San Nicolas this difference between low and medium appropriation corn growers was 15.8 units, but the former obtained 1 359 kg ha^-1 and the latter 1 343 kg ha^-1.

The discrepancy that exists between the use of radical innovations and yields is due to the fact that conventional management has restricted it to the use of agrochemicals, which does not coincide with the different ways of managing corn growers, which adapt it to the diversity of ecological niches local of Mexico. In addition, for rainfed corn growers, the corn harvest is a matter of survival, which is why they have only adopted-adapted some INIFAP recommendations that, when interwoven with their own technologies, result in a dialogue of knowledge and greater productivity.

Therefore, it was not by chance that when measuring the GETP it was found that: a) progressive innovations prevail over radical innovations in corn management: in Cohetzala the GETP surpassed the IATR by 42.6 units and in San Nicolas, by 20.7; b) the GETP was also differentiated: in Cohetzala the range fluctuated between 57.5-83 units for medium and high GETP milperos and in San Nicolas it was between 20-54-82 units for low, medium and high corn producers; and c) there was a direct relationship between GETP and returns. In Cohetzala these were 695-816 kg ha^-1, for those of medium and high GETP, and for San Nicolas 778-1 285-1 585 kg ha^-1, exposed in the same order.

From utopianism to agroecological utopia

Utopianism shows the relevance of progressive technologies in corn handling, but what was essential was that it allowed the construction of an agroecological utopia. Applying the proposed methodology, it was found: the highest and lowest yields (kg ha^-1) of the corn growers of Cohetzala were 400 and 1000 and those of San Nicolas were 500 and 2 200, the difference was 600 for Cohetzala and 1 700 for San Nicolas; the quotient was 200 and 567 for Cohetzala and San Nicolas; and ranges, related to the three types of corn growers according to their yields were, for Cohetzala: low < 600, medium between 601-800 and high > 800 kg ha^-1 and for those of San Nicolas they were: low < 1 067 , medium 1 068-1 635 and high > 1 635.

The attributes of the types of producers were recorded in Table 2, where it is noted that: a) almost a third were efficient, with significantly higher yields than the non-efficient ones; and b) the values of the IATR and the GETP were reduced, perhaps due to the impact that both innovations have on the impulse of the productive forces, when they act together.

When comparing the technological patterns applied by the corn growers (Table 3) with those of the INIFAP, it is noted that the latter promote epistemic violence in the management of the milpa since the institute did not recognize the peasant technologies, decisive in this management, while that the former promoted epistemic independence and the de-colonization of knowledge, by recognizing and valuing the peasant knowledge applied in the management of the milpa. Likewise, it is observed that in the former a dialogue of knowledge was applied, especially efficient producers, from which it derived its greater productivity, enabled by four technological processes that are broken down for analytical purposes, but that occur at the same time.

The first is encouraged by the biomimicry of the crop association, which consists of several ‘plant floors’, as in natural ecosystems, originating greater diversity of flora and fauna above-below the soil and inside-around the agroecosystem. In this diversity, C4 (corn) and C3 (pumpkin, beans, etc.) coexist with different needs for solar energy to convert inorganic compounds into organic ones, making the use of solar energy efficient. Also, the diversity of flora and fauna in-around the milpa promotes pollination and creates trophic networks that reduce the damage of pathogens to the milpa.

At the same time, this diversity provides more biomass below the ground, resulting in a greater abundance and richness of microorganisms that decompose organic matter and recycle nutrients and energy. At the same time, in a polyculture the range of colors and odors released by the vegetation makes it difficult for insects to locate food (Paleologos and ^{Flores (2014}). The low use of insecticides by efficient milperos may be the result of this diversity of species, since it creates an ideal habitat for there to be a greater abundance and richness of arthropodofauna, resulting in a biological balance of the milpa system. INIFAP technological package considers certain elements of arthropodofauna as pests, proposing their extermination, disturbing this balance biological.

^{Walker (1992}) reports that if there is redundancy of species in this biodiversity due to the role they play in the agroecosystem, a redundancy of relationships will be created that ensures few changes in the agroecosystems (stability) and if an extreme environmental change occurs, the agroecosystem has greater capacity to absorb shocks and to quickly regain its functionality (resilience). A resilient system subsists longer in time, that is, it is sustainable. The redundant species are represented by the weeds, classified by modern agriculture as weeds, raising their annihilation and with it the redundancy of relationships they promote.

