Study area

This study takes place in La Cuchilla, a highly marginalized rural community in Nopala de Villagrán, Hidalgo. La Cuchilla is one of the 112 communities of Nopala de Villagrán, which, according to the INEGI, is the second municipality with the highest number of poultry in the State of Hidalgo (689,850 heads); it concentrates 18% of the total poultry in the State. This community has a humid subtropical climate with rains during the summer. It is classified as a rural community with a high degree of marginalization⁷.

Research stages and data collection

This study followed a non-experimental design using a descriptive method. During the first stage, an agricultural census was carried out to identify the total number of family farm production units (FFPUs) and the type and number of animal species in the community. After recognizing the FFPUs used for poultry production (26/29), bird species were identified.

During the second stage, semi-structured questionnaires were applied to the person responsible for the poultry production in the selected production units to identify the roles assigned to the poultry, following the classification proposed by various authors^4,6. In this study, bird roles were defined as the function that the family assigns to their poultry based on the benefits they expect to obtain from their breeding and production. Roles were identified and classified by applying semi-structured questions designed to obtain information about the following characteristics:

Nutritional role: production destined for family consumption, amount of production destined to family consumption, and frequency of use of poultry-derived products.

Cultural role: participation of sons and daughters in poultry production and reasons to include them in breeding and poultry production activities.

Economic role: production percentage destined for sale.

Social role: production destined for celebrations, parties (weddings, baptisms, birthdays), or gifts to family or neighbors.

Environmental role: chicken manure destined as fertilizer.

Recreational role: bird breeding for pleasure.

Family welfare spheres were defined based on previous reports that identified the contribution of small-scale livestock at the family level: food security^8,9, availability of economic resources¹⁰, strengthening of social ties¹¹, market connection⁸, and transmission of vernacular knowledge⁵. The family welfare spheres were defined as those positive impacts in the daily life of the producing family that result from the roles assigned to the poultry.

Egg-sale strategies were identified using semistructured questions about the points of sale (direct or indirect), the types of consumers, and sales periodicity. These sale strategies were classified as proposed by LEADER¹².

Data analysis

The collected data were analyzed by descriptive statistics (absolute and relative frequencies) using the statistical software for social sciences SPSS 15.0 and Excel 2010.

General characteristics of the family farm production units (FFPU)

Of the total FFPU, 93.1 % (27/29) reported having animals. There were 1,089 animals in the community; the most abundant species were poultry (48 %), followed by sheep (39 %), dairy cattle (11 %), rabbits (1 %), horses (0.6 %), and pigs (0.3 %). Of the total FFPUs with animals, 96.3 % (26/27) had poultry, of which 96.15 % were used for egg production and 3.85 % for meat. Laying hens were the most abundant poultry species (71 %), followed by chickens (10.4 %), roosters (6.4 %), turkeys (6.1%), fighting poultry (4.7 %), ducks (0.8 %), and geese (0.6 %).

Family members involved in the FFPU

Poultry activities were performed by women in 100% of the FFPUs. However, in 57 % of the cases, the interviewed women were entirely in charge of the poultry; in the rest of the cases, the mother (4 %), husband (14 %), children (14 %), and adult daughters (11 %) were involved in poultry production and frequently or sporadically contributed to various activities, such as egg collection, feedlot cleaning, feeding, cleaning of drinking and feeding troughs, and egg selling.

Importance of poultry

The FFPUs with animals had 2.4 ± 0.9 animal species in a range from 1 to 6 species; in the community, the livestock activity tended more towards diversification than its production specialization. Overall, poultry animals were considered the most important species (Table 1). However, FFPU with less than three animal species were the ones that considered poultry the most important species (82.3 %); this shows that as the diversity of animal species increased (from 4 to 6), the importance attributed to poultry decreased (17.7 %).

Due to the numerous benefits obtained from poultry farming, food security being the most mentioned benefit, 63 % of the producers consider it the most crucial activity in their FFPU (Table 2).

The role of poultry in small-scale production systems

Roles were classified into six categories based on the different uses and purposes assigned to the poultry products and poultry by the producers (Table 3). On average, each producer assigned three roles to the poultry, these roles were not mutually exclusive.

a) Nutritional role

On average, producing families consumed bird meat from their production one time every 24 ± 5.61 wk (6 mo). Producing families only consume poultry meat in specific situations, such as in times of food shortage or special occasions (Table 4). Moreover, poultry was mainly used for egg production purposes, not for family meat consumption.

