Despite decades of colonization and development initiatives, the southern Yucatán peninsular region remains an economic frontier. The term ‘frontier’, however, hides a complex political economy of social, political, and economic structures in which land managers operate. Presently, multiple interest groups vie for influence, increasingly positioning themselves around sustainability concerns, and attempting to reconcile the competing goals of economic development and environmental preservation. The major political institutions and organizations promoting conservation and development in the region fit into five categories: federally decreed land management regimes, federal and state secretariats, local community-based groups and institutions, national non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and international accords. These institutions and organizations aim to influence land-use decisions in the dominant land access unit, the ejido. The relationships among ejidos, social movements, NGOs, government policy, and international activity in the region are examined here, highlighting how even within a frontier economy, conservation and development visions increasingly influence resource use. Before the Mexican revolution of 1910–17, 96 per cent of Mexico’s rural people were landless (Sinha 1984). These rural poor supported the revolution, in large part, to break up grand haciendas (estates) and to allow campesinos (peasants) access to agricultural land. Ejidos, one of four landtenure types federally mandated, were designed to provide campesinos access to land that could not be transferred easily and thereby taken from them. Based on interpretations of pre-Hispanic land tenure, Article 27 of the Constitution established ejido land to be communal, ruled by an ejido assembly (consisting of all members with land rights in the ejido, or ejidatarios), and used in ejido-defined usufruct. Prior to 1992, when the law was reformed, ejidatarios were prevented from selling their land, renting it, or using it as collateral, and from negotiating deals with private investors. Perhaps more important than these official guidelines, however, are the perceptions of ejidos by state officials. Established, in part, to protect ‘indigenous’ people and not open to privatization, the ejido was stigmatized as ill-suited for modernization (Oasa and Jennings 1982). A bimodal Mexican agrarian policy followed (de Janvry 1981; Tomich, Kilby, and Johnston 1995) in which the potential productive role of ejidatarios was largely ignored (Oasa and Jennings 1982; Sonnenfeld 1992; Tomich, Kilby, and Johnston 1995).
PENGUATAN IDENTITAS DAN SEGREGASI SOSIAL KOMUNITAS EKS PENGUNGSI TIMOR TIMUR DI SUKABITETEK, NUSA TENGGARA TIMUR
