Political Ecology of Food Security and Nutrition in the Municipality of Jesus De Otoro, Honduras

By Rebecca F. Ivanoff

A thesis presented to

The University of Guelph

In partial fulfillment of requirements

for the degree of Master of Arts

in Public Issues Anthropology

and International Development

Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Rebecca F. Ivanoff, May, 2012

ABSTRACT

POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION IN THE

DEPARTMENT OF JESUS DE OTORO, HONDURAS Rebecca Ivanoff Advisors: Professor Sally Humphries University of Guelph, 2012 Professor Elizabeth Finnis

This study addresses food security in three communities in rural, central Honduras by looking at the interrelationships among nutritious food, environmental and political forces, and cultural behaviours through the collection and analysis of local knowledge and laboratory data. Evaluation of ethnographic research were combined with analysis of policy documents and the nutritional analysis of ninety local varieties of corn. Research showed how households in three rural communities in the mountains of Honduras, struggle to access sufficient, safe and nutritious food while respecting cultural and agricultural diversity. Policies to address food security need to not only address the diversity of environmental niches, and a history of disenfranchisement of most rural farmers from the political process, but also the cultural ideals that impact definitions of hunger and nutrition. Analysis of 90 varieties of local landraces show that coloured varieties of maize have higher nutritional value for protein, anthocyanin, and vitamin A content.

iii

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank my committee, Sally, Beth and Steve, for their encouragement and continual support in the field and much appreciated direction and editing during the thesis writing process. Thank you to Sally for sharing your love of Honduras, for inspiring me in moments of doubt, and for helping me to secure funding for this research. Thank you to my external reader Renee for your helpful comments. I’d like to also thank my research assistant and friend, Angela, for walking for hours to the communities, for interpreting my poor Spanish, and enthusiastically gathering data for this project. This project would not have been possible without the support from Omar and Kati, mi familia de Rincon, as well as to Fredy from FIPAH, who taught me valuable Honduran slang. Thank you to all the FIPAH staff, including Jimenez, Hugo, Vero, Osea, Domingo, et al. Of great help throughout the process, but in particular in all the work gathering varieties for the nutritional analysis, I have to thank Marvin. Your endless work to improve the lives of your fellow citizens is of great inspiration to me.

A very special thanks to all those people who helped make Otoro my home away from home. In particular my roommate, Marianne, and our neighbours Doña Denia, Jeny, Yajaida, Teco, Jorge, and la familia de Castillo: (Wilson, Ada, Vivian, Valeria, Seidy). I must thank the family of Dona Isi, Don Claros, Luisa, and mis hermanitos: Chepe, Franklin, Pedrito, y Wendy. I thank the hillside community members who found the time to make me feel comfortable in their homes, teach me about their lives, and share their personal information with me. In particular, Carmen, Jacinto, Doña Ramona, and la familia Santos: Don Roberto, Doña Chila, Rosi, Yesenia, Rita, Omar, Juanito, y nuestra mini-guía: Iris.

Thank you to Mario Ardon Mejía for your tremendous help finding obscure information and answering interview questions from afar. Thank you also to Natalia Palacios with help with nutritional information, and Bruce Manion for teaching me how to use SPSS.

Without the tireless dedication of my friends and family, whose years of encouragement and understanding have gotten me this far, I would not have been able to make this journey. Special thanks to mum, dad, Hannah, Ben, Katrina, Bethany, Becky and Kaitlin. Thank you for putting up with me. Thank you to Ravi for the support, getting packages to Honduras, and tea. Thank you to Drew, for your encouragement and care when I had a grumpy-face on, and for editing with me right up until the last moment.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS: ABSTRACT  .............................................................................................................................................................  IV  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:  ...................................................................................................................................  III  LIST  OF  TABLES  ...................................................................................................................................................  VI  LIST  OF  FIGURES  ...............................................................................................................................................  VII  LIST  OF  APPENDICES  ......................................................................................................................................  VIII  LIST  OF  ACRONYMS  ............................................................................................................................................  IX  INTRODUCTION:  ..................................................................................................................................................  1  CHAPTER  1:  LITERATURE  REVIEW  ................................................................................................................  6  

INTRODUCTION:  ....................................................................................................................................................................  6  POLITICAL ECOLOGY  ...........................................................................................................................................................  6  FOOD SECURITY AND FOOD SECURITY STRATEGIES:  .........................................................................................  12  FOOD SOVEREIGNTY  ........................................................................................................................................................  15  

CHAPTER  2:  RESEARCH  CONTEXT  ...............................................................................................................  19  GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, AND SOCIAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS OF

THE OTORO VALLEY  ........................................................................................................................................................  19  MALNUTRITION AND “HIDDEN HUNGER”  ..............................................................................................................  28  LOCAL NGO: FUNDACION DE INVESTIGACION PARTICIPATIVA DE HONDURAS (FOUNDATION FOR

PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH WITH HONDURAN FARMERS, OR FIPAH)  .......................................................  30  LARGER RESEARCH PROJECT:  ......................................................................................................................................  31  

CHAPTER  3:  RESEARCH  METHODOLOGY  ..................................................................................................  32  RESEARCH ASSISTANCE:  ..................................................................................................................................................  34  PARTICIPANT RECRUITMENT:  .......................................................................................................................................  36  DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:  ................................................................  36  

Participant-Observation:  ..........................................................................................................................................................  36  Semi-structured Interviews:  ......................................................................................................................................................  38  Group Interview:  .......................................................................................................................................................................  39  Nutrient Analysis:  .....................................................................................................................................................................  41  

CHAPTER  4:  FOOD  SECURITY  AND  RESOURCES:  DIVERSITY  AND  INEQUALITY  ...........................  44  ENVIRONMENTAL DIVERSITY WITHIN THE REGION:  ..........................................................................................  44  TRANSITORY AND SEASONAL FOOD INSECURITY:  ...............................................................................................  50  INEQUALITY OF ACCESS TO MARKETS AND TO GOOD QUALITY LAND:  ....................................................  54  INEQUALITY OF LAND OWNERSHIP:  ...........................................................................................................................  60  ADDRESSING INEQUALITY: A BRIEF HISTORY OF LAND REFORM POLICIES AND CURRENT

POLICIES THAT AFFECT FOOD SECURITY  ...............................................................................................................  65  CONCLUSIONS:  ....................................................................................................................................................................  72  

CHAPTER  5:  CULTURAL  AND  SOCIOECONOMIC  FACTORS  AFFECTING  AVAILABILITY,  ACCESS  AND  USE  OF  FOOD  .............................................................................................................................................  73  

SUPERFOODS AND A CULTURAL DEFINITION OF HUNGER:  ..............................................................................  74  CULTURAL PREFERENCES AND FOOD CONSUMPTION  .........................................................................................  79  PURCHASING POWER AND STATUS:  ............................................................................................................................  85  

v

FOOD PREFERENCES AND IDENTITY:  .........................................................................................................................  87  THE NUTRITIONAL VALUE OF LOCAL FOOD SOURCES: MAIZE NUTRITION  ............................................  92  STRUCTURE OF THE MAIZE KERNEL  .........................................................................................................................  93  

Typical Nutritional Composition of Maize:  ..........................................................................................................................  94  Changes during the Grain Harvest, Drying and Processing into Foods:  .............................................................................  96  Results from Nutritional Analysis:  .........................................................................................................................................  98  Discussion of results:  ..............................................................................................................................................................  107  

CONCLUSIONS:  .................................................................................................................................................  112  KEY FINDINGS:  ..................................................................................................................................................................  112  THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS:  ............................................................................................................................  116  LIMITATIONS OF THIS RESEARCH  .............................................................................................................................  117  AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH  ..............................................................................................................................  118  

BIBLIOGRAPHY:  ..............................................................................................................................................  140  

vi

List Of Tables

TABLE  1:  SUMMARY  OF  THREE  COMMUNITIES  ...........................................................................................................................................  35  

TABLE  2:  TESTED  NUTRIENTS  AND  HUMAN  NUTRITION  (FROM  WHITNEY  ET  AL.    1990)  ................................................................  43  

TABLE  3:  CONVERSION  CHART  OF  WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES  ..................................................................................................................  56  

TABLE  4:  LAND  AND  SELF-­‐SUFFICIENCY  ......................................................................................................................................................  61  

TABLE 5: RECOMMENDED DAILY ALLOWANCE OF VITAMIN A, IRON, ZINC AND PROTEIN AT DIFFERENT LIFE STAGES,

COMPILED FROM HEALTH CANADA (2010)  ............................................................................................................................  110  

vii

List of Figures

FIGURE  1:  FOOD  SOVEREIGNTY  SOURCE:  ADAPTED  FROM  QUAYE  ET  AL.  2009.  .....................................................................................  16  

FIGURE  2:  MAP  OF  JESUS  DE  OTORO  AND  SURROUNDING  AREA,  INCLUDING  BARRIO  NUEVO,  CRUCITA  ORIENTE,  AND  EL  ÁGUILA  

(SKETCH  BY  THE  AUTHOR,  2010)  ......................................................................................................................................................  20  

FIGURE  3:  PERCEIVED  DIETARY  DIVERSITY:    NUMBER  OF  INTERVIEWEES  WHO  PERCEIVED  DIETARY  DIVERSITY  TO  BE  HIGH  

DURING  THE  MONTH.  CIRCLED  AREAS  SHOW  MONTHS  THAT  INTERVIEWEES  THOUGHT  OF  AS  HAVING  HIGH  DIETARY  

DIVERSITY.  ..............................................................................................................................................................................................  78  

FIGURE  4:  “FLAVOUR”  OF  YELLOW  VS.  WHITE  MAIZE  ...............................................................................................................................  83  

FIGURE  5:  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  MAIZE  KERNEL  ...........................................................................................................................................  93  

FIGURE  6:  MEAN  PROTEIN  CONTENT  OF  WHITE,  YELLOW,  RED  AND  BLACK  MAIZE  LANDRACES  .......................................................  98  

FIGURE  7:  PERCENT  PROTEIN  CONTENT  OF  ALL  VARIETIES  ACCORDING  TO  ALTITUDE  OF  PLOT  .........................................................  99  

FIGURE  8:  MEAN  PROVITAMIN  A  CONTENT  OF  MAIZE  COLOUR  CATEGORIES,  WITH  THE  AVERAGE  PROVITAMIN  CONTENT  FOR  

YELLOW  MAIZE  (GIVEN  BY  CIMMYT)  SHOWN  TO  GIVE  CONTEXT.  ............................................................................................  100  

FIGURE  9:  GRAPH  OF  THE  SHOWING  THE  VALUES  OF  PROVITAMIN  A  CONTENT  OF  WHITE,  YELLOW,  RED  AND  BLACK  MAIZE  

LANDRACES,  SHOWING  THE  NAMES  FOR  SOME  VARIETIES  ............................................................................................................  100  

FIGURE  10:  VALUES  OF  ANTHOCYANINS  SHOWING  THE  OUTLIER  IN  THE  WHITE  COLOUR  CATEGORY.  .............................................  101  

FIGURE  11:  MEAN  ANTHOCYANIN  CONTENT  OF  WHITE,  YELLOW,  RED  AND  BLACK  MAIZE  LANDRACES  WITHOUT  OUTLIER  ........  102  

FIGURE  12:  MEAN  STARCH  CONTENT  OF  WHITE,  YELLOW,  RED  AND  BLACK  MAIZE  LANDRACES  ......................................................  103  

FIGURE  13:  MEAN  CRUDE  FAT  (ETHER  EXTRACT)  CONTENT  OF  WHITE,  YELLOW,  RED  AND  BLACK  MAIZE  LANDRACES  ...............  103  

FIGURE  14:  MEAN  IRON  CONTENT  OF  MAIZE  LANDRACES  FROM  DIFFERENT  REGIONS  .......................................................................  104  

FIGURE  15:  MEAN  ZINC  CONTENT  OF  MAIZE  LANDRACES  FROM  DIFFERENT  REGIONS  ........................................................................  105  

FIGURE  16:  LINEAR  REGRESSION  OF  ZINC  CONTENT  VALUES  PLOTTED  AGAINST  ALTITUDE  ..............................................................  105  

FIGURE  17:  CULTURAL  AND  AGRONOMIC  VALUES  OF  FOURTEEN  VARIETIES  OF  LANDRACES  .............................................................  106  

viii

List Of Appendices

APPENDIX  1:  INTERVIEW  QUESTIONS:  ...................................................................................................  119  

APPENDIX  2:  FREE-­‐LISTING  QUESTIONS  ................................................................................................  121  

APPENDIX  3:  NUTRITIONAL  DATA  ...........................................................................................................  122  

APPENDIX  4:  LIST  OF  FOODS  EATEN  IN  THE  OTORO  VALLEY  .........................................................  127  

APPENDIX  5:  STATISTICAL  OUTPUT  ........................................................................................................  133  

ix

List Of Acronyms

ASOCIADRO Asociación de CIALs para el Desarrollo de la Región de Otoro/Asociation of CIALs

for the Development of the Otoro Region

ASOCIAL Asociación de Comités de Investigación Agrícola Local/ Association of Local Agricultural Research Committees

ASOCODE Asociación de Organizaciones Campesinas Centroamericanas para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo/ Central American Association of Peasant Organizations for Cooperation and Development

BANADESA Banco National de Desarrollo Aricola/ National Agriculture Development Bank (Honduras)

CCLF CGIAR-Canada Linkage Fund

CENTA Centro Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria (Mexico)

CIAL Comités de Investigación Agrícola Local/ Local Agricultural Research Committees

CIAT Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical/ International Center for Tropical Agriculture

CIDA Canadian International Development Agency

CIMMYT Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo/ International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

CNA Censo Nacional Agropecuario/ National Agricultural Census

COCOCH Consejo Coordinador de Organizaciones Campesinas de Honduras/ Honduran Coordinating Council of Peasant Organizations

COHDEFOR Corporacion Hondurena De Desarrollo Forestal/ Honduran Corporation for Forest Development

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, a synthetic insecticide

DICTA Dirección De Ciencia y Tegnología Agropecuaria/ Directorate of Agricultural Science and Technology

DR-CAFTA Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement.

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FHIA Fundación Hondureña de Investigación Agrícola/ Honduran Agricultural Research Foundation

FHIS El Fondo Hondureño de Inversión Social/ The Honduran Social Investment Fund

FIPAH Fundacion para la Investigacion Participativa con Agrucultores de Hondoras/ Foundation for Participatory Research with Honduran Farmers

x

FTA Free Trade Agreement

GMO Genetically Modified Organism

HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score

IAASTD International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development

IADB Inter-American Development Bank

IDRC International Development Research Centre

IHCAFE Instituto Hondureños del Café/ Honduran Coffee Institute

IHSS Instituto Hondureño de Seguridad Social/ Honduran Social Security Institute

IMF International Monitary Fund

INA Instiuto National Agraria/ National Agrarian Institute

LMDSA Ley para la Modernizacion y Desarrollo del Sector Agricola/ Agricultural Modernization Law

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

PAHO Pan American Health Organization

PPB Participatory Plant Breeding

PROHECO El Proyecto Hondureno de Educacion Comunitaria/ The Honduran Community Education Project

QPM Quality Protein Maize

SAG Secretaría de Agricultura y Ganadería/ Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock

SANAA Servicio Autónomo Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados/ National Autonomous Service Water Supply and Sewers

SRN Secretaria de Recursos Naturales/ Ministry of Natural Resources

SS Secretaría de Salud/ Ministry of Health

UPOV-91 The 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USC-Canada Unitarian Service Committee of Canada- Non-profit international development organizations, establishing programs in food security/ biodiversity, desertification, climate change and poverty alleviation.

VAD Vitamin A Deficiency

WB World Bank

WTO World Trade Organization

1

Introduction:

The ability of people throughout the world to access sufficient, safe, and healthy food is

defined by multiple factors. All humans have an intimate relationship with food. Not only does

food sustain us but our relationship to food is mediated by factors outside of our body. We have

political and historically rooted connections with food. Our food partially determines our

interactions with the natural environment. Our activities around food are embedded in our

cultures.

In recent years, the importance in addressing issues of availability, access and the

appropriate use of food has become of great interest to many people. On the international

agenda since the 1970’s, this issue was once again brought to the fore of public debate during the

‘world food crisis’ when prices for food rose to the point that people from Haiti to Indonesia

began riots in the streets. These protests brought to the world’s attention some of the economic

and political aspects of food. Having food security as a key theme during large international

conferences, such as the Copenhagen Climate Change talks, has shown the world the importance

of the environment and climate change to issues of food. As well, international food movements,

for example, the slow food movement and the local food movement, have brought to the fore the

ideas of regionally and culturally important foods. Yet, despite food becoming such a talked

about issue, many people worldwide do not have access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food.

Indeed, there are still nearly 1 billion people worldwide who are undernourished, 98% of whom

are in developing countries (FAO 2010). This thesis addresses food security in three communities

in rural, central Honduras. Through the collection and analysis of local knowledge and

2

laboratory data, I describe the interrelationships among concepts of nutrition and hunger,

cultural behaviours, and political and environmental factors.

Honduras, a country situated in the middle of the Central American peninsula, is one of

the poorest nations in the Americas (Humphries et al. 2005:1). It remains by and large an

agrarian country, where rural people constitute half of the total population (PAHO 2007:443).

Of these rural people, seventy-five percent live in extreme poverty (PAHO 2007:443). High rates

of malnutrition and poverty among rural households are fuelled by inequality in access to land

and resources, isolation from markets and extension programs. As well, Honduras has as a

political system that effectively disenfranchises the most vulnerable, and where traditionally rural

women are marginalized from participating in public life (Classen et al. 2008:2407).

Though small in size, Honduras is a diverse country. Climate and geography change

quickly as one travels through this mountainous state, making homogeneous livelihood strategies

impractical. Poverty is aggravated by frequent natural disasters, such as hurricanes, droughts,

and seismic events (PAHO 2007), as well as a deteriorating environment and a changing climate.

It is within this environmental and political climate that households strive to achieve food

security, many of whom rely on the culturally appropriate basic grains of maize and beans. In

Honduras, 80 percent of farmers farm on less than 5 hectares, using less than 15 percent of the

total agricultural land, while 1 percent of farmers farm on more than 50 hectares each, owning

more than 30 percent of the total arable land (United Nations World Food Program 2005:11).

On average, this eighty percent has only a little more than one hectare of land to grow enough

3

maize and beans to feed a family with an average of six children for a year1, and to generate a

surplus to feed to the urban population and for trade (FAO 1994; also see Tucker, Eakin and

Castellanos 2010). Rural hillside farmers cultivate landrace varieties using basic hand tools to

prepare, plant, and harvest the land. At the time of harvest, some farming households sell off part

of their harvest so that they can buy necessities and repay outstanding debts, and then, during the

annual period of scarcity, these same famers are forced to buy grains that are now at a higher

price than when they originally sold their own harvest (FAO 1994).

Non-governmental and civil organizations have recently been struggling to address food

security and nutrition in a way that addresses the myriad of challenges that households live with

on a daily basis. Peasant, indigenous, and agroecological organizations are promoting locally

based methods of focussing on environmental, economic and cultural aspects of food availability,

access and use. Many of these organizations are redefining what it means to be food secure and

are linking other struggles with those surrounding food.

My project draws on local and scientific knowledge bases2, in order to improve the

nutritional status of smallholder farmers, particularly of the most vulnerable family members

(women and children). This study identified, developed and evaluated, in partnership with mixed

gender farmer research teams, factors that impact food security as well as identifying and

evaluating maize varieties.