The second agroecological process derives from the associated plants, enhancing the water-soil-plant-environment relationship: beans fix atmospheric nitrogen, an essential plant nutrient, corn serves as a guardian for beans, and pumpkin, with its wide foliage and creeping habit, safeguards the soil from erosion, encourages the filtration of water and prevents its evaporation and the growth of weeds during the first phenological cycles of corn and beans.

The third process springs from peasant innovations. The millenary adaptation of creole seeds to local ecological niches and their productive stability is due to their high variability, which is in permanent change (^{Flores and Sarandon 2014}). Crop rotation improves soil properties, retains moisture and nutrients, provides nutrients and health to the soil (^{Mendoza, 2004}). Soil conservation avoids the loss of nutrients and water, which enhance its productivity. Manure provides nutrients, improves structure and texture, increases aeration, penetration and water retention, stimulates the development of beneficial microorganisms for the plant and promotes carbon sequestration (^{Robert, 2002}).

Finally, a process derives from the fusion of rural technologies and some modern ones, such as the application of nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen is essential for plant growth, in addition, it is essential for microbial growth and the degradation of organic matter. If it has a high nitrogen content, the microorganisms will have enough substrate to induce further mineralization, since the microflora will have its nitrogen needs fully satisfied (^{Ferrera and Alarcon, 2001}). It is noteworthy that in Cohetzala and San Nicolas, 78.3 and 68.8% of the milperos applied only nitrogen fertilizers.

Data in Table 4 show that the types of milperos have similar living conditions: they are extreme smallholders with few means of production; their average expenditures are very low and heavily subsidized by remittances, especially in Cohetzala, production is intended for self-consumption and they deploy various survival strategies: the sale of labor power, the management of the cornfields, large and small livestock, the backyard and the collection of natural goods. However, the efficient ones were characterized because they diversified their tasks in the primary sector related to the management of the milpa, especially in Cohetzala, while the others have done so in the secondary and tertiary sectors.

Pluriactivity increases the income of rural households (^{De Grammont, 2009}) and, at the same time, reduces agricultural income (^{Anseeuw and Laurent, 2007}). Pluriactivity has turned agriculture into a marginal economic task for the family unit, obstructing the initiatives and capacities of the producers that nurture the dialogue of knowledge and with it, the key technological processes that occur in the milpa.

Finally, in the data in Table 4, the high percentage of corn destined for self-consumption stands out, which suggests that this good has the highest social use derived from human activity, since it is directly destined to the satisfaction of human needs.

Corn production and consumption

Data from the survey indicate that the family structure of the corn growers was 328 and 401 people for Cohetzala and San Nicolas respectively. When estimating the consumption of real corn, it was found that: a) 15 and 57% of the people of Cohetzala and San Nicolas, achieved food self-sufficiency by producing at least 500 kg per capita. If the technological pattern of efficient corn growers in Cohetzala is transferred to those of low and medium efficiency, the yields would grow, on average, 91 and 24%; therefore, 27% of people would achieve food self-sufficiency in Cohetzala. For San Nicolas, the yield would increase 150 and 38%, for corn producers with low and medium productive efficiency, allowing 81% of people to achieve food self-sufficiency.

These results coincide with those of other authors. ^{Pretty et al. (2011}), when evaluating 40 agricultural projects from 20 African countries during 2001-2010 where integrated pest control, soil conservation and agroforestry were applied. In 2010, the average yield multiplied by 2.13 and increased the total food production in 5.8 million tons per year, equivalent to 557 kg per family/year. For its part, the Campesino to Campesino Movement (^{Holt, 2008}) increased corn yields from half a ton per hectare to three, by applying compost and rotations with legumes, as well as intercropping new crops in the Vicente Guerrero plots of the municipality of Españita-Tlaxcala-Mexico.

Conclusions

The results obtained confirm the hypotheses raised. Indeed, we find that: corn growers coexist with different levels of appropriation of radical and progressive technologies, and differentiated returns; productivity has its origin in the dialogue of knowledge, where the management of biodiversity present in the milpa has been and will be, fundamental to optimize unit yields, it was finally found that corn growers share technologies since the vast majority applied modern technologies and peasant women, with an evident prevalence of the latter; furthermore, by having similar general living conditions, it would make it easier for less efficient corn growers to appropriate the technological pattern applied by efficient milperos, assumed as an agroecological utopia. This, as demonstrated, can enhance the development of productive forces that sleep within the land and labor, because it is pregnant with what is objectively possible and are available among producers at the local level. In the agroecological utopia, a useful, socially necessary work prevails, which produces authentic goods, destined for the self-consumption of peasant families. This has been the role that the milpa has played since time immemorial.