Of the total FFPUs with poultry, 96.15 % were engaged in egg production. Eggs were mainly used for family consumption (54.76 %), sale (35.71 %), and as gifts to their neighbors or family members that no longer live in the community to strengthen ties (9.53 %).

b) Cultural role

In this study, 100 % of the producers with family members younger than 17 yr old, either from their nuclear or extended family, used poultry farming to teach them values and work ethic by involving their family members in bird care and production activities. The cultural role of poultry farming consisted in:

1) Teaching children how to work from an early age and make them responsible for one activity to keep their minds focused on something positive that will help them in the future; 2) Teaching them about savings; 3) Preserving across generations the culture and knowledge that states that through hard work, children can procure their own food; 4) Teaching them how to take care of the animals in order to harvest tangible (money, food) or intangible benefits (knowledge, experience in animal handling); 5)Teaching them the value of things; 6) Leaving a legacy for the children, which can constitute a means of life for the future.

c) Economic role

Of the total egg producing FFPU, 60 % sell their products in the local area. The egg-selling price was $2.00/egg in the entire community, except for one producer that sold it at $2.50/egg. The weekly economic income obtained from egg sales ranged from $20 to $ 420. This variation resulted from the number of hens per FFPU and the percentage of eggs for sale.

The small producers used different short food supply chains (SFSC) to reach consumers inside and outside the community. In this study, 10 SFSC were identified and classified into three groups, as proposed by LEADER¹²: local markets (25.92 %), direct sale to the FFPU (55.56 %), and home delivery (18.52 %) (Table 5).

Although 60 % of the FFPUs sold their eggs, not all production was intended for sale. The number of eggs produced was distributed based on the profit that each producer intended to obtain. The FFPUs were divided into three groups based on the number of eggs destined for sale.

Group 1 (Economic): producers that destined the largest number of eggs for sale locally (66.67 %) (Table 6).

Group 2 (Family consumption): producers that destined the largest number of eggs for family consumption (26.67 %) (Table 7).

Group 3 (Social): producers that used most of their eggs as gifts to family members or close neighbors (6.67 %).

As shown in Tables 6 and 7, the variety of places used to sell eggs differed according to the group to which each FFPU belonged. For example, group 1 had a wider variety of places to sell eggs by SFSC than group 2. Group three consisted of only one FFPU. These results indicate that although most FFPU sold their eggs, some used most of their products for other social or nutritional roles.

d) Social role

As mentioned before, a percentage of the eggs produced in the FFPUs was assigned a social purpose. These eggs were consumed in family events (family visits or birthdays) or used as gifts for family members or neighbors to strengthen their ties. In this case, the consumption of poultry meat in special events was not reported.

e) Environmental role

Chicken manure was used as a milpa (cornfield) fertilizer by 83.3 % of the producers; 8.3 % did not use it at all, and 4.2 % sold it or used it in the herbarium (4.2 %). Furthermore, 52 % of the producers used the corn from their milpa (cornfield) to feed their poultry; this practice decreases the purchase of external supplies. This feeding practice changed at specific times of the year (non-sowing seasons or water scarcity).

f)Recreational role

According to 2.6 % of producers, poultry farming represents a recreational and relaxing activity that allows them to rest from their daily activities, bringing them pleasure and satisfaction.

Family welfare spheres

Each of the roles assigned to poultry contributed to the family welfare in different ways, classified in five spheres: food security, availability of economic resources, strengthening of social relationships, link to the market, and transmission of vernacular knowledge. Food security (availability and accessibility): poultry eggs or meat were consumed in times of food shortage, for pleasure, and as savings or when money was not available.

Availability of economic resources: the economic income obtained from each FFPU was used to obtain several goods and services that improved family welfare, allowed reinvesting in the various livestock activities of the family, and contributed to their food security by allowing them to purchase food that was not produced in their FFPU (Table 8).

Strengthening social ties: eggs were used as gifts for their neighbors or family members who no longer lived in the community as a symbol of reciprocity and trust.

In this case, it was possible to infer that egg production allowed the establishment of close relationships between the producers through cooperation mechanisms; one producer could complete the number of eggs of another producer so that the latter could sell the required number of eggs (cooperation strategies).

Link to the market: Small producers used different SFSC to sell the eggs produced in their FFPU. The SFSC included strategies that connected them with consumers both inside and outside the community. According to the producers, the advantages provided by the SFSC included the inexistence or low number of intermediaries involved in egg commercialization, which allowed them to sell their product directly to the consumers and concentrate their profits.

Transmission of vernacular knowledge: producers with family members younger than 17 yr old, either from their nuclear or extended family, used poultry farming to teach them values and work ethic by involving their family members in poultry care and production activities. Producers also transmit vernacular knowledge about production strategies and means of subsistence.

General characteristics of the FFPU in the rural community

The current data about the state of rural communities in Mexico only correspond to population density, marginalization degree, social lag degree, number of housing units, and household deficiency indicators. However, the data about the production and productivity of agricultural and non-agricultural activities in rural communities are scarce. These data are available per municipality or state, not per rural community.