1 The average household size in the municipality of La Campa in western Honduras was 6.4 (with a standard deviation of 2.77) (Tucker, Eakin and Castellanos 2010: 24). 2 This thesis not intended to privilege scientific knowledge over local knowledge but to use both to come up with a better understanding of nutrition in its localized context.

4

The aim of this project is to examine the factors that influence the livelihood strategies

employed by marginal, highland farming households in Honduras to attain food security.

Specifically, I ask the questions: 1) In what ways do dietary values and food security strategies

intersect with issues arising from the specific environmental locale, as well as by national and

international policies? 2) How are cultural and social factors both hindering and enabling in

regards to household food security strategies? 3) What are the perceived nutritional and culinary

values that farmers attribute to their different crop varieties? What is the relationship between

farmers' perceptions of nutritional values of landraces 3 and the laboratory-tested nutrient

content?

The goals of this project are:

1. To gain an ethnographic understanding of the perceptions of local crop varieties

(particularly those of maize), culinary practices, and the locally preferred nutritional and

culinary qualities of maize, and how these intersect with agricultural decision-making.

2. To take samples of key maize varieties and assess nutrient content.

3. To generate qualitative data of the nutritional and culinary characteristics of crops that

will inform further research by local farmers and participatory research4 with national

and international scientists.

4. To provide data on the opportunities and constraints for improving nutrition within the

broader context of community livelihoods.

5. To consider local perceptions about health, nutrition and dietary changes.

3 Landraces refer to locally grown maize populations that have resulted from selection and management by farmers over many generations (Bellon et al, 2006). 4 For Cornwall and Jewkes (1995:1667) participatory research is focused on gaining “knowledge through action” and using a bottom-up approach which focused on “locally defined priorities and perspectives”.

5

6. To explore how these perceptions affect farmers’ desire to conserve local germplasm.

7. To consider how the findings can be linked theoretically to the growing data on the

political ecology of dietary change.

My thesis begins with a chapter on the relevant literature around the key concepts used in

my analysis, including political ecology, food security and food sovereignty. Chapter 2 gives

context to the research site and this project, while Chapter 3 discusses methodology. Chapter 4

addresses the environmental and climatic heterogeneity of Honduras, specifically looking at the

municipality of Jesus de Otoro, and how this, as well as unpredictable weather, impacts

household food security strategies. This chapter then focuses on policies that have sought to

address agrarian reform and how the marginal, hillside farmers to whom I spoke, and the

experiences they possess, have been ignored by these policies. Chapter 5 addresses the cultural

and social factors affecting food availability, access, and use by households in the Otoro Valley,

and concludes by giving background information on the nutritional qualities of maize and the

results from an analysis of 90 varieties of local maize and how these results relate to the factors

described above. In the last chapter I conclude my findings and suggest options for further

research.

6

CHAPTER 1: Literature Review

Introduction:

Three theoretical frameworks have influenced my research: political ecology, food

security and food sovereignty. The political ecology perspective approaches the complex

relationship between communities and the environment from a global-local perspective, while

food security allows for the exploration of access to healthy and nutritious foods. A food

sovereignty perspective helps to illustrate the decision-making abilities of these communities. I

use these frameworks to describe people’s food security strategies because they collectively

provide a perspective on nutritional intake that ranges from the individual level to the wider level

of international policy, while seeing the individual as part of a cultural and ecological

environment.

Political Ecology

Political ecology is a theoretical perspective that attempts to integrate human and physical

approaches to environmental change though an analysis of: politically, ecologically and

economically marginal people; the social and cultural pressures of production on local resources;

and, the interaction of local-global politics (Zimmerer and Basset 2003; Robbins 2004; Peet and

Watts 2004). The most frequently cited definition of this concept was stated by Blaikie and

Brookfield (1987). They maintain that political ecology merges “the concerns of ecology and a

broadly defined political economy. Together this encompasses the constantly shifting dialectic

between society and land-based resources, and also within classes and groups within society

itself” (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987:17). Various authors have remarked that political ecology

comprises less of a theoretically consistent field of study and more of a loosely connected area of

7

research that has similar methodologies and interests (e.g. Peet and Watts 2004). These interests

include: (1) nature/culture interactions; (2) analyses of the capabilities and agency of local actors;

(3) how the interactions, from the local to the global, are determined by social, cultural,

environmental and economic elements; and (4), how historic activities determine and continue to

create the range of inequalities that exist today (Walker 1998; Biersack and Greenberg 2006).

The connection between human culture and the physical environment is one that has

been studied by anthropologists since the beginnings of the discipline. Ecological approaches to

cultural and social concepts have waxed or waned in influence on anthropological research over

time. In the 1940s, Julian Steward inspired by the earlier works of geographer Carl Sauer,

developed the first explicit melding of ecology and anthropology under the banner of cultural

ecology. Though the works of Steward and other cultural ecologists have been criticized for

being apolitical and deterministic, their work created a place for ecology and the environment as

a subfield within anthropology. Forty year later, the environment and human culture again grew

in prominence as researchers fused ecological anthropology with the study of political economy.

These researchers called their framework political ecology. The early works relied on neo-

Marxist theories and focused on issues of class and production (Bryant 1997, Zimmerer and

Bassett 2003, Robbins 2004). In the following decades, political ecology researchers were

influenced by many other theoretical perspectives, including peasant studies (Stonich 1993), post-

modernism (Escobar 1996), liberation theology (Peet and Watts 2004), and feminist perspectives

(Rocheleau et al 1996). During this time, anthropologists and many other academics used what

they called a political ecology theoretical framework for their studies, though it was still an

emerging theoretical framework; as Peet and Watts wrote in 2004, “the theoretical work has just

only begun” (36).

8

By merging political economy with issues of ecology, political ecology endeavours to

remedy the flaws in both frameworks (Biersack and Greenberg 2006). Political ecology addresses

the “structures of inequality that mediated human-nature articulations” and places power and

the environment at the centre of analysis (Biersack and Greenberg 2006:3). This framework

values social action (see Bryant & Bailey 1997), as can be seen in works such as Mehta (1996) and

Kalipeni and Oppong (1998) who fashion the idea of political ecology through a policy

perspective, as well as political ecologists such as Stonich (1993), who worked from a standpoint

of social justice. Much research in political ecology has been focused on the ways that

marginalized people deal with deteriorating and shifting environments (Finnis 2007), including

analyses of agricultural resource issues (Stonich 1993; Jansen 1998; Grossman 1998), biodiversity

(Escobar 1998), deforestation (Vasquez-Leon and Liverman 2004), health issues (Turshen 1984;

Stonich 1993; Kalipeni and Oppong 1998), land use and control (Turshen 1984; Moffat and

Finnis 2005), as well as soil loss and degradation (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Zimmerer 1996).

Food is a uniquely important link between humans and the environment and thus a

political ecology of food and nutrition is a natural step in understanding how the interactions of

both biological and social factors influence the nutritional condition of individuals and

populations. Despite this, there has been limited work on the political ecology of diet, nutrition,

and agriculture (Finnis 2007). Political ecology provides a way to approach food security and

nutrition by considering the myriad of factors that can mediate access to healthy and culturally

preferred foodstuffs. Understanding perceptions of nutrition and a healthy diet at the local level is

crucial to understanding and addressing food insecurity. Giving voice to local understandings of

nutrition and preferred qualities of food allows for a process of active involvement by local

players in the formation and development of policies, strategies and programs to combat food

9

insecurity and malnutrition. Nutrition and household food security are affected by the

perceptions of household members, which may vary according to gender, age, education, labour

divisions within the family, occupation, socio-economic status, and experience (Callens and

Seiffert 2003). Another reason political ecology is an important perspective to use while studying

food security and food sovereignty is its emphasis on analyzing the myriad acts of power present

in any food system. Hvalkof and Escobar (1998:426) define political ecology as “the study of

manifold constructions of nature in contexts of power”. Nature in my research is chiefly the

ecological context where food is produced but also the varieties of food that can be grown.

Studying power means acknowledging unequal relations within our global food system, as well as

the complexities and uncertainties of what determines nutritional status and health. Working

within the emerging political ecology research agenda of dietary transitions (Finnis 2007), the

investigation of how broader changes in crop variety availability create changes of nutritional

preferences at the household level will have implications for future community development

projects. My research works towards filling the political ecology research gap through an

examination of the relationships between food, cultural preference and nutritional perceptions,

and agricultural decision-making. Political ecology, specifically local political ecology, provides a

particularly useful context in which to look at nutritional preferences and improving livelihoods.

Thus by considering the multiple factors that constrain households and the decision-making

capabilities of individuals, I will be able to better understand the food security status of

communities in Honduras. Perhaps because of Honduras’ agrarian features and its tumultuous

political history, many political ecologists have worked in this Central American country.

Political ecology research that touches on health, nutrition and food security, does so in reference

to other main topics, usually that of agriculture. Political ecology studies within Honduras have

concentrated on how marginalized farmers are dealing with changes in the local environment,

10

the economy, and political conditions both locally and globally (Stonich 1993; DeWalt 1998;

Jansen 1998).

Beginning in 1981, anthropologists such as Billie DeWalt, Kathleen DeWalt, and Susan

Stonich worked as part of the International Sorghum/Millet Collaborative Research Support

Program (INTSORMIL), studying the relationship between farming systems and nutrition

systems in southern Honduras (see DeWalt and DeWalt 1982, DeWalt 1983; DeWalt and

DeWalt 1984; DeWalt and DeWalt 1987; Stonich 1993; DeWalt and Stonich 1996; DeWalt

1998). The main objective of INTORMIL was to study the socio-economic limitations on the

production, distribution, and consumption of sorghum (DeWalt and DeWalt 1987). As extensive

agricultural research was to focus on improving sorghum in the department, the researchers

wanted to establish “the most appropriate means by which such improvement might occur, as

well as to attempt to predict what the socio-economic and nutritional consequences of such a

change might be” (DeWalt and DeWalt 1987: n.p.). Out of this collaborative effort came further

research looking at the relationship between farming systems, consumption and nutrition in

southern Honduras. By using what they later called a political ecology approach, researchers

documented the impacts of the large-scale shift to cotton, beef, and melon production, and the

environmental and socio-cultural shifts that went along with it. They found that the development

efforts of the World Bank, USAID and the Honduran government to promote commercialization

and export agriculture were harmful to the majority of the population of this southern region,

and they did not address the root causes of deforestation and land degradation (DeWalt 1998:

311). Reflecting on his work in Honduras over ten years later, Billie DeWalt wrote that he and

his fellow researchers attempted to utilize a political ecology approach, which he defines as a

blending of political-economy and human ecology perspectives to determine the dynamic

11

interaction and potential contradictions among social, political and economic process of human

health, nutrition and demography, and the use and abuse of natural resources (DeWalt 1998:

295, see also Stonich 1993; Stonich and DeWalt 1996).

A graduate student with the DeWalts, Susan Stonich worked alongside the other

researchers in southern Honduras in the 1980s. Following Blaikie and Brookfield (1987), Stonich

(1993) was one of the first authors to call her style political ecology. Stonich looked at the

connections between environmental, social, cultural, and policy characteristics of development in

southern Honduras at different levels spanning from the individual to the global. Using the

earlier works of Blaikie (1985) in which he showed how colonial practices were leading to soil

degradation of the fields of African farmers, Stonich proposed a “chain of explanation” to

demonstrate the link between the environmental deterioration and social processes in southern

Honduras (Stonich 1993:148). Stonich (1993) raises the question of human agency by studying

how external forces negotiate the behaviours of local actors. In her work, the concept of human

agency is employed to demonstrate individual responses to external forces and the ability of

individuals to make decisions.

Another important ethnographer and political ecologist in the Honduran context is Kees

Jansen. Jansen (1998) writes about agriculture and environmental deterioration in a village in the

municipality of Santa Bárbara, in western Honduras. Jansen believes that the agricultural

practices that he observed, which were destroying the land, were not the result of the commonly

cited causes such as poverty, ignorance, population pressures, or the imposition of external

capitalist development, but in fact are part of the larger environmental, social and political

context of the region (Jansen 1998). His main theoretical argument is that humans are subjects

who have the capacity to reproduce social structures that are constantly negotiated and

12

heterogeneous (Jansen 1998). He is particularly interested in the diversity of farmer responses to

environmental degradation. Like Billie DeWalt and Susan Stonich, Jansen realizes that the

diversity of individual responses means that some contradictions are present. Though he does not

particularly address nutrition or food security, his emphasis on rural households that produce

much of their own food, means that availability, access and utilization of basic grains is a theme

throughout his work.

Food Security and Food Security Strategies:

The most recent definition of food security by the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture

Organization (FAO) describes this concept as “a situation that exists when all people, at all times,

have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their

dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” (FAO 2002). This description

alludes to an idea of food security as not being solely the embodied experience of malnutrition by

an individual, but is instead about individuals being fully social and active beings. In fact, food

security contains biological, social and cultural components. And just as the world holds a

diversity of ways of living, individuals and households throughout the world create unique and

diverse strategies to try and achieve food security. My work looks at those strategies of attaining

food security employed by the farming households with whom I worked. In looking at food security

strategies, I take elements of the livelihoods perspective found in the local political ecology

framework and apply them to the decisions about food related issues made by rural highland

farmers in Honduras. Following from the above sub-section, political ecologists such as Warren,

Batterbury and Osbahr (2001) promote a local political ecology approach, which emphasises the

importance of local decision-making and local context. They build their framework on the work

of Chambers’ (1997) that shows that natural resources are only a part of what makes up

13

livelihoods. They also agree with Ellis (1999) and Rocheleau et al. (1996) in saying that forms of

power inherent in gender, class, ethnicity, and political status influence rights that affect

livelihoods and decision-making. When addressing food security strategies, it is important to

interpret these strategies in the context of the overall decisions that aim to meet a diversity of

needs. Food is only one of a variety of interdependent needs that effect household decision-

making (FAO 2005:6). Households are always balancing conflicting interests and risks in order to

survive in both the short and longer terms (FAO 2005:6), and food strategies are an important

aspect of the whole.

What the term food security means and how food security can be improved is an idea

that has been “widely debated and much-confused” (von Braun et al 1992: 5). Indeed, since its

conception in the 1970s, the term has evolved and expanded to reflect how complex the role of

food is within society. The concept of food security was originally launched during the initial

World Food Conference in 1974, and was defined in terms of a global supply problem that could

be resolved by having a constant supply of basic foods at stable prices (Maxwell and Smith 1992).

Originally, the term food security was used to describe whether a country was self-sufficient, but

without addressing the meaning of sufficient. Maxwell and Smith (1992) discuss how ‘enough’

food meant having resources to meet dietary energy requirements of individuals, in other words

that there was sufficient caloric intake to supply all dietary energy needed by individuals. In the

early 1980s, Indian economist Amartya Sen wrote a book called Poverty and Famines: An Essay on

Entitlement and Deprivation (1981) which became very important in food security studies as in it he

demonstrated that famines do not only occur from lack of food, but from inherent inequalities

within society. The stressing of the individuals’ ability to access food, led to a new way of defining

the concept of food security (Pottier 1999:12). Works, such as Sen’s, showed that food insecurity

was not due to an absence of food in a region, but rather, that food insecurity was greatly affected

14

by the social roles and social status inherent in food access and production (Carr 2006:16).

According to Carr (2006:16), cultural perceptions and local knowledge were shown to have a

much more important role in food outcomes than had previously been envisioned. By focusing

on access to food, there was a shift in the idea of food security as a fulfillment of a fundamental

need to seeing food as one aspect of a diverse livelihood. In order to further understand the

multifaceted character of food, studies on food began to focus at a local level. Placing household

food security within a local environmental, political, and social context makes it an appropriate

concept to study from a political ecology perspective. Food security is both an area of study and a

perspective that has a decades’ old basis of investigating the constraints and capabilities of people

in their daily struggle to access food. Since my research focuses on food and nutrition, using food

security to analyze my data was the logical choice.

Achieving a world in which everyone has access to safe, sufficient, healthy, and culturally

appropriate food is a well-meaning goal, however, the definitions of food security promote the

notion that everyone should have food without specifying where it will come from, or who will

produce it. Because of this, it is worthy of critique. A food security that aims to build

transnational market mechanisms that ship commodities from one place to another, has been

criticized as the epitome of a neoliberal approach to development (Schanbacher 2010), one

which “may contribute to creating more dependency, poverty and marginalization” (IAASTD

2009:20). This can occur when concepts of food security become intertwined with ideas of

neoliberal development formulated by industrialized nations of the northern hemisphere, and

promoted heavily by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), and the UN’s

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The model of food security that they promoted was

characterized by trade liberalization, privatization, deregulation and open markets, with an

15

emphasis on industrialized, corporate-driven agriculture, a model that is distinctly different than

many unique and contextualized food security strategies throughout the world. This model of

food security also removes access to food from other elements of livelihoods and healthy living.

Because the notion of food security does not state in which manner safe, sufficient, healthy and

culturally appropriate food should be achieved, this ambiguity has allowed the term has been

coopted by a wide range of actors. Others have moved away from the concept of food security

and formulated a new term called food sovereignty.

Food Sovereignty

While the notion of food security draws attention to access to food, the notion of food

sovereignty incorporates "the right of peoples and sovereign states to democratically determine

their own agricultural and food policies" (IAASTD Global Report 2009:113). The difference

between food security and food sovereignty is that the former sets a goal while the latter defines

the way to realize this goal. In 1996, the members of La Vía Campesina created the concept of

the food sovereignty framework to mean:

“The right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced

through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define

their own food and agriculture systems. It puts those who produce, distribute

and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the

demands of markets and corporations. It defends the interests and inclusion of

the next generation...Food sovereignty prioritizes local and national economies

and markets and empowers peasant and family farmer-driven agriculture...and

food production, distribution and consumption based on environmental, social

and economic sustainability” (La Vía Campesina 2007).

Quaye et al. (2009) describe food sovereignty as having four rights: (a) the right to nutritious, safe,

16

sufficient, and ethnically suitable food, (b) the right to access land, water, seeds, and biodiversity,

(c) the right to produce food sustainably and in an ecologically acceptable manner, and (d) the

right to access trade and local markets (see also Quaye 2007). Figure 1 presents a conceptual

framework of food sovereignty.

Figure 1: Food Sovereignty Source: Adapted from Quaye et al. 2009.

To understand the history of the term food sovereignty, one must understand the history of the

global farmers’ organization called La Via Campesina5. La Via Campesina (or simply Via

Campesina as they say in Honduras) is an international movement comprising organizations

made up of landless peasants, small-scale farmers, migrants and farm workers, rural women, and

indigenous and agrarian communities throughout Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. This

organization grants opportunities for farmers to express a set of demands in the international

arena (Desmarais 2008:138). Over 150 agricultural organizations, representing millions of rural

households from over 56 countries are a part of La Via Campesina (Desmarais 2008:138). The

movement has strong links to Honduras. The early 1990s were a time of increasing liberalization

in Honduras (see Chapter 4 for further discussion), and the Honduras leaders struggling for

agrarian reform encountered many hardships. The remaining farmer unions during these

5 “The Peasant’s Way”

17

hardships of reduced capital to fund local organizations constituted Coordinador de Organizaciones

Campesinas de Honduras (Honduran Coordinating Council of Peasant Organizations, COCOCH).

The lack of funds prohibited the organization from performing any significant action within their

own country. Thus, national leaders had to explore beyond their borders to find opportunities for

political and civil society engagement. In 1991, the Honduran leaders met with farmer union

leaders from six other countries to found the Association of Central American Peasant

Organizations for Cooperation and Development (ASOCODE). At the 1992 ASOCODE

meeting in Managua, COCOCH leader Rafael Alegría attended along with delegates from

North America, the Caribbean, and Europe. During this meeting they passed the Managua

Declaration in which they called on “sister farm organizations” globally to unite with them in

constructing an “alternative development model” (Edelman 2003:194). In 1993, in another

global assembly of peasant and farmer organization organizers in Mons, Belgium, La Via

Campesina was formally established. Honduras is further linked with this global movement

because from 1996–2004 this association was headquartered along with COCOCH in the

Honduran capital with Alegría as its general coordinator (Desmarais 2007:8).

In 1996, La Via Campesina initiated its campaign around the notion of food

sovereignty during the World Food Summit mentioned above. There, the peasant network

publicised food sovereignty as “the right of each nation to maintain and develop its own capacity

to produce its basic foods, respecting cultural and productive diversity”, and also “the right to

produce our own food in our own territory” (Desmarais 2007:34). In 2000, La Via Campesina

added “the right of peoples to define their agriculture and food policy” (Desmarais 2007:34).

Food sovereignty was seen as a viable alternative to formal food security policy, specifically its

dismissal of the importance of local food production. For many in the movement, the phrase

18

“food security” was fashioned within a climate of mistrust of American and neoliberal strategies

that aimed to feed the world with surpluses grown in the western world (McMichael, 2008:42).

I have used the concept of food sovereignty because of the ideas rooted in Honduran

agrarian movements, its focus on local and democratic participation, but more importantly,

because it reveals the complex and heterogeneous makeup of small-scale agricultural

communities. The idea of food sovereignty helps increase understanding of the heterogeneity,

complexity, and agency of these communities alongside the diversity of the cultural values,

traditions, and customs they embrace. Indeed, along with recognizing the diversity of local

communities, this concept allows for the recognition of the importance of the agency of local

actors. Food sovereignty allows us to "avoid conceiving of these communities as passive subjects

of the globalization process" (Schanbacher 2010:55). In order to situate the food strategies of the

households in rural Honduras with whom I worked, the next chapter describes the context of the

research.

19

CHAPTER 2: Research Context

Geographic location, physical environment, and social and demographic factors of the Otoro Valley

Travelling from San Pedro Sula, the largest city in Honduras, to the Otoro valley and the

town of Jesus de Otoro in the department of Intibucá, one passes along a smooth new highway

that connects the Caribbean Sea on the northern side and the Pacific Ocean in the south.

Vehicles pass through plantations of bananas, sugar cane, and oil palms, flat, uniform cornfields,

and large expanses of rocky soil with cattle grazing. Evidence of mechanization, such as tractors

and large irrigation systems, can be seen in the plantations and fields, and some communities

where the farm workers live are tucked in amongst the large blocks of mono-cropped land. As

one climbs out of the Sula Valley and into the highlands, the view changes. The steep slopes of

the mountains are a mosaic of small fields of maize, coffee, and pasture, fruit trees and

pineapples, fallow fields, and the small plots of cleared land around homes, all tucked in between

stretches of secondary forest. Vendors selling fruit, candy, pottery, and woven baskets sit in small

shelters at the side of the highway, though with the improvements of the highway paid for with

funds from the United State’s Millennium Challenge Corporation, many vendors have been

moved to small concrete block stalls. The highway passes Lago de Yojoa, the largest lake in

Honduras, where small restaurants and individuals selling strings of tilapia and black bass line the

sides of the highway. Midway between San Pedro Sula and the capital city is the town of

Siguatepeque. At the town of Siguatepeque, one has to leave the large highway and head south

towards the indigenous town of La Esperanza. South of this turn-off, a paved highway passes

through the mountains and down into one of Honduras’ interior valleys, the Otoro Valley,

20

before snaking its way back up into the mountains. As you head out of the mountains and into

the Otoro Valley, you get vast views of the large pastures and rice fields that fill the valley

bottom, with smaller plots tucked

into irregular or poorer locations

and high mountains surrounding

the valley. It is in this region that I

conducted my research within

three communities at different

altitudes: 1) Barrio Nuevo, 2)

Crucita Oriente, and 3) El Águila.

See Figure 2 for a map of the area

showing the location of these

communities in relation to Jesus

de Otoro.

Jesus de Otoro is the

county seat for a municipality by

the same name, which consists of

this large town, five villages and

approximately 150 smaller

communities, housing a total

population of around 25,000 inhabitants (Martinez 2009). In pre-Colombian times, the valley

was home to many Lenca agricultural communities, who cultivated maize, yucca, beans, sugar

cane, sweet potatoes, cocoa, and many fruits (Ienstroza M 2007:37). The valley changed

Figure 2: Map of Jesus de Otoro and surrounding area, including Barrio Nuevo, Crucita Oriente, and El Águila (sketch by the author, 2010)

21

drastically with the arrival of Spanish settlers in the 16th century, who brought with them horses,

pigs and cows (Ienstroza M 2007:37). By the 19th century, much of the valley land had been

appropriated by a landowning oligarchy to grow sugar cane, coffee, tobacco, and intensive cattle

ranching, using the indigenous and mestizo population to work the farms (Ienstroza M 2007:37).

Today, the communities at higher altitudes around the valley are predominantly of Lenca ethnic

origin. Over the last few decades there has been some in-migration from the poorer areas of

southern and western Honduras. At the same time there has been much out-migration by family

members who work in the larger cities, such as San Pedro Sula or Tegucigalpa. Many families

also have members who live in the United States, most being “mojados” (illegal immigrants).

Though the fertility rate in Honduras fell from six children per woman in 1980 to 3.3 in the

present (Bermúdez-Madriz et al., 2010:S211), families with whom I spoke tended to be large,

with many members. Some families had up to 14 children, and families in the more remote areas

were apt to have larger families. Often siblings will live nearby and it was not uncommon to see

many young cousins playing together at the homes I visited.

Infrastructure, such as roads, homes and schools, differ depending on location within the

valley. Most areas are served only by gravel or sand roads, which become difficult to traverse

during the rainy season (from May to November). During this time the roads become

increasingly washed out and fixing them would mean that all the work might wash away in the

next afternoon rainstorm. One important organization that fixes and improves rural roads is the

Honduran Coffee Institute (IHCAFE), which was established in 1970 (Tucker 2008). IHCAFE is

a not-for-profit private body that supports coffee improvements, development and marketing,

and promotion of Honduran coffee. During the late 1980s, the Honduran government passed a

decree that instituted an annual payment for the improvements of roads in departments where

22

coffee was produced that was to be proportional to production (Tucker 2008). This means that

roads are improved until the point where coffee is grown, but that communities living at higher

altitudes do not have roads that are accessible by the trucks that pick up the freshly cut coffee.

Moreover, all roads lead down into the valley’s large coffee cooperatives, and thus, to drive from

one highland community to another might mean having to drive all the way down into the valley

before heading up a different mountain road. However, many foot trails lead from one

community to the other, and even when roads are used to travel by foot, many shortcuts

(derechura) cut straight through the forests and fields, instead of following the hairpin curves of the

road.6 In the highland communities, most people get around on foot or on horseback.

The homes in the villages are built predominantly of adobe or cinder block, plastered and

whitewashed using local calcium, or painted in colours. Within communities it is easy to spot the

households that receive remittances, as they have often been newly built and are painted bright

colours and have high cinderblock walls around the yards. Within the smaller communities, most

of the houses have dirt floors and are made of adobe or bahareque (plaited wood or cornstalk

and mud walls). All the houses I visited that had dirt floors were swept spotless, as were the patios

around the home. Houses have either sheet metal or tile roofs. In the past, houses had thatch,

however, I was told that there had been a program to replace thatch roofs because of the illnesses

caused by insects that lived in them.7 The majority of the houses have no screens on the

6 People mention that it can be dangerous walking down the mountain paths, especially by yourself. They mention danger from wild animals, robbers, and ‘bolos’ (drunks). 7 Chinches are insects measuring about two to three centimetres long which such blood. During the day they hide in the cracks of adobe walls and thatch roofs, and at night they come out looking for human blood. They transmit the parasite Trypanosomoa cruzi, which leads to Chagas disease. Chagas disease causes high fever and swelling of the eye-lids at first, but years later it reapears and attacks internal organs (CIDA 2011).

23

windows or doors, and wooden shutters are closed only when the family is not home.8 This is a

worry to some, as flies, mosquitoes, gnats and other disease vectors fly easily throughout the

home.

Basic education in Honduras goes up until sixth grade. In rural communities, often there

are only one or two teachers for the six grades, and rarely do classes go beyond that. For further

education, youth must rent, billet, or stay with family in the town of Jesus de Otoro in order to

attend colegio for three more years. For most of the population, grade six is the terminal grade. In

the early 1990s, the Secretary of Education and USAID created the Educatodos program which

gave youth and adults the opportunity to finish grades one through six in three years. The

program was expanded in 2000 to include grades seven through nine. Educatodos offers an

alternative way of education that centres around rural and marginal urban populations who have

limited access to formal schooling. The program is coordinated through local volunteer

facilitators (facilitadores) who teach in the evenings or on weekends using audiotapes and

textbooks. Educatodos had a strong program in one of my research communities, while in another

community they had a community-organized school that had been built by FHIS (Fondo

Hondureno de Inversion Social). In the latter village, the local community looked after the school, the

school grounds and prepared the school lunch, and organized the pay of the teacher through a

program run by the ministry of education called El Proyecto Hondureno de Educacion Comunitaria

(PROHECO).

Income in these communities is primarily earned through agricultural activities. Most

8 While parcitipating in an information and funding drive with local youth in a small village, I observed that the youth knew if someone was away from home from afar by seeing if the shutters were closed and if there was no smoke coming from the kitchen.

24

crops require temporary labour, and therefore, many people work as day labourers while also

engaging in household subsistence activities. During the summer (January to April) coffee picking

provides alternative forms of income, especially important to women and children. Public schools

are closed during this time to allow children to participate in income generation for the

household. Women and older children also bake bread and tamales to sell within the community.

Some individuals work selling second-hand clothing or plastic kitchenware door-to-door, while

others work in the town of Jesus de Otoro. Most land is privately owned, although there are also

lands that are communal, national, or occupied (meaning used by those who do not have title to

the land) (Martínez 2009).

Increasingly, the younger generation is migrating to major cities of the country or abroad

to work and remittances are sent back to their families in Honduras. Honduras receives a large

amount of income remittances, estimated at $2 billion by the World Bank in 2004 (Boland and

Brautigam 2010), from migrants working in the United States. The Honduran government

anticipates that remittances from the maquila sector and from the United States will help produce

non-farm activities in rural areas and lead to lower levels of rural poverty (Humphries et al.

2012). Approximately 11 percent of Honduran families have a relative abroad, representing

nearly 1 million Hondurans (of 7 million living in the country) who have left in search of better

livelihoods (IDRC 2007). Many in Honduras, however, see remittances as having a negative

impact on agriculture and also on nutrition. While driving with a FIPAH agronomist, for

example, we passed through a town with nice new buildings, but no men to be seen. I was told

that most of the males above the age of 16 had left and were sending money home. This had

implications for more than just community demographics. For example, I was also told that the

local NGO with whom I was associated used to work in this village, but that the program failed

25

because of the lack of interest. There was no longer a farmer research group here as it was the

men who would normally work the fields, and the women did not want to work. This was

because they did not have to work thanks to the dollars coming back from their husbands or

other male relatives.9 DeWalt (1998) explains that, “because the poor have increasingly come to

depend on the remittances from those members of their family who engage in temporary or

permanent migration, they are unwilling to invest time and resources in attempting to intensify

their agricultural operations” (308). I was told that this has led to an increase in consumption of

processed foods and a decrease in the ability of families to eat nutritious foods.

As discussed in the Introduction, Honduras has a high prevalence of malnutrition, which

is shaped not only by food availability and access, but also by disease, sanitation, and the

availability of preventative health care services (FAO 2010: 33). The health system in Honduras

is composed of public and private sectors. Two institutions provide public health care: the

Secretarías de Salud (SS), and the Instituto Hondureño de Seguridad Social (IHSS). There is a large health

centre in the town of Jesus de Otoro, which is always very busy, and a small centre in Crucita

Oriente, but the nurse and doctors are there very infrequently. The leading causes of death in

Honduras are deaths during the perinatal period, followed by diabetes, strokes, and respiratory

diseases, such as influenza and pneumonia (Bermúdez-Madriz et al 2010:S211). Most

communities in the valley have a midwife, though not necessarily with formal training (also see

9 During a meeting with youth CIALs in the Marcala area, two young men spoke about how programs such as the CIALs run by FIPAH are very important to the youth in these small communities. For the youth here it is hard to stay when there is not anything to do there, so they migrate to the large cities such as Tegucigalpa or San Pedro Sula in search of work. Others try and hop on the train that brings them to the US. However, programs such as the CIALs are giving youth a reason to stay, skills to start their own businesses within their communities, skills to improve their livelihoods, a reason to stay together with family, a reason to be proud of who they are. Thanks to my friend Warren Dodd for bringing this issue originally to my attention. Warren mentioned this after his stay in Vallecillo, which is another area where FIPAH works, and where this is an ongoing problem issue. He had questions about what FIPAH´s role was in addressing the issue of the “villages without men”.

26

Rowlands 1997:67). Despite advances in the control of pre-transitional conditions, vector-borne

diseases like dengue, malaria and Chagas disease, still pose a serious threat, especially to the

poorest households (Bermúdez-Madriz et al 2010:S211). Diarrhoea related to intestinal

infections affects many children under 5 living in poverty, which is linked to lack of access to

clean drinking water (Bermúdez-Madriz et al 2010:S211). I was told that the leading causes of

death among both adults and children in the hillside communities of Jesus de Otoro are

complications from gastrointestinal and respiratory infections. During my time in the Valley, it

became evident from interactions in many of the communities that households lack the financial

resources and education to know when to seek medical attention, leading to worse infections that

are more difficult and costly to treat.

Drinking water in the countryside is taken from small streams, springs or groundwater.

The amount of water is not necessarily enough, and the water may not be clean since many of

the water sources are adversely affected by untreated wastewater and sedimentation arising from

deforestation. In rural communities in Honduras, many national and international organizations

have facilitated the building of wells and gravity-fed water systems, in particular after Hurricane

Mitch in 1998. However, many of these international organizations and NGOs seldom return to

see if the water systems are working or to provide funding for maintenance and operation.

Maintenance is left as the responsibility of the communities, where organizations have educated

community members to be plumbers and created water boards (Juntas de Agua) to collect water. In

some communities the Juntas de Agua can be very powerful, such as was the case in one of the

communities I visited during my work with the local NGO. In rural areas, the Servicio Autónomo

Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (SANAA) or National Autonomous Water and Sewerage

Service, has worked in small communities to provide one tap and latrine to each house and

sanitary education to the communities. Many houses I visited had latrines and pilas (above

27

ground water holding tanks used for bathing, washing dishes, and doing laundry), and PLAN

International had built the majority of them. However, I also visited houses that did not have

latrines with a septic tank, but instead just holes in the ground that in turn contaminated the

surrounding water sources.

I was informed that many of the waterways are unfit for human consumption due to

bacteria and/or pesticide contamination from farmers’ fields (such as DDT). Especially in the

valley, people mentioned that the water was not good for drinking, and that children were

susceptible to diarrhoea and parasites. People are very aware of the importance of clean water. In

2011, the local NGO began a community project to evaluate the water quality in Maye, a

community within the valley, in response to concerns about contamination and its effect on

malnutrition and wellbeing. While I was in Barrio Nuevo, women invited me to a demonstration

in Siguatepeque to protest the illegal cutting of the forest around the headwaters of the streams

that provided water to their community and those above them. As I will discuss in Chapter 4, El

Águila and its neighbouring communities also have a history with water protection.

The town of Jesus de Otoro has a garbage collection. However, the waste is brought to a

location along the highway above some of the lower valley communities and alongside a stream,

where the waste is picked over and then burnt. From most locations in the valley it was possible

to see the smoke from the dump. The mountainside at this location was growing with the

constant dumping of garbage. Some members of the highland communities brought their waste

to the dump themselves, but usually solid waste was dumped beside the house and burnt in small

fires. The smell of burning plastic was not uncommon while visiting these communities.

28

Only a few communities, usually those close to the highway, have electricity. Of the

communities I worked in, only a few houses at the upper end of Barrio Nuevo had electricity

because of their proximity to Coclan, a community along the highway. Nearly all of the

households in the Otoro Valley use firewood for cooking, which puts great pressure on the

surrounding forests. Though most households I visited had stoves that vented outdoors,

historically many of these homes would have had stoves that kept the smoke inside. Even with

chimneys leading outside, smoke does enter the house from the open windows. Most families

desired roble (Quercus segoviensis), for their firewood as they say it burns hot with little smoke and

ocote (Pinus oocarpa) to start the fire as it has resin that easily ignites.

Malnutrition and “Hidden Hunger”

The most recent estimates by the United Nations agency the Food and Agriculture

Organization (FAO) are that 925 million people globally do not get enough food to meet their

needs for an active life (FAO 2010). The percentage is higher than the level of 800 million at the

occasion of the second World Food Summit in 1996 as well as greater than it was previous to the

2008 food crises (Wegner and Zwart 2011). As mentioned, in Honduras 75 percent of the

population of rural areas live in extreme poverty, and a third of all Honduran children under the

age of 5 suffer from chronic malnutrition (PAHO 2007), which means that they do not eat

enough energy and protein over a long period resulting in stunted growth. However, energy-

protein malnutrition is not the only concern. Taken together, micronutrient deficiencies affect a

larger number of people globally than does protein-energy malnutrition (Bouis et al. 1999). This

“hidden hunger” caused by vitamin A-deficiency (VAD) disorders, iron deficiency and anaemia,

and iodine-deficiency disorders, is estimated to affect over 2 billion people worldwide (Kennedy

et al. 2003). Pregnant women and young children are considered to be the most vulnerable to

29

these deficiencies (Dickinson et al. 2009). Although the country was certified as virtually free of

iodine-deficiency disorders in 2002, one third of Honduran children suffer from iron deficiency,

and anaemia continues to be prevalent among women, especially pregnant women (PAHO

2007). VAD in Honduras affects approximately 16-19 percent of people in rural areas according

to a national survey in 1996 (Nestel et al. 1999:36). Deficiencies in essential micronutrients

diminish children’s motivation and development as well as damaging mental and cognitive

abilities and leading to lower intellectual and physical abilities when these children become adults

(Graham and Welch 2000: 1629-1630). Micronutrient malnutrition not only leads to poor

health, but lowers worker productivity, causes increases in “rates of mortality, chronic diseases,

and permanent cognitive impairment of infants born to mothers with micronutrient deficiencies”

lessening many prospects for secure, comfortable lives (Dickinson et al. 2009).

Policymakers, economists and plant breeders typically see malnutrition as an issue of low

agricultural productivity. This means that only certain agricultural policies are put forward,

which leads to an emphasis by commercial breeders on yield and yield stability, while other

agronomic traits such as resistance to pests, plant height, and likelihood of lodging are also taken

into account (Duvick and Cassman 1999). Yield is important for increasing quantity of food, but

indicates little about the availability of nutrients for consumption. The dedication over the last

half-century to increasing yields has created a “blind spot where incremental erosion in the

nutritional quality of our food has occurred” (Halweil 2007:5). There has recently been a call to

realize that attention merely to production yields and not nutritional value is unsound and

negligent policy (Welsh and Graham 2002; Ruel and Bouis 1998; Dickenson et al. 2009).