The search of poultry production data at a micro-level in rural communities is difficult because the data provided by the INEGI have the following limitations: 1) The information provided is solely at the municipal level and focuses on the population density of its poultry, the number of poultry products sold, and their access to technology. 2) INEGI only considers the production units that report having more than 1,000 poultry, ignoring small-scale producers. 3) The data do not distinguish the dynamics between large-scale and small-scale poultry production systems based on their access to technology or animal density.

In the specific case of La Cuchilla, there are no previous data about the overall production characteristics of its agricultural and non-agricultural activities or its technological level, productivity, income, or employment.

Therefore, it is essential to carry out studies that collect and analyze data from rural communities at a micro-level. These studies will provide basic information for future and more complex studies that will help understand the dynamics of the FFPU in rural communities at a local, national, and international level and how they survive in a capitalist system.

The data in this study allow us to glimpse the activities practiced in La Cuchilla and the importance of poultry production for producing families.

Importance of poultry

Several studies carried out in Mexico highlight two common reasons for which small-scale poultry farming exists in the rural sector, family consumption and the sale of poultry products. For example, previous studies in Yucatan reported that poultry products were used for selling purposes, family consumption, and, in some cases, for incubation^13,14.

In some Oaxacan communities, eggs are mostly used for selling and incubation purposes; in other communities, like Zompantle, eggs are mainly sold and used for breeding chicks¹⁵. In the Oaxacan coast, poultry products are mostly sold, used for family consumption, or as gifts. In other communities, also in Oaxaca, poultry products are mainly sold to neighbors and used for family consumption¹⁶.

As reported by different studies carried out in Mexico, the roles assigned to poultry in rural communities are based solely on the use of poultry products. These roles have not been described, studied, or analyzed as a way to establish strategies to achieve the welfare of the producing families.

Contrary to previous studies, which technically characterize small-scale poultry farming in Mexico and focus on its nutritional and economic roles, several authors highlight that poultry must be considered as a means to improve the lifestyle of rural communities, that is, family welfare. Poultry are also important for pest control, as a source of organic fertilizer, and essential in special festivities and traditional ceremonies^6,11.

This study indicates that producing families guide their production based not only on technical-economic interests¹⁷; they also consider non-economic interests, such as their basic needs (nutritional, economic, social, and cultural)^18,19. These results highlight the multiple roles of poultry, not their zootechnical purpose.

Family welfare spheres

Food security: a family has food security when it has access to the food required by all its members for a healthy live (adequate in terms of quality, quantity, security, and cultural acceptability)⁹. This study identified that poultry production contributes to food security; however, it is necessary to evaluate other food security elements to determine its contribution more accurately.

Availability of economic resources: producers in rural communities often do not have access to financial markets, such as banks. Livestock, as a “source of living savings”, offers an alternative to save or accumulate capital. In times of crisis, producers can sell their cattle, pigs, and sheep to obtain money. In this study, poultry were not sold to solve financial crises, probably because the economic value of poultry is low compared to cattle. However, it was possible to identify egg sale strategies that gave access to complementary goods and services⁴.

Strengthening of social ties: Animals assigned social roles are mainly used to meet the responsibilities acquired through the social relationships established between the family and members of the community, such as family celebrations (weddings, baptisms, funerals), local festivities (Patron Saint Festivals), traditions (Day of the Dead, Holy Week), gifts, or barter^1,3. In this case, it was possible to infer that egg production allowed to establish close relationships between producers based on egg sale cooperation mechanisms.

Link to the market: To face the economic, social, technological, and political changes, small producers have developed commercialization strategies to ensure the generation of family income and the continuity of the FFPU across generations²². In this study, producers used various short food supply chains to sell their poultry products; this allowed them to find different niche markets, where producers could also sell other products generated in their FFPU.

Transmission of vernacular knowledge: A study performed in Yucatan reported that small-scale production unites the family and community through activities focused on preserving, enriching, and spreading the knowledge of its inhabitants; backyard production reflects how much a family knows about their environment²⁸. This study identified the essential elements transmitted through poultry production: values, work ethic, and production strategies.

It is necessary to identify the elements transmitted through this livestock activity, such as production strategies to reduce the use of external supplies, traditional treatments for diseases, sales strategies, etc.

In developing countries, livestock activities have been mainly focused on generating income and meeting the growing needs of the production units. These efforts prioritize technologies that maximize individual animal productivity, technology transfer, and thus, the dissemination of technical information^29,30. However, these actions should not only focus on increasing the yield of poultry production and income, because the FFPUs are not necessarily developed under a capitalist logic and, therefore, may not correspond to the context in which they are developed⁴. Actions must be accompanied by a comprehensive understanding of the bird role and the context in which it develops so that the design and implementation of programs or strategies respond to the problems and concerns of the producers and are consistent with their objectives and production strategies^20,25.