30

Local NGO: Fundacion de Investigacion Participativa de Honduras (Foundation for Participatory Research with Honduran Farmers, or FIPAH)

Beginning in 1996, a program was developed in Honduras using the method of CIALs

(Comité de Investigación Agrícola Local) established by the International Center for Tropical

Agriculture (CIAT) (Classen et al. 2008). This methodology instructs groups of farmers to

investigate new farming practices and local crop varieties along with modern agricultural

practices and improved varieties of crops. The majority of CIAL programs in Honduras are

supported by a non-governmental organization called Fundacion de Investigacion Participativa de

Honduras (Foundation for Participatory Research with Honduran Farmers or FIPAH) which is in

turn funded through a partnership with USC-Canada, a Canadian NGO committed to

supporting small-holder farmers and to protecting their seed systems, along with the

Development Fund (Utviklingsfondet), a Norwegian non-governmental organization. Today FIPAH

works with more than 800 smallholder farmers in 66 CIALs located in different regions of

Honduras. This includes communities in the municipalities of Yorito, Victoria, and Sulaco in the

department of Yoro, Vallecillo in the department of Francisco Morazán, Jesús de Otoro,

Masaguara, and San Francisco de Opalaca in the department de Intibucá, as well as La Iguala

and Gracias in the department of Lempira. Women make up approximately 50 per cent of CIAL

members and are increasingly playing leadership positions in the CIALs (Classen et al. 2008).

Many CIALs no longer work solely on crop improvement projects, though this continues to be

their main aim, but they also provide support to members through the creation of seed banks,

grain storage, credit programs, sewing and cooking classes, biodiversity and seed fairs, and

workshops on topics such as health and nutrition (Classen et al 2008:13).

31

Larger Research Project:

My project took place alongside the implementation of a Participatory Plant Breeding

(PPB) program in association with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

(CIMMYT), Honduran farmer researchers, and Honduran agronomists working with the

Foundation for Participatory Research with Honduran Farmers (FIPAH). Honduran farmer-

researchers, FIPAH agronomists, as well as Dr. Gary Atlin, director of the Maize Program at

CIMMYT, and Dr. Sally Humphries, director of International Development Studies, University

of Guelph, developed this research program in response to the high prevalence of malnutrition in

Central America, and in particular within Honduras. The PPB program was supported by a

research grant (Canada-CGIAR Linkage Fund) through the Canadian International

Development Agency (CIDA). The scientifically rigorous methods of PPB are complemented by

my anthropological methods. These methods will be discussed in the following chapter.

32

CHAPTER 3: Research Methodology

My interest in doing graduate work in Honduras started while I was working on a small

island off the north coast of Honduras between seasonal contract jobs for Ontario Parks in

Canada. During my stay in Honduras in May 2009, having applied to the Public Issues

Anthropology program and International Development for the following September, I was able

to attend a meeting of FIPAH staff with Dr. Sally Humphries, a professor with whom I had done

an independent project during the last year of my undergraduate degree. During the meeting, I

was introduced to many of the FIPAH agronomists and other staff and learnt about work that

they do, as well as past projects done by university students. It was here that we decided that

staying for a month with FIPAH members would allow me to practice my Spanish, and

familiarize myself with the interior of Honduras as well as the work that FIPAH does.

My advisor Sally Humphries, FIPAH staff, and I selected the municipality of Jesus de

Otoro as the site for my research primarily because of its institutional links with FIPAH, and with

the larger project on maize with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

(CIMMYT). It was also a location where FIPAH works, but no students from the University of

Guelph had yet worked. During June 2009, I had the opportunity to live with FIPAH agronomist

Omar Gallardo and his family just outside of Jesus de Otoro. Omar Gallardo is one of the

regional FIPAH agronomists who are responsible for implementation of maize experiments set

up through CIMMYT. During this month I accompanied Omar, other FIPAH agronomists, and

farmer facilitators to many different communities with whom FIPAH works in the departments

of Intibucá, La Paz, and Lempira. While working with FIPAH I met the second annual team of

students from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, who were working with FIPAH

33

through Nourish International. Over the summers of 2008, 2009 and 2010, Nourish

International volunteers worked with FIPAH on climate change surveys within the communities,

assisted in the building of greenhouses, taught classes in English and self-esteem with the youth

farmer committees, and made a documentary on food security in Honduras. While I was in

Otoro, I was able to travel with the two students who were working on this documentary while

they interviewed farmers, rural movement leaders (including Rafael Alegria), NGO workers,

professors of anthropology, professors at the Pan-American School of Agriculture (Zamorano),

and government officials. This provided me with an invaluable opportunity to learn about some

of the prominent issues surrounding agriculture, food, and food security in Honduras.

I conducted my primary fieldwork for four months between May 19th, 2010 and August

26th, 2010. I arrived in Honduras in time for a meeting with FIPAH agronomists and the new

leader of the CIMMYT-CCLF maize project, Felix San Vicente, at the FIPAH offices in Yorito,

Yoro. During this meeting I learned about how the CIMMYT project was proceeding and

briefly explained my plans for my thesis project. After this meeting I returned to the region of

Jesus de Otoro where I was to conduct my research. Here I sat down with Omar Gallardo and

together we looked over my proposal. He gave me suggestions, particularly about questions to

ask during interviews, and in which communities around Jesus de Otoro to do my research.

Further comments and suggestions were gathered during a meeting with local farmer facilitators

and CIAL leaders at the FIPAH offices in Otoro during my first week there. At this meeting I

presented myself, explained my research project and then listened to their ideas about what I

should ask during my interviews in order to elicit information on factors affecting food security.

This gave me a basic understanding of perceptions of nutrition and culinary values within the

communities, and allowed me to ask appropriate questions. However, perhaps because of my

34

involvement in the wider maize project, many of the suggestions and comments were directed

towards maize consumption, cultivation and nutrition, and not more broadly at nutrition and

food security. Other reasons for this became clearer as I progressed through my research (see

Chapter 5).

Research Assistance:

After the first week, I was able to arrange to work with a young woman from one of the

communities. Angela Gomez10 was free to help me with my work, as her job with the local coffee

cooperative was only part time during the months of May to August. Her mother and sisters

work with FIPAH as farmer facilitators and as radio hosts and Angela has helped out in the past

with projects in most of the communities where FIPAH Otoro works. Angela’s background

growing up in a mid-altitude community in the Otoro valley, as well as her knowledge of farming

systems (especially coffee), the local varieties of crops, foods, and customs made her an ideal

person to help me with this project. Her patience and kindness were invaluable in helping

translate between my Spanish and the local dialect during field visits and interviews.

Community Selection:

While choosing communities in which to work, I was reminded of the words of Stonich

(1993), who, while writing a political ecology ethnography of southern Honduras, used an

integrated perspective to show the linkages between social processes and the environment

(Stonich 1993). In so doing, she was cognisant of the variability and heterogeneity of the social

and environmental setting she was describing, and aware that her sampling strategies needed to

be chosen “so as to be capable of collecting data that are representative of that heterogeneity” 10 Her name is used with consent.

35

(Stonich 1993: 27). With this in mind, during my first weeks in Jesus de Otoro, I was able to sit

down with FIPAH staff and decide in which communities to work. We chose three communities

in the municipality of Jesus de Otoro. Communities were selected based on whether there is a

current and well-established CIAL working within the communities, and also with altitude in

mind. The altitude at which the communities are located means differences in climate, which

crops are grown, different abilities to access markets and to land, and also “influence from the

cities” as one agronomist referred to the influence of western cultures and the loss of traditional

Lenca practices. We choose the community of El Águila that was “de arriba” (at the top), Crucitas

Oriente as the community “de medio” (in the middle), and Barrio Nuevo was the community “de

abajo” (at the bottom) (see Table 1).

Table 1: Summary of Three Communities

Community Name:

Meters above sea

level

Distance to Otoro (on foot towards

town)

Population School Health Centre

Land Title Interviewees

(Male + Female)

Barrio Nuevo Around 750 45 minutes 65 houses To grade 6, with easy

commute to Colegió in

Otoro

No Majority rent land, some with

private land

7+5=12

Crucita Oriente

Around 1,165

1.5 hour 85 houses To grade 6, with

Educatodos available

until grade 9

Yes About half own a small amount of land of their own, while the

others only rent.

5+7=12

El Águila Above 1,730 Over 2 hours

25 houses To grade 6 with one teacher

No Communal title, plus some

private title

6+6=12

I concentrated on the heterogeneity of the environmental context, rather than the social

heterogeneity. However, due to the character of the CIALs, which involves an “ethic of

inclusiveness” (Classen et al 2008: 12), I feel that I had the opportunity to interact with both

leaders within the community and those considered the most marginalized.

36

Participant recruitment:

Through the FIPAH staff, I met key members of CIALs, who then introduced me to other

members of the community. While attending ClAL meetings/activities in the three communities,

I had the opportunity to introduce myself to the community members, explain briefly my

research project, and ask their permission to conduct research in their villages. My research was

also explained briefly over the radio during the weekly farm radio program. Afterwards members

of the communities would ask me further questions about my research during informal

conversations.

Data Collection Methods and Ethical Considerations:

During my initial fieldtrip I carried out participant observation, semi-structured interviews,

a group interview, and arranged for the laboratory nutrient analysis of 90 varieties of maize. In

May 2011, I returned to Honduras to give an update on my work, to attend a meeting with

CIMMYT officials and FIPAH staff, as well as to informally interview a few farmers to clarify

and elucidate some questions that had come up during the initial writing process.

Participant-Observation:

Participant-observation occurred both in the fields with the farmers, at CIAL and

community meetings, at documentary screenings, and within homes, especially at mealtimes,

during trips to market, and during planting and harvesting. By participating in the work that

FIPAH does, I was able to work in the fields, doing such work as hoeing the soil in preparation

for planting, sowing and weeding, as well as harvesting beans, vegetables, fruits, and herbs. My

undergraduate background in ecology, and experience working on farms and gardens in Canada,

allowed me to be a participant in these undertakings, with a perspective of someone who was not

37

completely new to these activities. Work in the fields also allowed time for observation on crop

selection and casual conversation about preferred crop varieties (particularly maize varieties),

health, and changes in available maize varieties. I performed participant observation in early

morning tortilla making11 and other chores, lunch and merienda (small snack) during community

activities and preparation. During this time I was able to make a list of foods eaten by members

of local households (see Appendix 4). Participant observation also allowed for observation of

culinary practices and casual conversation around the local crop varieties, food preparation, the

locally preferred nutritional and culinary qualities of maize, and any changes in preferences. The

method of participant observation provided a context for the statements and data generated

through my other methods, as well as adding a depth of understanding to culinary practices, the

characteristics of preferred local maize varieties, and perceptions of health, nutrition and dietary

change. This method also gave me a hands-on understanding of the labour requirements

throughout a day by all members of the community.

In order to be able to participate and observe the activities within the households, and

interview farmers who were working in far off fields during the day, Angela and I arranged to

stay overnight in each community. In Crucita Oriente, one of the CIAL members arranged for

us to stay in the local school. We were given mattresses to sleep on, and were able to purchase

food for a late dinner from a family, which we ate after two lengthy interviews with farmers who

were eager to chat by candlelight in the school. At 5:45 AM we rose and walked over to a home

of a wonderful woman whom we had interviewed the day before and had arranged to meet that

morning at 6 AM. She was eager to show me how to make tortillas and laugh with me at my

11 I had the opportunity to learn how to degrain maize, how to grind it, and how to make tortillas during my fieldwork, with sore thumbs, sore arms, and burnt fingertips that go along with that!

38

childish, small, and thick tortillas. In both Barrio Nuevo and El Águila, Angela and I were

welcomed into the homes of community members twice during my time in Otoro, and I was able

to observe and participate in the late evening and morning activities surrounding food

preparation and chores.

Semi-structured Interviews:

Preliminary interview guides were developed prior to arriving in Honduras, and

reworked after talking to NGO members and local community members (See Appendix 1 for my

key interview questions). Questions were open-ended and designed to offer interviewees the

opportunity to elaborate on the issues and topics that were of concern or interest to them. The

semi-structured nature of the interviews allowed for flexibility to explore for details or discuss

issues not brought up in the questions, while allowing for a more relaxed atmosphere and

conversation. Semi-structured interviews are valuable for defining patterns of knowledge and

belief because the same questions are asked of several informants. This method develops a

qualitative base for the construction of ethnographic research (Hahn and Inhorn 2010). Semi-

structured interviews were conducted so as to allow for freedom within the interview. The

interviews took place with individuals in the three research communities. I interviewed three

non-CIAL family groups (including husband, wife, children, grandparents) and three CIAL

family groups within each of the three communities. This was done to account for differences in

perceptions held by the CIAL members that might differ from the wider communities. As I

hoped to gain an understanding of culinary practices, the characteristics of preferred local crop

varieties, and perceptions of health, nutrition and dietary change, which are concepts that may

vary between genders and generations, I aimed to speak to both male and female community

members, and individuals of different ages. Interviewees were over 18 year old, though I had

39

interactions with people of all ages over the course of my research.12 Individuals directly

involved with food preparation, farmers (male and female), and elders within the community

were key informants. Elders were of particular interest when documenting dietary change. I

recognized that workloads are demanding, especially for women, and making time for an

interview may have been difficult for farmers. I did not want to put any community member in a

position where he or she might feel coerced into participation. I began by interviewing members

of the CIALs within these communities, but widened the search for possible interviewees by

asking CIAL members if they could introduce me to other members of the community. This

produced a snowball sampling method. A snowball sampling method was appropriate as this

qualitative sudy was not meant to be generalized to a wider population. After consultation with

FIPAH staff and CIAL members, it was decided that three households of CIAL members and

three with non-CIAL members would be interviewed in each community. CIAL members

seemed eager to speak to me and be interviewed. I had previously met a few of them in 2009, as

well as during visits to the communities with FIPAH staff, and during workshops in the FIPAH

office. Non-CIAL members tended to be more wary; especially those in the highland community

of El Águila. It was in this community that I found that not everyone in each family wanted to be

interviewed.

Group Interview:

As part of my interview process I used three techniques commonly used within nutritional

anthropology and participatory research (see Blum et al 1997) in a group setting. It was decided

that my group interview would be done with members of the Asociación de Ciales Agrícolas de la

12 I was able to participate in Youth CIAL meetings and workshops, help English and health classes with Nourish International, and I played a lot of soccer with youth during my time in Honduras.

40

Región de Otoro (ASOCIADRO), the association of all the CIALs in the area. Although members

of the Asociación had a busy schedule of events, fairs and workshops on top of their daily work, I

was able to meet with all eight of them during the final week of my fieldwork.

A free listing technique was performed where the interviewees were asked a series of

questions that are designed to yield a list of varieties that are perceived by them to be of high

nutritional and culinary value (see Appendix 2 for list of questions). The list gathered names of

different varieties of maize and other foods, as well as possible synonyms for each food item. A list

of varieties that were spoken about during interviews and participant-observation were compiled

together with the free-listing inventory of varieties. Participants reviewed this list and checked off

whether yield, flavour, colour, commercial value, and nutritional value were very good, good,

regular, poor, or very poor. This gave me an idea of what varieties were valued, and for what

reasons.

The second technique I used was pile sorting, where I used cards with the name of maize

varieties on each, and where possible, the addition of a physical sample of the variety of maize or

other food item. The respondents were asked to sort the varieties into piles or groups that go

together. This process gave me an idea of the emic grouping of crop varieties and foods with

similarly perceived nutritional qualities, but also allowed me to ask about the meaning, or criteria

of similarity, among varieties in the same group. My expectation was that the respondents’

explanations would be more revealing than the groupings themselves. This was true, as

participants' reasoning behind the groupings was of great value to my research, and

complemented the answers they had given during interviews.

41

Joanna Kocsis, a Masters student in the Rural Planning and Development program at

Guelph, assisted me in facilitating the group interviews, and in particular led an exercise called

Dotmocracy, a facilitation method for gathering and identifying levels of consensus on written

reports among a large group. In trying to elicit a visual representation of what varieties were

considered the best in nutritional value, Joanna had participants privately put checks next to a list

of varieties in another room, to show which they believed were three most nutritional varieties.

Check marks representing first place were tallied as three points, second place checks with two

points, and those in third place with one point. These points were added together to show a

visual representation of the group's collective preferences.

During my final visit in May 2011, I was able to interview a group of individuals from El

Aguila about some of my preliminary findings and to clarify a few of the answers I had received

the year before. By using different methods, including semi-structured interviews, group

interviews and by consulting with FIPAH staff members and facilitators, I was able to collect

sufficient data from a diverse group of people to triangulate the information gathered.

Nutrient Analysis:

Due to my involvement in the larger CIMMYT-CCLF project to improve the food

security and nutritional status of small farmers in the marginal highlands of Honduras, it was

possible to arrange for a nutritional analysis of maize varieties. As I will describe in the following

sections, maize is the most important food item for the households in the Valley of Jesus de

Otoro. As it is such a vital element of every meal, and because individuals have very strong

feelings about the different varieties of maize, farmers and members of FIPAH expressed interest

42

in having data about the nutritional content of their local varieties. With this data, those wanting

to improve nutrition and food security in the region could work to educate communities on

which varieties were more nutritious, and also to use this knowledge when implementing

experiments with the CIALs.

Natalia Palacios, CIMMYT maize nutrition quality specialist, gave me a list of tests that

she would recommend be done in order to analyse the nutritional quality of the local maize

landraces. Marvin Gomez, a FIPAH agronomist, and I made inquiries as to whether the

laboratory services at CIMMYT, the University of Guelph, FHIA (The Honduran Agricultural

Research Foundation), or CENTA (National Centre for Agricultural Modernization, in El

Salvador) could perform these tests. In the end, only CIMMYT was able to complete the

required tests. Samples of ninety varieties of maize from seven departments where FIPAH works,

eight samples of which were from communities where I did my research, were sent to the

CIMMYT laboratory for nutritional testing. Most varieties were local landraces, and a few

creolized improved varieties. The analyses performed were for the content of protein, oil, starch,

total phenolics, iron, zinc, and anthocyanins in the blue varieties and carotenoids in the yellow

ones. Anthocyanins were analyzed because they are powerful antioxidants and something that

CIMMYT is looking at breeding into varieties to improve nutrition. Carotenoids are important

indicators of vitamin A that, as mentioned above, causes vitamin A deficiency (VAD) when

lacking (see Appendix 3 for laboratory data). Using SPSS 19, varieties were grouped into colour

classes or by location and the mean and standard error of the mean were computed and graphed

(see Appendix 5) . In the next chapter I begin my discussion of the analyses of these data,

beginning with the environmental and political factors that influence food security.

43

Table 2: Tested Nutrients and Human Nutrition (From Whitney et al. 1990)

Nutrient: Importance in Human Nutrition: Deficiency in the Diet leads to: Anthocyanins Non-essential nutrient that acts as an antioxidant Carotenoids Are precursors of the fat-soluble vitamin A, that

are essential for normal vision, foetal development, and cell division needed for healthy skin, mucus membranes, and a functioning immune system.

Dry corneas, loss of night vision and eventual blindness. Can also cause abnormal growth and a poor functioning of the immune system leading to increased infections.

Iron Needed for energy and for carrying oxygen throughout the body

Reduced ability to work and mental productivity. Symptoms include paleness, fatigue, weakness, and apparent apathy and lack of motivation.

Lipids (Fats and oils)

Used by the body as energy and for the absorption of some essential vitamins.

Phenolics Non-essential nutrient that acts as a antioxidant Protein Provide the body with amino acids that are

needed to build, maintain, and replace tissues Fatigue, changes in pigmentation in hair and skin, the wasting of muscles, diarrhoea and swelling of the body (oedema), including feet, ankles, and abdomen, as well as stunting.

Starches Broken down into glucose which provides cells with energy

Lack of energy, and degradation of the body (mental impairment, wasting, stunting) as proteins are used to produce energy.

Zinc Involved in many processes in the body, including growth and membrane strength of cells, thus affecting development and immune function

Retardation of physical and sexual development, and an impaired immune system especially of the digestive system that leads to further malnutrition.

44

CHAPTER 4: Food Security and Resources: Diversity and Inequality

In order to achieve food security, people need to have access (physically, socially and

economically) to productive resources and to markets and political ecology allows for a viewing of

food security as being integrally linked to environmental and policy spheres. In this chapter, I

explore how the diversity of environmental niches, quality of land, and access to markets affects

food security and the livelihoods of rural Honduran farmers. I will also show how national and

international policies in Honduras have failed to address the diversity and inequality, especially

in land access, to the detriment of the marginal rural poor.

Environmental Diversity within the Region:

In order to understand the varied environmental niches and their relationship to ongoing

household food insecurity, I first need to provide a general overview of the Otoro Valley. The

climate, vegetation, and soils of Honduras are very diverse given its mountainous relief and its

two coasts. This results in high ecological heterogeneity that allows for a wide variety of

agricultural systems. If we concentrate exclusively on the region where I worked, this

heterogeneity can be seen clearly. The Otoro Valley ranges in altitude from about 650 meters

above sea level (masl) to over 2,000 masl. Even within the municipality of Jesus de Otoro, the

diverse climate, vegetation, and soils give rise to a variety of ecological zones. These zones are

classified according to Holdridge into a) tropical dry forest, transition to subtropical, b)

subtropical moist forest, c) subtropical lower montane humid forest, and d) subtropical lower

montane wet forest (Romero Velásquez 2009). The local population recognizes the different

zones as lowlands or valley, foothills, a middle altitude, and the highland area.

45

The flat areas and rolling hills of the lower Otoro Valley are classified as tropical dry

forest, transition to subtropical (Romero Velásquez 2009). The annual average temperature here

is below 24oC, with average annual rainfall approximately 1060mm (Romero Velásquez 2009).

The area is prone to drought during the dry season that lasts approximately six to seven months.

Snaking through the valley is the Rio Grande de Otoro, a tributary of the great Ulua River, with

tributaries and ephemeral streams that appear only in the rainy season. The soils vary from

fertile, well-drained soils in some parts of the valley, especially near the rivers and streams, to

stony, dry, and acidic soils with low fertility in other parts (Romero Velásquez 2009). The valley

is used mostly for agriculture and livestock, and also contains the larger towns and villages, such

as the town of Jesus de Otoro where FIPAH is based. As a result of urban expansion there are

no longer any virgin forests within this zone, although these are normally common in marginal

areas. Extensive lands are pasture lands for the grazing of Brahman cattle, and large fields of

upland rice grown using irrigation channels can also been seen. Cultivation of maize and beans,

and coffee in the shade of guanacaste (Enterolobium cyclocarpum)13 trees, occurs within this zone.

Indio desnudo or indio paludo (Bursera simaruba)14, pochote (Ceiba aesculifolia), pino caribe15 (Pinus

caribaea), roble 16 (Quercus segoviensis), encino (Quercus oleoides) 17 , and nance (Byrsonima

crassifolia)18 grow in the more infertile soils, while cedro real (Cedrella odorata)19 and caoba del

pacifico (Swietenia humilis)20 grow in the more fertile soils of the valley (Romero Velásquez 2009).

13 Elephant Ear Tree 14 Gumbo-Lindo/Copperwood 15 Caribbean Pine 16 Oak species 17 Oak species 18 Called Craboo in the Bay Islands 19 Spanish Ceder 20 Honduras mohogany/ Pacific Coast Mohogany

46

Further up into the hilly terrain above the valley is the subtropical moist forest (Romero

Velásquez 2009). Here the annual average temperature is about 20.6oC and the soil has high

natural fertility (Romero Velásquez 2009). Estimates by a local agronomist suggest that about

1200mm of rain per year is average for this altitude. Much of the land is agricultural, with

shaded and sun-grown coffee plantations, pineapple and banana varieties, small plots of maize

and beans, as well as small grasslands used to feed the beasts of burden used for transportation

and also to gather firewood. Since most of this area does not have electrical service, except those

communities located directly beside the highway, the primary use for the secondary forests

around the villages located within this zone is as fuel for cooking. The wood from the forests is

also used for constructing homes and fencing. The forests in this zone is made up of indio desnudo

(Bursera simaruba), sombra de ternero (Cordia bicolor), guapinol (Hymenaea courbaril), guama (Inga

sp.)21, pino candelillo (Pinus maximinoi)22, ocote (Pinus oocarpa)23, ciprés de montaña (Podocarpus

guatemalensis), roble (Quercus skinneri), and encino (Quercus oleoides) (Romero Velásquez 2009).

Higher up, around 1,500 masl, in the steep ravine topography and shallow but well

drained soils, is the subtropical lower montane humid forest (Romero Velásquez 2009). Here the

average annual temperature is around 18oC, and rainfall is around 1,340 mm per year (Romero

Velásquez 2009). Over two thirds of the area is secondary forests, with crops of coffee, pineapple,

banana, guineo (variety of banana), and basic grains for subsistence. Here again, there are small

grasslands used to feed the horses, donkeys and mules that are used for transportation and also to

gather firewood. The common tree species are guama (Inga sp.), guarumo (Cecropia peltata),

21 One Inga spp., which is edible, is called the ice-cream-bean tree 22 Thinleaf Pine 23 Pine/Yellow Pine; national tree of Honduras

47

pinabete (Pinus maximinoi), ciprés de montaña (Podocarpus guatemalensis)24, roble (Quercus skinneri),

and encino (Quercus oleoides) (Romero Velásquez 2009).

Above 1,500 masl, there exists a zone called the subtropical lower montane wet forests

(Romero Velásquez 2009). This area makes up an extensive part of the mountain top areas of the

region. Here the soils are high in organic matter, shallow, and high in acidity (Romero Velásquez

2009). The average annual rainfall is above 2,000mm and the average annual temperature is

18oC (Romero Velásquez 2009), though it can get close to 5oC during the early mornings

(madrugada) of December and January. Above 2,000 masl frost can occur at times. Much of this

area is primary forest, and it is the source of many of the streams, rivers and aquifers that feed the

valley. Due to its ecological importance, much of this zone has been protected through the

implementation of a Reserve by the government (discussed further below). The main trees in this

zone are cedro (Cedrella tonduzii)25, ciprés de montaña (Podocarpus guatemalensis), encino (Quercus

oleoides), roble de montaña (Quercus skinneri), liquidámbar (Liquidambar styraciflua) 26 , ticuaz

(Trichospermun mexicanum), pino candelillo (Pinus maximinoi), and álamo (Populus sp.)27 (Romero

Velásquez 2009). Some trees are up to 2m in diameter and over 30m in height, which, according

to Romero Velásquez (2009), indicates they are about 800 years old. Small communities,

growing maize and beans for subsistence on the steep slopes, are found within this zone. For the

most part, the main use of wood is as a source of energy for food processing and construction

material for beams, posts, and fences in households.

24 Mountain cypress 25 West Indian Cedar 26 Sweetgum 27 Poplar species

48

Along with a great span in altitude and environmental conditions, the climatological

conditions differ according to altitude. In general, precipitation follows a seasonal pattern, which

can be divided into two seasons that dictate the way agricultural work is distributed throughout

the year. Winter (invierno) corresponds to the rainy season which begins in May or June and lasts

until around November, whereas summer (verano), or the dry season, begins in December or

January and lasts until April. However, traditional confidence in, and knowledge of, seasons has

been eroded due to frequently changing and consistently unstable precipitation and temperatures

associated with climate change (Kocsis 2011). This is not unique to Honduras; other researchers

(see Finnis et al 2012; Mertz el al 2009; Mertz et al 2008) have found that small-scale farmers are

experiencing similar issues elsewhere. Usually, the rainy season is long enough for two cropping

periods, but there is a significant chance that those crops sown in October-November face water

shortages at the end when the dry season starts. The annual average of approximately 1,600 mm

of rain per year masks considerable variation (FAO 2009). In addition, dry periods (called

canícula) often develop during the rainy season, usually in July. These add an additional risk to the

forecasting when to plant crops. Because agriculture is the main source of income in the Otoro

valley, all household livelihoods are vulnerable to extreme weather events. This can occur

directly by los in agricultural productivity or through the need for local agricultural labour, or it

can occur indirectly by effecting the market relations that bind all the communities in the valley

together (Kocsis 2011). For example, during participant-observation in the fields, participants

mentioned that the rainy period is interrupted by an extended drought (canícula), while very

heavy rainfall causes washouts more regularly. The impact of these disruptions on agricultural

productivity can cause significant loss of productivity as well as loss of income for many

community members.

49

In the face of irregular and extreme weather and the loss of food crops and income, short-

term coping strategies in the Otoro Valley rely heavily on remittances through migration,

informal credit and the sale of possessions (Kocsis 2011), however, adaptive strategies over the

long-term are constantly on the minds of farmers. Nearly every week when I accompanied a

community member and FIPAH staff to her weekly radio show that disseminates information

and promotes communication between farmers in the valley, she, her guests, and local farmers

calling into the show, would talk about how to adapt to a changing climate. The CIALs actively

work to alleviate the losses from extreme weather events through research and participatory plant

breeding of new crop varieties that are adapted to specific conditions that strengthen their

communities’ production systems. The CIALs have also been identifying landraces that are

tolerant to diseases that are occurring lately as a result of extreme weather effects. The use and

dissemination of these identified varieties improves the food security of rural communities. Along

with improving crop varieties, NGOs in the region also facilitate capacity development around

soil conservation techniques and use of more sustainable farming practices. For example, small

farmers generally do not use irrigation, but some farmers in the valley have been taking water

from rivers and streams in the area, and to a lesser degree from the rain, to water their crops. In

the greenhouses used by the CIALs for example, they use drip irrigation that is gravity fed from

streams or the community water system. Some farmers also use gravity to feed mariposas

(sprinklers) that they rotate throughout their fields in times of drought.

In this chapter I demonstrate how food security in the Otoro Valley is intimately affected

not only by climate and geography but also by access to land - particularly good quality land.

The quality of land serves to accentuate differences in landscape and climate discussed above.

This diversity in the biophysical environment within a small area impacts access to beans, maize

50

and vegetables that help households and individuals better meet basic nutritional requirements.

The heterogeneity of the biophysical environment along with changing weather, also impacts

farmers’ ability to sell excess produce for cash essential for meeting other family needs such as

education, clothing, household improvements and health care expenses. In addition to

geographic diversity, there is severe seasonal variability in food access. Rural small-scale farming

livelihoods are not predictable, affected as they are by the interaction of annual variations in

climate, income, food, labour necessities, and market prices. These elements can reinforce each

other and, in some households, may trigger regular periods of increased poverty, ill-health, and

malnutrition (Graham 1999:9).

Transitory and Seasonal Food Insecurity:

Food security is affected by how the biophysical environment and climate factors impact

vulnerability to crop loss and the stability of access to food. These factors contribute both to

seasonal or cyclical food insecurity and temporary food insecurity, along with the possibility of

chronic food insecurity (Maxwell and Smith 1992:15). Temporary food insecurity arises when a

household encounters a short-term drop in its food security and is in jeopardy of failing to meet

food needs over a short period (Maxwell and Smith 1992:15). While seasonal food insecurity

happens when a regular repetition in the periods of insufficient access to food occurs, the term

transitory food insecurity refers to insecurity that is less predictable and regular. It is

characterised by periods of scarcity of food availability and access to food that are caused by crop

failure, due to diseases, insects and animals (Maxwell and Smith 1992:15). Farmers in the Otoro

valley experience both of these types of food insecurity.

Farming in the Otoro valley is very risky. As one man in his 30s in Barrio Nuevo stated,

“In this season, there are so many pests. There is a worm that we call “el medidor”, and another

51

we call the “el cogollero” that damage the plants...There are also insects, like the cricket.”28 For

many farmers the unpredictability of climate is the factor that most influences food availability.

One male farmer from Crucita Oriente said, “When the climate changes, crops fail, and prices

for food rise [so] families can’t feed themselves.”29 Due to frequently changing and consistently

unstable precipitation and temperatures associated with climate change, every year presents

different problems with crops (Kocsis 2011). One blight, called mancha de asfalto (Tar Spot), was

found in almost every maize field in the Otoro region during the 2010 season. This disease,

caused by three fungi (Phyllachora maydis, Monographella maydis and Coniothyrium phyllachorae), meant

that there was a very poor maize harvest. The fungus spreads through the plants' leaves,

absorbing nutrients and preventing the seed from growing, leading to low grain yield. Farmers

and agronomists in the Otoro region seemed not to have been familiar with this disease30. The

Honduran Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, SAG, conveyed their concern about mancha de

asfalto, which has been known to cause yield losses of up to 75 percent in Central and South

America (SAG 2011). They mentioned that mancha de asfalto was first detected in Honduras four

years ago and has since spread throughout the country (SAG 2011).

Earlier in 2010, many of the fields of maize needed to be replanted (some as many as four

times) because of an infestation of caterpillars that were eating all the newly sprouting maize

plants. Farmers also told me of losing crops to hielo (literally, ice), which is a number of different

28“En este tiempo hay tantas plagas. Hay un gusano que le llamamos el medidor, y otro que le llamamos el cogollero que daña la planta…También hay insectos, como el grillo." 29 “Cuando el no es el cambio climático, las cosechas son malas, e incrementar los precios de los alimentos ... las familias no pueden alimentarse” 30 From my fieldnotes in 2010: “Mancha de asfalto seems to have been unknown to the agronomists and farmers of Otoro until this year…FIPAH organized a day long workshop for local farmers to come and learn about it. However, [a FIPAH agronomist who works in Yoro] knew about the disease because it had affected Yoro and Vallecillos (where FIPAH also works) in 2008 and 2009. But it seems to be a newish problem in Honduras since no one was very familiar with it.”

52

diseases affecting beans, maize, cabbage, tomato, potato, and mango that typically cause

wrinkling, discoloration and spots on the plant leaves. For example one farmer (male, 50 years

old, in El Águila) said: “I do not save potato seeds. I lost them in ‘un hielo’ - to a fungus. Right

now, I do not save the seeds from beans…they were hit by a bean ‘hielo’”.31 One women in El

Águila told me “the land is good for producing, but always there is damage from hielo”.32

Another women in that village told me that “we grew vegetables but they were hit by hielo”.33 A

male farmer and active volunteer in the middle community mentioned that, “The black bean

that I have is resistant to ‘hielo’, and is resistant to drought. Because of this, I grow it”.34 Farmers

generally attribute hielo to storms that bring cold rain and strong wind (called el Norte), which

occur most frequently in the highlands, or excess water in the soil, which is particularly a

problem in the flatter areas of the valley. The farmers in the mountains, far from other

communities, also mentioned that they regularly lost crops to animals, such as the racoon

(mapache)35. Farmers in the lower communities said they regularly lost crops to theft. Not only do

these losses of crops mean a loss of access to food, but also a loss of access to seeds for future

planting. One young farmer I spoke to told me with great sadness about how his crop had been

eaten by caterpillars. Though he was worried about his ability to grow a crop of maize for his

family, he seemed particularly hurt by the loss of his best seed, which he had spent time sorting

and saving. Jansen (1998) describes the concern about the unpredictability of climate. He

describes how when people are faced with the question as to how they know when to plant and

31 No [guardar las semilla de papas]. Perdió en un hielo, un hongo….Ahorita no [guardar la semillas de frijoles]….pegan hielo de frijol.” 32 “las tierras son buenas para producir pero siempre se daña por el hielo.” 33 “siembramos verduras pero le cayó hielo”. 34 “frijol negro que tengo ese…es valiente por el hielo…es fuerte para la sequita también…por ese yo lo sembró” 35 “El mapache mi cultivos lo comio... Es un animal como perro…Personas aquí se comen este animal… yo me come hasta el tepezcuinte” (The racoon eats my crops. It is an animal like the dog. People here eat this animal. I eat things including the tepezcuinte) (Male farmer, early 30s, El Águila).

53

when to harvest, they say, “ ‘we sow when it starts to rain, but you never know whether summer

returns after the first rains’. Doubt dominates” (Jansen 1998:122). Doubt also dominates in the

Otoro Region.

In the Otoro valley, only households in the valley bottom mentioned using the second

cropping season (which is called la postrera), and exclusively for planting bean crops, and only

when they could access land. Since water is lacking in this second cropping season, its success

depends to a large extent on the water–holding capacity of the soil (Jansen 1998). The

unpredictability of this cropping season in terms of drought and crop pests means that some

farmers deliberate on whether to plant during this time or not. This concern is reflected in the

work of Jansen (1998:78) who found that several of the farmers he spoke to considered not

sowing during la postrera because of increasing drought stress, while others experimented with

sowing in August instead of in November, the so-called postrera de agosto.

Seasonal food insecurity is a well-documented phenomenon in the communities in rural

Honduras. In the Otoro region, much like Beaudette (1999) describes for the Yorito region of

Honduras, the period between April and August is characterized by a shortage in household

income and food security known as los junios. A FIPAH baseline study in 2010 indicated that 47

percent of households who form part of the CIALs, lack maize for household consumption in

August as their own stores have been depleted (FIPAH 2010). My interviews suggest that this

number may be higher for the communities as a whole. Seasonal food insecurity arises because

the savings from the coffee harvest at the beginning of the year have been spent, the maize and

beans from the previous year’s harvests have been consumed or sold, and producers have

recently invested any money left into buying inputs for the planting season. As well, reduced

demand for farmworkers (as jornaleros or mozos), coupled with the requirement for those farmers

54

who own land to prioritize planting maize and beans in their own fields (Beaudette 1999:158),

affects income availability. Los junios are a time of food shortages because, having eaten their

reserves of staple foods, families now have to buy maize and beans at elevated prices at a time of

reduced income. This means that some families simply cannot afford to buy food, even if staples

are available in the market. Food supplies become more readily available in September at the

time of harvest in the valley, and especially after the coffee harvest begins when women can

afford to buy more items to augment the family diet (see also Beaudette 1999:158). Though

families said that they grow tubers such as yucca, sweet potato, malanga and badú, which are ready

to be consumed in June and July, these are not seen as a substitute for maize. Food preferences

and cultural issues of food access are discussed in the following chapter.

Many families in the Otoro region stated that during June, July and August they

experienced a shortage of food and a need to buy maize and beans. ASOCIAL and Classen

(2008) and Classen et al. (2008) indicated that households participating in FIPAH projects in the

Yorito region have enhanced their food supply over the years, reducing, and in many cases

eliminating, the time of food insecurity known as los junios. This outcome is associated with the

work of the CIALs and continues to be a priority for the local NGO with which I was associated.

Inequality of Access to Markets and to Good Quality Land:

In addition to the diversity of landscape and climate, there is also considerable diversity in

terms of people’s ability to own and access assets, especially land. From a food sovereignty

perspective, access to these resources is important in order to achieve food security. One of the

major themes that emerged during interviews with farmers in all three of the research

communities was access to land. Access to food is determined by a family's ability to acquire

food, whether they obtain it through home production, commercial purchase, or transfers

55

between people, such as exchanges, gifts, or aid. In Intibucá, 78.2 percent of households

consumed more than 80 percent of the maize they produced, and 85.7 percent of farmers

consumed the same percentage of beans (Thorpe 2002:135). Home production, quality of land,

and growing conditions are major factors influencing crop yields and thus food attained from

home production.

In general, the fields of farmers in the highlands have steeper slopes and more organic

matter from the surrounding forests. As mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, temperature

and light also play a role in growth. Temperature in the community of El Águila, the highest

altitude community I worked in was significantly lower than in the valley. On the days I worked

in this community, the mornings were wet, dark and foggy. The proximity of the surrounding

mountains also means that direct sunlight only reaches certain fields for small portions of the day.

This contributes to high humidity because rainfall and dew do not evaporate. These agro-

ecological factors mean that the maturation period of crops grown in fields higher in the

mountains is much longer than those crops grown in the valley regions. Farmers in El Águila

informed me that they planted their maize in mid-April, and would harvest in October or as late

as January. One variety called Maiz del Año was said to take over nine months (270 days) to

mature, while the variety Matasaneño, that was planted by every household I interviewed in this

town, has a slightly shorter maturation period. In the valley, maize varieties mature in only three

months, with elote (corncobs) ready in August and fully mature maize in September (120 days).

This corresponds to research findings in the region of Yorito, where FIPAH also works. Here the

ripening of the maize in the high-altitude fields is 210 days contrasted to the 120 days it takes

corn to ripen on the gentle slopes of the valleys (Classen et al 2008:15 footnote #8).

56

While these differences can provide challenges, it should also be noted that farmers

exploit these differences as a strategy to achieve food security. Families in both the mid-altitude

community and the highland community said that they planted maize and beans in both the

mountains and the valley or foothills (las lomas). They do this in order to be able to access maize

earlier in the season, thus shortening the period when food is scarce, as well as having different

fields maturing at different times, so that not all fields had to be harvested at once as more hands

are needed to do so. Planting at different altitudes is a hunger prevention strategy for those at

high altitudes. In this sense, farmers exploit the different geographical and climatic factors to

their own benefit.

Income generated from asset ownership varies with differences in the productivity of land.

Not only is landownership highly inequitably distributed within Honduras, but also the

distribution of quality land is highly unequal across farm-size in Honduras (Thorpe 2002:129).

Thorpe (2002) quotes a POSCAE-OXFAM survey that documents the large regional differences

in basic grain yields; yields in Choluteca were under 10 qq/mz (see Table 2 for a conversion of

local weights and measures), while those in Atlántida were up to 62 qq/mz. There is also a

considerable difference just within the Otoro Valley. In the Valley, maize yields on average are

about 40 qq/mz, however, yields on the hillsides are about 16-20 qq/mz. In the case of beans,

yields are lower; in the valley the yields are about 25 qq/mz, while on the high altitude slopes

beans only yield 12 -15 qq/mz (pers com Omar Gallardo). Climate and geography affect the

availability of food by influencing the yields of crops.

Table 3: Conversion Chart of Weights and Measures

Local Honduran system Imperial system Metric system 1 Tarea (1/16 mz) 0.11 Acres (ac) 0.04 Hectare (ha)

57

1 Manzana (mz) 1.68 Acres (ac) 0.7 Hectare (ha) 1 Quintal (qq) 100 Pounds (lbs.) 45.5 Kilograms (kg) 1 Arroba (1/4 qq) 25 Pounds (lbs.) 11.4 Kilograms (kg) 1 Carga (2 qq) 200 Pounds (lbs.) 136.5 Kilograms (kg)

Climate and geography affect the availability of food by influencing what types and what

varieties of crops can be grown. Improved varieties of maize, beans and other crops, which were

not bred for the climatic conditions of the highlands, do not grow well there, and the traditional

landrace varieties far out-produce them. Many of the highest yielding varieties suitable for this

area are yellow varieties, such as Matasaneño. If improved varieties are tested out by farmers, they

are subjected to the local conditions and management practices, kernels of these varieties

repeatedly selected for cultivation the next season, and occasionally their hybridization with local

varieties is encouraged. Thus farmers create varieties that they call “creolized” (variedades

acriolladas) (Bellon et al. 2006; Bellon and Risopoulos 2001). One such creolized variety is Guayape

Criollo, which is a hybrid of the improved variety called Guayape and a local variety. In the

highlands, varieties of beans such as chinapopo (Phaseolus coccineus) and frijol milpero (Phaseolus

vulgaris, the climbing variety) are grown. Not only are different varieties of crops available at

different altitudes but also entirely different types of crops as well. Farmers in the highlands

planted cabbage, potatoes, onions, and squash much more frequently than those at lower

altitudes. Farmers in the highlands mentioned that the climate at these altitudes was more like

the climate in La Esperanza where many commercial vegetables crops are grown.

Though most of the households I spoke with had some access to land, some did not own

or rent any land and relied on men in the household to take on day labourer jobs (jornalero) and

the women to do other jobs, such as operate a small pulperia, or be a caretaker for other

community members and visitors. Data of household income sources of rural farms in Intibucá

58

shows that around 57 percent comes from off-farm sources (Thorpe 2002: 139). Wage rates in

the departments of Lempira, Intibucá and Ocotepeque are amongst the lowest because of lack of

opportunities associated with high value agricultural production and a problem of surplus labour

on small family-owned plots. However, due to the fact that the farming of annual crops on the

steep hillsides of these mountainous regions is so labour-intensive and there is only so much

available labour, there is “a limit on the amount of land that can be cultivated” (Thorpe

2002:142). Labour absorption seems to be greatest where small landholdings are present and

where unpaid family labour dominates. In Intibucá, 62 percent of labourers are unpaid

employees (Thorpe 2002:126).

The steep geography and torrential rains during the rainy season prevent the supply of

food from such sources as commercial food production, government food stocks, imports and

food assistance, from reaching the higher altitudes. Whereas every corner in town has a small

pulperia that sells a range of food from basics like maize, beans and lime, to cleaning supplies,

dairy products, and small packages of snack foods, called churros, in the pulperia in El Águila the

only things for sale were local maize, salt, lime for tortillas, soap, small denomination cell phone

cards36, and a few small candies. The biggest obstacle to supply is the lack of passable roads in

the steep mountain areas. Along the flat valley floor, transportation by car, truck, pack animal, or

on foot is relatively easy, however, as you ascend into the mountains the roads and paths become

steep and during the rainy season many of them are impassable due to washout. I was in

Honduras during the rainy season and many days while working with FIPAH we had to cancel

our trips to communities because it had rained at night and the roads would be washed out or

36 Cell phones are often recharged by car batteries which are themselves recharged in town and carried up into the mountians, by friends in other communities who have generator, or in the FIPAH offices while gathered for workshops.

59

too soft to drive on. As mentioned in Chapter 2, roads are only navigable to a point, and even

then only by trucks with four-wheel drive. At medium and high elevations, only a few villages

have people who own a truck, usually those who own larger coffee plantations. Many families in

the communities near the valley own bicycles that they used to get around. One home that I

visited in Barrio Nuevo was at the bottom of the hill along which the town was located. Many of

the community members left their bikes, which they used to bike to town or to the hacienda, at

this house before walking up the steep road to their homes. Another common mode of

transportation was on horse, mule, or donkey. With these animals, farmers would use the many

shorter walking paths down the mountainsides. However, it was by foot that most people

travelled. During a stay with a family in the middle community, Crucita Oriente, Angela and I

were awoken at 4am as the three young men in the family ate breakfast before walking down the

mountain to start work around 7am in the town. In the case of an emergency, transportation was

a concern to many in the communities, especially those in high communities. One group of

women with whom FIPAH works set aside funds from their projects so as to be able to hire a

truck for transportation if ever needed. Not only is transportation a worry during emergencies

but it also impacts households’ food security strategies, in particular influencing availability of

fruits and vegetables, maize varieties, meat and dairy due to lack of electricity for fridges, farm

inputs, and labour.

Access to, and availability of, a diverse diet are influenced by climate and geography. As

discussed, geography affects the availability of crop species and varieties. Though it is true that

many fruits and vegetables and other foods are available in the town market and the weekly

“mall” (open air market), people in El Águila and other high communities typically only have

access to their own vegetables, fruits, as well as access to many more wild greens and animals.

60

Inequality of Land Ownership:

About a quarter of the households I spoke with could feed themselves with maize grown

on the land they had access to (see Table 3 below). Most of those who grew enough for their

families and some to sell when harvests were good were those who lived in the highest elevation

community who had fought to get communal land title in the late 1980s. Though there had been

a community there for over 70 years, a “diputado terrateniente” (large landowner) had claimed the

land in El Águila, built a road and decided to harvest the trees for lumber. Because it was going

to impact their water source, the communities from lower altitudes joined with the people from

El Aguila to fight this. After being beaten and harassed by the landowner’s guards, and

undertaking protests in the capital, the Congress finally passed a decree buying the land from the

landowner at an inflated price and then titled it to the residents of El Águila. The land is now

administered by a Consejo Indigena Lenca (Lenca Indigenous Council). It became a communal title

so that no one individual could sell parts of it. I was told that the communal title makes the

community more secure and that it gives them more food security. Because they have land every

year, they strive to diversify their plots, improve the soil, protect their water37. The great care

many farmers in El Águila take of their plots was obvious the first time I visited in 2009. During

this visit, I accompanied a FIPAH agronomist for a day of planting apple, peach, pear and

avocado trees on the steep slopes of a field directly above area where two homes are located.

When I came back a year later, quite a few of the trees had not survived, but the ones that had

were showed to me with pride and there was much talk of the importance of diversification and

soil stabilization. For example, during a group interview with three male farmers (two in their

30s; one in his 70s) and one female farmer (in her 60s) in El Águila, I was told, “The land is

37Interview in El Águila with four key informants, May 6th, 2011.

61

always used by someone in the community and it can’t be lost. It allows for better food security

because you always have access to land. You can’t sell your land and become landless. The

communal title allows for freedom to grow whenever, freedom to diversify the plot, freedom to

improve the soil on your own area and you know you will still have that field in the future. It is

an advantage and a freedom.” 38

Table 4: Land and Self-Sufficiency

Interviewees Community Where land is rented: Where land is owned: Own Maize lasts the whole year?

1 and 2 (Husband and Wife)

Barrio Nuevo

Rent in valley for maize Small plot on the hilltop, and small area near house

No

3 and 4 (Husband and Wife)

Rent in valley for maize Small area near house No

5 (Elderly Man)

Rent in valley for maize Small area near house No

6 (Middle Aged Widowed Father)

Rent in valley for maize Has own land near house, in the valley and his fathers land just above the village

Yes

7 and 8 (Husband and Wife)

Owns a plot in the hills, as well as small area near house

No

9 and 10 (Husband and Wife)

Owns land in the mountain, has a larger plot around house with coffee

No

11 and 12 (Husband and Wife)

Have land in mid-altitude and small area near house

No

1 and 2 (Husband and Wife)

Crucita Oriente

Rent land in the mountains

Use family land in the valley, and small area near house

Yes

3 and 4 (Husband and Wife)

Recently purchased small plot near the valley, and small area near house

No

5 and 6 (Husband and

Rent land near community

Land around house has very diverse stand of fruit trees,

No

38 “La tierra siempre es utilizada por alguien de la comunidad y no se puede perder. Permite mejorar la seguridad alimentaria, ya que siempre tienen acceso a la tierra. Usted no puede vender su tierra y se quedan sin tierras… El título comunal permite la libertad para cultivar cuando quiere, libertad para diversificar la parcela, la libertad para mejorar el suelo en su propia área y usted sabe que todavía tiene ese parcela en el futuro. Es una ventaja y una libertad.” (Group interview with 3 male farmers (two in their 30s; one in his 70s) and one female farmer ( in her 60s) in the Highland community of El Águila, May 2011).

62

Wife) coffee, 7 (Elderly Woman)

Her sons use her land and give her some maize to use.

No

8 (Widow who lives with her sons)

Only small area near house with a few fruit trees and vegetables

No

9 and 10 (Husband and Wife)

Own a little land in the mountains, and small area near house

No

11 and 12 (Husband and Wife)

Own a little land in the mountains, and small area near house

No

1 and 2 (Husband and Wife)

El Águila

Communal land, and private land near valley

Yes

3 (Wife) Communal land, and uses family’s private land near valley

Yes

4 (Husband) Communal land, and private land near valley

Yes

5 and 6 (Husband and Wife)

Communal lands No

7 and 8 (Husband and Wife)

Rents in valley Communal lands No

9 and 10 (Husband and Wife)

Communal lands Occasionally

11 And 12 (Husband And Wife)

Communal land, and private land near valley

Occasionally

The same year that the community of El Águila received their communal title, much of

the land around them became protected. The Reserva Biologica de Montecillos falls over the border

between Comayagua, La Paz, and Intibuca. It was created July 1987 through the Ley de los

Bosques Nublados which stated those areas between the highest point and the altitude of 1800,

2000 or 2100 masl were a “protected zone in perpetuity” and that within the limits of this zone

any agricultural activity, grazing, logging, burning, mining, hunting, fishing, construction of

roads, houses, commercial establishments, or any public or private activities which would cause

ecological disturbances would be prohibited (Article 5, Ley de los Bosques Nublados, Decreto

87/87 1987). This law may have protected the water and forests of the mountaintops, but it

63

impacted farmers who had used this land to grow basic grains. In the middle community, many

farmers noted that they had very little land, and often less than their fathers, because of the

formation of the Reserva. For example, the following conversation typifies this kind of experience:

Farmer: “My dad worked in the mountains. There. I remember him working in

Malacara39. This corn is called maíz del año. How white the cob is! ……….

According to the teacher, maíz del año is hardy (valiente) against ‘hielo’ (a fungus).

He had land very high up.”

Angela: “You did not continue planting this variety?”

Farmer: “No, because the water projects came and it was prohibited to cut the

forest anymore. Now it is called a protected area. But that land is excellent.” 40

In the lowland community, no one owned land on the valley floor because the powerful

landlords used this flat, rich soil for rice and cattle production. Stickers in town proudly stated

that Otoro was the rice capital of Honduras, however, I was told that because of falling rice

prices, much more of the land is now being used by the owners for beef cattle. Often land that

could be rented in the valley by the residents of local communities, but it could only be used for a

portion of the year as the owner then used it to pasture his cattle.

As I was shown, access to land is a critical aspect in food security and poverty. As Classen,

et al (2008:4) state, “extreme poverty is a consequence of a number of factors. Inequality in

access to land is a critical one.” Stonich (1993:149) argues in her ethnography of southern

39 A highland community. 40 A: mi papa trabaja en la montaña. Allí. Recuerdo que delel trabajaba en malacara. Esta maíz se llama maíz del año Que blanco la mazorca así. La mazorca blanca… no se….Mi papa sembró un maíz del montaña. Maíz del año, dice la maestro (Jacinto). Valiente para el hielo. Tuvo tierra muy arriba. Ángela: usted no siguió sembrando esa variedad? A: no porque en eso salieron unas proyectos de agua y prohibieron cortar el boque. ya lo denominaron como área protegida. Pero eso tierra es excelente.

64

Honduras that, "the crucial issue underlying … continuing human impoverishment is gross

inequality in access to resources within a socially institutionalized context". Indeed, inequality

levels in Honduras are high compared to the rest of the world although they are similar to those

of neighbouring countries and close to the Latin American average (World Bank 2006:iii). As I

stated in the Introduction, 80 percent of farmers farm on less than 5 hectares, using less than 15

percent of the total agricultural land, while 1 percent of farmers farm on more than 50 hectares

each, owning more than 30 percent of the total arable land (United Nations World Food

Program 2005:11). Gini coefficients, which are an indication of inequality of income

distribution41, computed from the Censo Nacional Agropecuario (CNA) data show that inequality in

land tenure increased over the second half of the last century from 0.7573 in 1952 to 0.7858 in

1993. Regional Gini coefficients illustrate the heterogeneity of landholdings in different

departments. In the department of Intibucá, the 1993 data show a coefficient of 0.718. More

uneven landholdings are to be found in departments with large cattle ranches (0.824 in

Choluteca, 0.758 in Olancho), coffee plantations (0.781 in Santa Barbara) and banana

plantations (0.749 in Atlántida). Departments with smaller Gini coefficients, and thus more equal

landholdings, are those found in the regions of Honduras that are less fertile, poorer and highly

indigenous. As Thorpe 2002 points out, “impoverishment is, on the surface at least, correlated

with a more egalitarian access to land” (117). This is demonstrated when looking at who has

access to land in the Otoro Valley. The poorer quality land that is not easily accessible in the

high mountains is available to the poor households as there is less competition for this land. This

is in contrast to the lowlands were landlessness is more extensive.

41 The Gini coefficient is a measure of the inequality of a distribution, a value of 0 expressing total equality and a value of 1 maximal inequality.

65

Addressing Inequality: A Brief History Of Land Reform Policies And Current Policies That Affect Food Security

In order to understand and improve the food security and nutritional status of rural

Hondurans, we must consider the specific policy factors that present constraints and

opportunities to rural farming households. The policy situation in Honduras influences the

livelihood strategies employed by rural Honduran households in attaining food security, as

defined to include a culturally appropriate and nutritionally sound diet. Over the last 250 years,

both national and international policies have been put in place to try and address the inequality

that keeps many Honduran farmers food insecure. However, there is a disconnect between the

food security strategies of rural Honduran households and the governmental policies that

propose to address the issue of food security and poverty.

Previously, government investments in human and physical resources have been spent

mainly in the areas around Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula and along the Northern Coast, the

area known as the “T of Development.” Outside this “T”, spending has been focused on the

inland valleys where agro-ecological conditions allow for export agriculture and large

landholdings. Agrarian policies have had a long history of only reaching these areas. In the

1880s, modern agrarian change was initiated with the implementation of agro-export oriented

modernization policies and the emergence of the banana plantations (Jansen 1998:7). Marco

Aurelio Soto’s liberal government (1876-1883) advanced policies that encouraged the production

of sugarcane, coffee, natural latex gum (chicle), and cocoa for export (Jansen 1998:7). In order to

do this, export taxes were cut while tax exemptions were created on inputs necessary for

plantations, conditions for increasing access to land for the purpose of commercial plantations

were created, and in order to free up labour, workers of plantations were excepted from the

66

requirements of military service and public work (Jansen 1998:7). This climate was ripe for the

formation of large plantations of the next big export: bananas. Honduras is often described as the

archetype of a “banana-republic”, for one hundred years ago bananas made up 66 per cent of

total exports (Lapper and Painter 1985), while the American-based companies the Standard Fruit

Company and United Fruit Company manipulated Honduran authorities. These companies

were given extensive land concessions along the northern coastal lowlands. Notwithstanding

opposition, these mighty banana companies continued to dominate Honduran politics until the

1970s (Jansen 1998:7).

The expansion of cattle for export is another important facet of agrarian (Howard 1987,

1989; Kramer 1986; Williams 1986; Stonich 1995). Loans in the 1960s and 1970s from the

United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the World Bank, and the Inter-

American Development Bank (IADB) delivered credit for pasture and farm improvement,

breeding programmes, and road improvements, which meant that “on-the-hoof trade” was

replaced by motorized transportation (Jansen 1998:7; see also Stonich 1993). The establishment

of high quality packing plants allowed for access to the protected US market and this coincided

with an increased demand for Honduran meat (Williams 1986). This “beef bonanza” in the

1960s and 1970s, did not improve the livelihoods of the rural poor (Jansen 1998:8). Between

1952 and 1993, the pasture area expanded by 86.3 per cent, increasing land used for cattle from

about one-third to nearly two-thirds of all farmland (Sunderlin and Rodriguez 1996:5). This in

turn altered the availability of arable land for cropping, together with reducing the demand for

labour. This type of land use, along with inequality in landholding, caused the rapidly growing

population to farm on fragile and steep hillsides with foreseeable consequences for the

environment (Humphries et al 2005:1). This model of development meant that increasing

67

latifundios such as the cattle farms, banana and sugar plantations were fencing-in public lands

and threatening the minifundios and subsistence livelihoods of most of the Honduran farmers

(Boyer 2010:323).

During the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century cattle herds were

largely owned by smallholders, as were most of the coffee plantations (Kramer 1986, Guevara-

Escudero 1983). Life in the highlands of Honduras was not defined by the banana industry that

defined the country at large, though the export commodities of coffee and cattle did have some

influence on rural life. For hundreds of years, smallholder agriculture developed on its own, while

government interest in smallholder was limited to the creating agricultural laws controlling land

rights.

The most significant reform initiative in Honduras arrived in 1962 when the land reform

law (‘Ley de Reforma Agraria’) was passed. The following decade was termed the ”Golden Age” of

land reform in Honduras. During this time, a portion of the land previously owned by the

banana corporations was distributed to farmer cooperatives. Yet, these firms continued to have

power over all banana commercialization as well as in political and military intervention (Posas

1992). After World War II, state-led macroeconomic planning created new state agencies, whose

mandates were to modernize agriculture. Of these new agencies, the most important were Banco

Nacional de Desarrollo Agrícola (BANADESA), the Instituto Nacional Agraria (INA), the Corporación

Hondureña de Desarrollo Forestal (COHDEFOR), the Instituto Hondureño del Café (IHCAFE), and the

Secretaría de Recursos Naturales (SRN) (Jansen 1998:9). Jansen (1998:7) points out that “these

agencies had to deal with the conflicting objectives of promoting growth in production and

productivity, meeting national demand for food grains, diversifying exports, incorporating the

68

rural poor in economic development as well as reconciling contradictory interests (especially with

respect to access to land)”.

These state-led interventions were threatened by the economic crisis of the 1980s along

with the new international philosophy on development that of neo-liberalism. Comparable to

many other Latin American countries, Honduras struggled with problems of stagnating

economic growth and foreign debt. Within this new development ideology, the Callejas

government (1990-1993) passed in 1992 the Agricultural Modernization Law (LMDSA)42 as the

new agenda for the agricultural sector. The basic argument underpinning this decree was for the

government to remove itself from direct involvement in agricultural production and to regulate

agriculture without disturbing the free movement of goods and capital (Boyer 2010:324).

Under the LMDSA, land titling led to the selling of agrarian reform lands to the “highest

bidder” (Boyer 2010:324). More than 50 per cent of lands occupied by cooperatives were sold to

foreign agribusiness and to the Honduran oligopolies, military officers and cattlemen (Boyer

2010:324). At this time, “the number of agricultural researchers in Honduras fell from 127 to 78,

and extension workers were reduced from a total of 561 to 241” (Boyer 2010:324). Throughout

Central America, public technical assistance, credit, and rural development projects declined

(Boyer 2010:324). Without any agricultural research being conducted at public institutions,

agricultural research became biased toward the desires of richer farmers who had enough money

to buy technical assistance packages (Classen et al 2008:5). Thus agrarian and food policies in

Honduras favour farmers from better resource-endowed areas that focus on improving

42 Ley para la Modernización y el Desarrollo del Sector Agrícola

69

productivity of export agriculture, while excluding poor farmers, who continue to use low-

yielding slash and burn farming and traditional varieties of crops (Humphries et al 2005: 2).

In April 2006, Honduras entered into a free-trade agreement with the United States: the

Dominican Republic–Central American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA). DR-CAFTA set

a precedent for trade agreements by including the obligation for signatories to recognize the strict

intellectual property rights (IPRs) outlined by the International Union for the Protection of New

Varieties of Plants in their Convention of 1991 (UPOV-91). Agriculture in Honduras, as well as

in the rest of Central America and the Dominican Republic, is being changed by DR-CAFTA

with the loss of agricultural livelihoods associated with cheap grain imports and downward

pressure on local prices (Humphries et al 2012). The type of legal protection enshrined in these

international agreements provides rights to a handful of formally trained plant breeders in large

institutes (Ivanoff 2006). By adhering to UPOV-91, plant varieties will become patentable, and

germplasm conserved by farmers or created by them will be difficult to protect from practices

such as “bioprospecting” (Humphries et al 2012). However, as of the writing of this thesis,

UPOV-91 has not been signed into law by the Honduran Congress, though many expect it to be

passed shortly.

Including agricultural products in a free trade agreement has always been extremely

controversial. The initial position of the Central American governments was a complete refusal

to lower the tariffs on certain agricultural products, wanting the US to first agree to lower its

domestic subsidies (Ricker 2004). The US rejected this proposal, but allowed for the tariffs on

some Central American products to be gradually reduced instead of immediately repealing them

outright. These products are categorized as “sensitive agricultural commodities,” and include

beans, rice, sugar, beef, pork, poultry meat, milk and other dairy products, and white maize. The

70

DR-CAFTA continues the process of unilateral economic opening, applied since the nineties by

the State of Honduras. A scenario of DR-CAFTA could be for Honduras to take advantage of

the lower-cost cereals and grains imported from the USA to supply a cheap basic food basket for

Hondurans (to stabilize the cost of living), while Honduras specializes in the production and

processing of diverse fruits and vegetables for export to the USA, along with clothing (maquila)

and traditional export crops (bananas, coffee, cocoa, wood) (IDRC 2005). The IDRC and the

Association for Research and Social Studies (ASIES; Asociacion de Investigacion y Estudios Sociales) of

Guatemala, funded a study analyzing the potential impact of DR-CAFTA on the rural sector in

Honduras which noted that the risk associated with this scenario is the dependency of the

affordability of the basic food basket on continued low prices of USA-imported grains and

cereals, which is in large part made possible by subsidies to the US industry (IDRC 2005)

The impact of import dependence is most keenly felt when steep rises in global grain

prices severely affect poor households, whose incomes are largely devoted to food purchases,

underlining the vulnerability of the majority of Hondurans to global integration. As well, farmers

are pushed aside as cheep grains flood the market. In reaction to worries about a food crisis, the

government led by Mel Zelaya designed a four-year National Program of Basic Grains

(Programa Nacional de Granos Básicos 2006-2010) to increase grain production and food

security within the nation by making Honduras self-sufficient in terms of agriculture (Carbonario

et al. 2010). In attempts to increase production of basic grains to ensure food security for the

population and contribute to employment generation, part of the Strategic Plan was to

implement the Technical Production Voucher Project, Bono Tecnológico. The Bono Tecnológico was

an economic incentive for the technological upgrading of small producers of basic grains. Seed

71

and fertilizer were to support 80,000 small farmers in 17 provinces and 17143 municipalities of

the poorest, and resource poor farmers (SAG 2006). High yielding seeds and fertilizers were

offered to smallholder farming households in order to increase national production. Recipients of

the seeds and fertilizers would repay communal banks (cajas rurales) “to create a revolving fund for

future credit to producers” (Carbonari et al. 2010:2). However, the World Bank (see report by

Carbonario et al., 2010) noted that an increase of 45 percent in the yields would be needed in

order for a normal smallholder farmer using the Bono Tecnológico package to be able to repay the

value of the voucher to the communal banks without losses (Carbonari et al. 2010). Farmers I

spoke to had not used this program themselves, but some of them talked about how the mayor

was giving away seeds and fertilizer. One farmer complained, “Look, right now the mayor is

offering a variety of seed...but we are only being given a pound. A pound does

nothing…Additionally, these varieties of maize brought plague. In the valley was an infestation of

caterpillars that damaged the crop.” 44 His response was that the program only offered one

pound of seeds and that it was not worth the trouble of sowing it.

The seeds that were given to farmers through this program were improved varieties

developed through DICTA (such as DICTA Laderas, DICTA Guayape, Tuxpeño, HB-104,

QPM 01 y 03, DICTA Sequia, Intibucano A-503) (SAG 2010). Though these varieties attempt

to address the diversity of the rural countryside, they continue to assume that farmers do not

have the productive resources or knowledge to address food security. As Honduran

anthropologist Mario Ardon Mejia, told me, “policies dealing with food security [in Honduras]

43 Carbonari et al. (2010:2) state that, “the project was implemented in 17 states, 216 municipalities, and 2,125 communities, benefiting 81, 747 small farmers. 44Mire,ahorita el alcalde ofreció una semilla… solo les está dando una libra. Con una libra no hace nada. Pero esas variedades de maíz traen plaga. En ese valle fue un gusanera que daño la cosecha.

72

have ignored the advances in food security and local knowledge developed over the centuries.

These policies erode the productive capacities of the rural producers…As well, [policies such as]

Bono Tecnológico simply gave farmers seeds and inputs without parallel policies that would ensure

that these rural households were less vulnerable and dependent on the use of agrochemicals”

(interview September 4th, 2011).

Conclusions:

Within the Valley of the Otoro Grande there are diverse environmental niches that allow

for unique livelihood strategies around farming because of the restrictions they pose on what

crops can be grown. Unpredictable climatic extremes also impact food accessed by families. The

combination of these factors can lead to seasonal and temporary food insecurity. Access to lands

in these different niches also impact food security. Access to appropriate seeds and good quality

land contribute greatly to food insecurity in rural farming families. As I have pointed out,

agrarian and food security policies have largely ignored the environmental and cultural diversity

of Honduras to the exclusion of the most marginal. The voices of poor, small-scale rural farmers

have been largely left out and ignored by national and international polices. This is why local, in-

depth research with small-scale farmers is so valuable to increase food security in a country where

over half the population lives in rural areas. By listening to these voices, policies can be directed

and made more useful within the range of livelihood strategies. Working with local actors will

also elucidate the locally specific cultural and socioeconomic conditions that affect food security.

In the next chapter, I will discuss these factors relating to the Jesus de Otoro Valley.

73

CHAPTER 5: Cultural and Socioeconomic Factors Affecting

Availability, Access and Use of Food

Just as the factors such as environment, unequal access to resources, and food security

policies affect food availability, accessibility and use, so too do values, beliefs, traditions, and

attitudes. Cultural practices affect food security by influencing what things are considered food,

how hunger is defined, which foods are preferred, how the consumption of certain foods

intersects with notions of identity, and how these affect the daily food choices individuals make.

Kathleen DeWalt (1984) outlined the concept of pathways of household food procurement. She

used this concept to explain how the food choice process encompasses the interaction of factors

that include time, economic resources, and the location of food supply, as well as norms and

cultural preferences. Cultural conventions for directing food intake are not easy to list nor

consistent in how they are carried out by groups of people (Goode 1989:127). The interactions

and practices I observed and about which people spoke to me were their own. “Para mi…” (for

me) or “en mi opinion…” (in my opinion) were often the qualifiers used by people when I spoke

with them about food preferences. Comparable to most features of culture, such “socially shared

understandings of food contribute to, but do not determine, choice”, states Goode (1989:129).

Indeed, conceptions surrounding food and nutrition are constantly negotiated, conveyed,

reinforced and adapted over time through communication by individuals, households and

communities. This chapter examines how those in the communities where I worked navigate the

cultural factors that contribute to food security, how these factors relate to preliminary nutritional

data obtained from local maize landraces, and how cultural practices impact nutritional intake.

74

Superfoods and a Cultural Definition of Hunger:

A cultural superfood is the staple food of the culture, one that is served at every meal.

According to Jelliffe (1967: 279) a cultural superfood is a staple food that is the main source of

calories, occupies a major part of the community’s work time, and has importance in religion,

mythology and history. The importance of staple foods in many cultures is evidenced by the

incorporation of these staples into definitions of what it means to be hungry. For example, in

much of Asia, rice is a superfood; a meal lacking rice is not a true meal, and its absence causes

subjective feelings of hunger (Wilson 1986:258). My Dedo (grandfather), a Bulgarian immigrant to

Canada, will tell you that a meal without bread is not a real meal. For him, like many in the

Mediterranean and Middle East region, every meal must always have bread (Goode 1989:133),

and a table is not properly set without the placement of salt and bread. In his exploration of the

cultural definition of hunger by the Kalauna of the Southwest Pacific, Young (1986:113) discusses

how some crops, especially those of introduced varieties, are not seen as proper foods. In

contrast, yam, taro, banana and sweet potatoes are the principal subsistence crops that are

carefully measured, distributed, tallied, and hoarded, and are considered an integral part of the

main meal (Young 1986:114). During the hungry season, only plantain, sweet potato and

cassava may be available, though a meal consisting of only cassava indicates a real scarcity and

poverty and “no one willingly admits to having fed on such despised food” (Young 1986: 114).

In Central America, maize is the cultural superfood and thus influences the definitions of

hunger and what it means to be food secure. Maize is the staple food of many in the developing

world. During the “Seminario Taller sobre Investigación Participativa e Innovación Tecnológica

75

en Producción de Semilla de Maíz”45 in La Ceiba, November 2011, Felix San Vicente quoted a

FAOSTAT (2007) figure that said in Honduras, annual maize consumption exceeds 73kg

(161lbs) per capita (FAOSTAT 2007). However, this figure is a national average and does not

fully illustrate the amount consumed in the interior of the country. In the Bay Islands, northern

coast and the large cities of Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula much of the population eats wheat

tortillas or even bread. For example, an average household of about 8 people in a mid-altitude

community in the Otoro Valley informed me during interviews and a meeting with USAID that

they consume (both human and animal) about 5lbs of maize a day (approximately 1,825kg per

year). Most of this maize is consumed as tortillas, the basis of every meal. Just as Beaudette

(1999) observed in the department of Yoro, I saw that all meals consist of tortillas, sometimes

accompanied by beans, rice, eggs, and occasionally meat and mantequilla (a type of sour cream)

(Beaudette 1999: 165-166). The simplest meal my interviewees told me about was that of tortillas

and salt, a point Thorpe (2002) also speaks to when discussing ways to quantify rural poverty. He

suggests that, because many respondents in his study said they survived on a diet of salt and

tortillas, local maize prices could be used to enumerate household consumption for evaluating

food security (Thorpe 2002:135).

Much time is devoted to maize in the communities I visited. Not only is maize the crop

that occupies significant time for farmers in their fields, the preparation of tortillas is also a long

process. The woman of the household (in the case of my interviewees it was either a mother or a

daughter) is the first to get up in the morning. She begins her day by starting the fire in the stove,

and starts the process of tortilla making by milling the maize in the hand mill. The night before,

the women cook the maize for many hours and then rinse it thoroughly to be ready for the

45 "Workshop on Participatory Research and Technological Innovation in Maize Production"

76

following day's tortillas. The tortillas are cooked on the comal (griddle), with well-practiced fingers

used to flip them over without getting burned. Often a woman will make all the tortillas for the

day. This could be around 100 or up to 250, as discussed by Beaudette (1999:154).

For those in the Otoro valley, tortillas are culturally and symbolically significant just as

they have been for the Maya of the Yucatan peninsula in Mexico, for whom without tortillas

there is no authentic meal, “amounting to symbolic and psychological (if not nutritional)

starvation” (Leatherman and Goodman 2005: 840). Indeed, due to the importance of maize to

every meal, access to and availability of this crop is key to defining hunger and food security.

Hunger in the communities where I worked is defined in terms of access to maize (or

tortillas), and not access to food altogether. When Angela and I explained my project to one

farmer, the first thing he wanted to tell us was about the importance of maize. He said “there is a

proverb that says, if there is a table without maize or beans, they say these tables are sad, because

they lack food”46. Another interviewee told me “without tortillas, there is hunger and sadness”.47

A family would not necessarily feel they were hungry if they did not have beans for a meal, but a

meal that has no maize is considered a serious problem.

As discussed in Chapter 4, the hungry time known as los junios occurs because

communities have consumed or sold the previous harvest of beans and maize (beans harvested

from December/November, maize harvested from September/October) and this year’s crop of

maize has only recently been planted. During these times families eat more bananas (and related

varieties of plantains), tuber crops such as yucca, potatoes, sweet potato, malanga and badu (taro 46 “...Hay una lección que dice que si hay una mesa, y no hay maíz, ni hay frijolitos, dicen quizas estas mesas están triste, porque falta ese alimento”(Male, early 30s, Crucitas Oriente)

47 “Si no hay tortillas, hay hambre y hay tristeza” (Female, 30s, Barrio Nuevo).

77

varieties), and vegetables such as chayote and cabbage. During this time pigs and chicken are

also fed other crops to reduce the amount of maize usage. Beaudette (1999: 244) mentions that

women in Yorito said that vegetables are important “during los junios, “because there are no

beans”, or “when there is nothing else to eat”.”

When I asked people about dietary diversity, I was told about two main time periods of

greatest diversity (see Figure 3). About half of the people mentioned that the time of more

diversity occurred during May and June, because this was a time of great abundance of crops

such as beans, yucca, and vegetables and that there may be a bit of maize left from the previous

harvest. However, this time period was also an occasion when families had to search for other

foods outside of the normal maize and beans. In this sense, diversity was seen as something

undesirable as it accompanied times of hunger. The other half of my interviewees told me that

there was more diversity after the maize harvest when there had been water available to nourish

the crops. These farmers would often confuse diversity with quantity of food, especially the

quantity of maize consumed, which underscores the importance of the maize crop. The time

with least diversity is associated with the period when people are picking coffee and have more

disposable income. Thus access to income does not translate into a diverse diet, despite

households having physical and economic access to diverse foods during the first few months of

the year.

78

Figure 3: Perceived Dietary Diversity: Number of interviewees who perceived Dietary Diversity to be high during the month. Circled areas show months that interviewees thought of as having high dietary diversity.

Dietary diversity, the number of diverse foods or food groups ingested over a given

interval, is often associated with higher household food security and a healthier diet. Dietary

variety is seen as a proxy for dietary quality. The household dietary diversity score (HDDS)

developed by the FAO are meant to reflect the economic ability of households to eat a variety of

foods. Hoddinott and Yohannes (2002:38-39) found that “as a general rule, changes in dietary

diversity—as defined as the number of unique foods consumed—are a good indicator of changes

in per capita consumption and per capita caloric acquisition, both “access” measures of

household food security”. Other reports have shown how an increase in dietary diversity is

related to both the socio-economic status and food security of households (see also Hatloy et al.

2000; FAO 2007:3). However, emphasis on dietary diversity overlooks cultural values when

cultures devalue dietary diversity. For people who value a single food source above all others,

dietary diversity might have a limited role in cultural perceptions of hunger. In fact, for many

participants in this study, the times of greatest dietary diversity were also perceived as times of

79

reduced consumption and caloric intake. Hence, dietary diversity for some people can be seen as

having a negative influence on food security. While the FAO has incorporated cultural

preferences into their definition of food security, frameworks that place a great deal of

importance on the role of dietary diversity in food security are not representative of the

perceptions and lived experiences of the people of the Otoro valley. People chose foods because

of cultural preferences for specific foods. This points to a potential problem inherent in the

definition of food security: different cultural groups put different emphases on different aspects of

the definition. These differences should have implications for thinking about food security

policies.

Cultural preferences and food consumption

Sensory properties of food, such as shape, size, and colour influence food selection and

preferences. These characteristics often inform people about taste and texture by which they

evaluate foods to be “more or less appetizing, appealing, or valuable for certain purposes.”

(Messer 1989:9). These visual cues provide criteria for folk classification of foods. These

classifications allow people to construct diets that combine “cultural ideas of the nutritional

contents of particular food types as well as their other social symbolic meanings” (Messer

1989:10). People use colour to rank varieties, and because it often “encodes other dimensions of

cultural value (colour) may influence food selection more than reputed nutritional worth" (Messer

1989:10). This was seen in Mexico, by the well-known nutritional anthropologist Ellen Messer,

where white maize is preferred for tortillas, "since white tortillas are said to look “cleaner”, to

have a softer texture, and to taste better than tortillas of coloured maize" (Messer 1989:10).

Though coloured maize can be seen as having good taste and texture, it may be seen as making

dirty tortillas and if coloured grains mix with white, it can be seen as dirtying the pure colour of

80

those tortillas (Messer 1976; Messer 1989). As Messer (1989:10) states, in this context colour

functions as “a kind of folk index of purity and refinement, and affects the prestige value of

varieties within a particular category of foods", for example the prestige of white maize versus the

lower cultural status of coloured maize. The prestige of white tortillas, which “since pre-

Colombian times…have had preference over coloured ones” (Bordi 2006:99), has changed over

the last decade for the middle and upper class in Mexico. Bordi (2006) calls this phenomenon a

nationalistic nostalgia for “authentic” Mexican foods in the face of globalization. In her article,

Bordi (2006) shows that because of the close link between colour, status and identity, when

globalization and neoliberal trade threaten national identity, there are changes in the way

Mexicans build identity through the consumption of coloured maize. How then are issues of

colour and other preferences, playing out in other contexts where maize is a staple food? During

my fieldwork, I observed how issues of identity and cultural preferences played out in the Otoro

Valley.

During my time in Otoro, it was immediately apparent to me that culturally influenced

sensory properties play an important role in food preferences. Local preferences of colour, shape

and taste, are important factors that help to determine what varieties of maize and beans are

available in the households. Many households that I interviewed cultivated a diverse number of

bean and maize varieties. The average number of varieties for each household for beans and

maize was two or three varieties, though diversity was variable throughout the communities.

Each variety is grown for a number of reasons. The most prominent motives, apart from

agronomic factors like yield and resistance, are colour, texture, taste, tortilla quality, length of

time tortillas stay fresh, cooking time, and marketability.

81

The colour of tortillas derived from the differently coloured maize varieties was very

influential in the making of food choices. One elderly woman informed me that she had no idea

what varieties she used because the colour was the only important characteristic in classifying

maize.48 This supports the findings of DeWalt and DeWalt (1982:80), who found that in their

mountain research communities in southern Honduras, farmers recognized two varieties of

maize: amarillo (yellow) and blanco (white). Not only was colour used to classify varieties, but

people had very strong feelings toward certain colours of tortillas. During my time in Honduras,

people expressed very strong feelings towards tortillas made from negrito (black) maize. One

woman in Barrio Nuevo, the lowland community, informed me that she did not even want to

touch tortillas of black maize because they made her think that the people who had made them

had not washed their hands.49 This sentiment was also related to me in the highland community

of El Águila, where most of the families use a lot of coloured maize. Here one woman told me

that her children think she has not properly washed the maize when she uses her black maize to

make tortillas. One young woman informed me that the reason she does not use ash to remove

the pericarp from her maize is because of the colour it turns the tortillas. I was also told a story by

another young woman of when her mother sent her to school with tortillas made from black

maize, her schoolmates would insultingly tease her saying that her family ate tortillas of ash.

Colour was so important for determining her preference for white maize that one woman in

48 A. Que variedades que les sembró? (what varieties did he grow?) DR: No se no me acuerdo ? (I don’t know, I don’t rememeber) R: ¿Qué color es? (what colour is it?) DR. es blanco (It is white) A. Hay otro variedades que usted siembra o solo esto? (Are there other varieties that you plant, or only this one?) DR: Si siembra maíz amarillo (Yes, he plants yellow maize) A. Maíz amarillo? Pero no sabía la variedad? (Yellow maize? But you don’t know the variety?) DR: No (No) (Female, 60s, Barrio Nuevo, No CIAL). 49 ““Por el color, yo pienso que nunca las he probado porque las miro negras… pienso que no se han lavado las manos” (Female, 30s, Barrio Nuevo, CIAL)

82

Barrio Nuevo said that, despite knowing that yellow is more nutritious, she “prefers what is nice,

and not what is good for health”50. Yet another example of how the importance of colour of the

maize masa (dough) is that some women I spoke to separate out different coloured kernels of

maize from cobs that have been pollinated by coloured maize from nearby fields. I was told that

this was done because the flavour of the various colours differs.

When discussing the nutrient value of crops, many rural Hondurans would talk to me

about the sabor (flavour) of the crops, and which varieties were “mas dulce” (sweeter). During the

group interview the participants told me “The mountain varieties are sweeter and thus we

believe they have more nutrition. Mountain maize is more sweet.” One woman told me she

thinks this means it has more nutrition and that the food tastes better when made from mountain

maize.51 Flavour was something they could talk to me about with personal knowledge, whereas

vitamin, mineral or protein content was something they said they did not know about personally,

but had some knowledge about these factors from health organizations and animal feed bag tags

sold in the agricultural stores in town.

50 “prefiero lo que es bonito, y no lo que es bueno para la salud”(Female, late 40s, Barrio Nuevo, No CIAL)

51 “Las variedades de montaña son más dulces y así creemos que tienen más nutrientes. Maíz montaña es más dulce.” “Creo que esto significa que tiene más nutrientes. El sabor de la comida es mejor.”

83

Figure 4: “Flavour” of Yellow vs. White Maize

Colour of the maize implies not only the colour of the tortillas, but also how “heavy” the

tortillas will be. People again and again told me that the tortillas of yellow maize are heavy or

unpleasant [“cae muy pesado”]. However, many others commented positively saying that one has

to eat only half as many tortillas of yellow to be full52. These sentiments show the complexity of

feelings towards one aspect of maize. While many said that they did not like the fact that the

yellow tortillas are heavy, others mentioned that this is evidence that they are more nutritious

and also that they have more flavour (see Figure 4)53. During the group interview participants

suggested that not only is it that yellow maize is heavier, but that the heaviness is explicitly

52 “Sí, yo me como cuatro tortillas de maíz blanco, y cuando comeo tortillas de maíz amarillo solo tres o dos.”(Male, early 30s, Crucitas Oriente, No CIAL)

“El amarillo llena más que el blanco”( Female, 30s, Crucitas Oriente, no CIAL),

“El amarillo rinde más; es más pesado. Con dos tortillas está cabal”(Male, late 40s, Crucitas Oriente, CIAL)

53 During my 36 interviews about a third of the participants (12 individuals) specifically talked about how they believe that yellow maize has the most flavour when compared to white (7 female, 5 male; 5 who were not part of a CIAL, and 7 who were; 5 in El Águila, 5 in Crucitas, and 2 in Barrio Nuevo). Only five individuals (3 male, 2 female) preferred the flavor of white maize over yellow.

84

related to environmental factors. Specifically, they argued that this is because most yellow maize

comes from the mountains (higher altitudes).

Colour also contributes to the ideas of what is “human food” and what is “animal food”.

Interviewees in the lowland community told me they do not like the colour of the yellow maize

because it is considered a food for animals, and not fit for human beings54. They said that yellow

was used mostly for “concentrado” (feed) for the chickens, pigs and horses. This idea dissipates as

one travels up the mountainside, where yellow maize is grown and eaten more frequently.

In southern Honduras, DeWalt and DeWalt (1982:80) found that although many of the

highland households in their research area “grew significant amounts of white maize”, there was

still a strong “personal preference for yellow maize”. The personal preference for yellow maize

did come up during my time in Honduras, typically from those in older generations or from

those involved in the CIALs or active in rural and indigenous movements. One elderly

grandmother said that she prefers yellow maize and that when people give her maize, she gives

the white to the chickens and cooks the yellow maize for herself.55 Households in the valley who

may prefer yellow or black maize, and do not grow much of their own maize, say that they thus

eat mostly white maize because of limited availability of coloured maize due to low market value.

Temmer (2010) found that when rural highland Honduran farmers grow maize and beans for

personal consumption and not for sale on the local market, their priorities in what they are

looking for in bean and maize varieties changes. Instead of good market value and high yields,

54 This sentiment was relayed to me during visits to the parcelas and the market. During interviews no one made this specific point but comments such as “No me gusta el color para comer, pero si lo tenemos, lo usamos para el engorde de los animales (Female, late 40s, Barrio Nuevo)” were mentioned many times. 55 “La tortilla de maíz amarillo es bien dulcita….como la de maíz negrito. También yo prefiero cuando tengo maíz amarillo. Mi hijo compro cuatro cargas y un día viene un niño escuelero y me mira con las tortillas y dice que bonitas las tortillas de abuelita. Entre blanco y amarillo yo prefiero el amarillo. El blanco maiz se los doy a los pollos y yo cocino el amarillo” (Female, 70s, Crucita Oriente, No CIAL).

85

farmers who produce for personal consumption tend to place more emphasis on taste, colour and

ease of cooking (Temmer 2010:90). Other families informed me that they ate whatever colour

they had access to on a daily basis, but that for certain food items, they would search for certain

maize colours. However, the personal preference for the taste of yellow or black maize does not

translate into market value.

Purchasing Power and Status:

The ability of consumers to obtain goods and services based on their control of money or

credit affects household food security, and their ability to acquire food is influenced by these food

prices. Price of foods influences what foods are bought, and in the case of maize, what colour is

bought by those with less cash to spend. International markets of maize distribute mainly yellow

maize, but in Latin America consumers as a whole prefer the domestically grown white varieties.

In fact, the price of yellow maize in Honduras is lower than for white. This is because urban

consumers throughout Latin America have expressed preferences for white, and consumers are

willing to alter their purchasing habits only at discounted prices. Further, consumers of low-

income groups are more likely to purchase and consume yellow varieties. This makes yellow

maize an inferior good for the more affluent residents, while it is a normal good for the highland

poor where income elasticity is low56. This process is seen in other food items, such as different

coloured sugars. In the ethnographies of Sidney W. Mintz (1985; 1999), he demonstrates how

changes in the preferences of consumers from brown sugar to white sugar, and then back again,

need to be contextualized within the political economy of consumption and production (Knight

56 An inferior good is one that decreases in demand when consumer income rises, unlike normal goods, for which the opposite is seen.

86

2009). Knight (2009) speaks to the shifts in taste from brown to white sugar by Indonesians

during the late twentieth century.

During the Tenth International Conference of Farmer Experimenters in Honduras (X

Encuentro Internacional de Agricultores (-as) Experimentadores (-as) en Honduras) held in Siguatepeque in

August 2010, I spoke with two sisters who presented on their CIAL’s evaluation of landrace

varieties of maize in Vallecillo, Francisco Morazán. During the presentation it became clear that

colour was a crucial factor that their community looked at while evaluating varieties, along with

yield and resistance to pests. Colour was important because it impacted the commercial value of

the grain itself and also the tortillas. White maize has a high commercial value, while a yellow

variety has less commercial value despite the fact that yellow varieties constantly scored the

highest in flavour during evaluations. Notwithstanding this, many families in their community

grow at least one variety of both yellow and white maize. They explained that this was because of

the personal preferences of the families and also because their community was poor. When

people needed to buy maize for themselves and their animals they would more likely be able to

afford yellow than white; if they only had white corn to sell no one in the community could afford

to buy it. The main advantage of white maize is its marketability.

Colour also affects the marketability of beans. I was told that the best beans to sell were

those with a brilliant red colour, while the best price for maize was obtained for white maize,

commonly the variety Guayape. One farmer in Barrio Nuevo, who harvests a large amount of

maize, said that he grows Guayape because of its good colour for selling, and the yellow variety

because of its good taste and use for personal consumption. Just as was conveyed to me by my

participants, DeWalt and DeWalt (1982:80-81) documented nearly 30 years earlier that white

was preferred by people in towns and larger urban centres and was thus easier to sell and earned

87

a higher price. Perales et al. (2003) also found that throughout their study area in rural Mexico,

the prevalent maize types were white, a trait that reflected market demand. In their ethnography,

they wrote that farmers reported that sometimes buyers refused to buy coloured maize (Perales et

al. 2003).

Food Preferences and Identity:

Identity has been studied in the social sciences as both as a process (how it operates) and

as an object (what it is). Identity involves the mental self-image that an individual gives to

themselves based on daily interactions with individuals, groups, and different objects. These

images expose various “layers of meaning” that are constructed upon individual, social, cultural

and foundations (Bisogni et al 2002: 129). According to Wilk (1997:308), “it is an anthropological

truism that food is both substance and symbol.” Many findings have shown that food is an

exceptionally meaningful symbol of personal and group identity (Caplan 1997; Counihan 1999;

Leitch 2003; Mintz 2002; Sutton 2001; Wilk 1999; etc). As Weismantel (1988:7) states, the

production, preparation and consumption of foods are central to identity construction: “What we

eat and how we eat it also defines us as social beings... To cook is to speak and to mean, as well as

to make and to do”. People ascribe identity to themselves and to others based on their

interactions with food, such as what is considered edible, what foods they like and dislike, and

how they prepare foods (Bisogni et al 2002:129). Eating specific foods is part of enacting one's

own identity. Identity as associated to food is a mutually shaping relationship; a person’s

identities affect what is eaten and vice versa. Identities linked to consumption are “reflexive and

dialectical in nature as they result from a person’s food choices, as a person compares themselves

with various situations” (Bisogni et al 2002:135). Research has shown that foods are a remarkably

powerful “symbol of personal and group identity, forming one of the foundations of both

88

individuality and a sense of common membership in a larger, bounded group” (Wilk 1997:308).

However, identities and food practices can also be fluid and changing. As Warde notes “what is

much less well understood is how such a stable pillar of identity can be so fluid and changeable,

how seemingly insurmountable boundaries between each group’s unique dietary practices and

habits can be maintained, while diets, recipes, and cuisines are in a constant state of flux” (Warde

in Wilk, 1997:244). Indeed, culture is constantly changing, even as it is being put on the pedestal

of tradition.

Honduran cultural identity has rarely been studied in the literature, and those that have

looked at it, point to the vague aspects of “an honoured Honduran national identity” (Pine 2008).

“Although it is constantly and openly being negotiated, ‘Honduran-ness’ is an elusive category”

writes Pine (2008:3) in her ethnography of urban Hondurans in which she studied complex

connections between alcohol, work, religion, politics, influence of the United States, and social

change in Honduras. There are some aspects of “Honduran-ness” that speak to sameness, but

many that point to differences with others (Pine 2008).

Rowlands (1997) notes that Honduras differs from its neighbouring countries partly

because of the composition and power of the oligarchy, the absence of a significant guerrilla or

independence movement, and its strategic significance in terms of US foreign policy. These

factors influence the identity that Pine (2008) speaks to in her ethnography, in which she shows

that Hondurans constantly compare themselves to an idealized image of Americans. Along with

this strong foreign influence, a strong local agrarian capitalist class failed to emerge and a middle

class did not begin to develop until the later half of the last century (Rowlands 1997:31). This has

left Honduras today with great inequality and also few national heroes. Along with inequality,

89

clientalism and caudillismo57 take power out of the hands of most Hondurans, and produce a

climate where social capital is very important for improving livelihoods.

As mentioned in earlier chapters, most Hondurans experience poverty, and Pine (2008)

shows that ‘Honduran-ness’ is greatly influenced by the amount of poverty in the country. The

population of Honduras is 90 percent mestizo (mixed race), with ethnically different features

present in both the ruling class and the indigenous populations. The inequality so prevalent in

Honduras means that most Hondurans see themselves as different from the “ethnically marked

ruling class” (Pine 2008:3). Most also see themselves as different from the nine officially

recognized indigenous groups (Tawahka, Pech, Tolupan, Lenca, Miskitu, Maya Chorti, Garífuna, Isleños

de Habla Inglesa, and Nahua), despite their mestizo heritage.

The Honduran identity described by Pine (2008:24), where Hondurans see themselves as

more violent than, and therefore behind, people from other countries, also arises within

Honduran society. Not only is Honduras the most violent country in the world outside of a war

zone according to the United Nations (UNODC 2010), but a 2005 CEPAL study reported that

61 percent of Honduran men hold traditional attitudes concerning the gender roles, involving an

overstressed connotation of masculinity related with machismo (male pride, male chauvinism)

(Classen et al 2008: 4). Along with machismo attitudes come stereotypical portrayals of poor

Hondurans, especially ‘indios’ as alcoholic and violent (Pine 2008; Rowlands 1997). These

general and clichéd patterns of behaviour produce a national identity of “supposed moral and

57 Caudillo means leader or boss. “In its broadest political sense, caudillismo in Latin America has popularly come to mean any highly personalistic and quasi-military regime whose party mechanisms, administrative procedures, and legislative functions are subject to the intimate and immediate control of a charismatic leader and his cadre of mediating officials.” At the local level, we more commonly find the Indian-derived cacique which signifies chief (Boussard 2003:152 footnote#7).

90

cultural inadequacy of the Hondurans…that is frequently expounded in the Honduran

newspapers” (Pine 2008:9).

However, the negative image of Honduran-ness was recently challenged. For a short

time under the leadership of Jose Manuel Zelaya, the Honduran Ministry of Culture had an

official policy to recognize the plurality of Honduran ethnicities (Enrique 2010:31). As part of this

work, Casas de Cultura58 were developed to promote, and indeed celebrate, local cultural heritage,

with centres in diverse areas such as the departments of Copan, Gracias a Dios, Santa Barbara

and the valleys of Sula and Jesus de Otoro (Enrique 2010:32).

Eating tortillas is a symbol of Honduran identity especially in the interior of Honduras,

but this identity is further defined within Honduran society depending on colour of maize used

and types of foods prepared. There is indeed a plurality of shared identities apparent in this

heterogeneous county. As was discussed above, many things are implied depending on what one

eats. By saying white maize is “cleaner”, “more beautiful”, and “more cultured” denigrates those

who eat coloured maize. The sentiment that “los pobres indios” who consume coloured maize

should feel shame about the fact that they eat this food was often conveyed to me. During a

group interview I was told that you would be considered “un indio pobre” if you ate tortillas made

from criollo varieties such as black maize, criollo beans varieties such as chinapopos (Phaseolus

coccineus, large colourful beans), or foods like ticucos (large tortillas with beans inside also called

tamal de viaje).

On the other hand, the celebration of the local criollos (landraces), and the local dishes, is

an expression of continuity with the past that is worth commemoration. It is also an assertion of a

58 Cultural Centres (houses of culture)

91

pride and a hope to share with the next generation. During an interview, a farmer who lives in

the mid-altitude community of Crucita Oriente passionately told me that planting criollos,

including the coloured varieties, was important because these seeds are the heritage or legacy

(patrimonio) of the indigenous people of Honduras; “they are life, for without them there is no

life”59. His choice of varieties of maize of certain colours was based around a pride in his identity

as indigenous Lenca60. During a conversation with the husband in one of the families I

interviewed, he and I talked about how important the activity of growing maize was to the people

of the Otoro valley. When asked why he always liked growing maize despite having his own shoe

repair stall in the town market building, he answered, “Because it is a tradition, it is our heritage,

our custom”61. For him, his roots are firmly planted in the parcela (field). He said, “Generally, we

were raised working in the fields”62. Criollo seeds and local foods had to some farmers an intrinsic

value as being a connection to their heritage. For them, their identity is wrapped up in these

seeds and these foods. Thus to lose these seeds and these foods is to threaten their identity. This

means that they struggle to protect these things. This became evident in stories about ambitious

travels to join huge marches in the capital city of Tegucigalpa against the loss of indigenous

seeds, stories and photos of local demonstrations to keep the municipality free of GMO seeds,

and a pride when talking about the seed banks set up by FIPAH and other NGOs. It should be

noted that climate and geography also seem to facilitate the retention of Lenca indigenous

culture, as they permit the growing of the crops that have symbolic and cultural meaning.

59 “Porque la semilla criollo… es nuestro patrimonio. Es la vida. Porque cuando no lo vea esto alimento, no hay vida.” (Male, 30s, Crucitas Oriente, No CIAL)

60 “Somos indígenas!” he told Angela and me during an interview, a sentiment I would hear often after that from him. During a trip with USAID officials in 2011 we passed him on the road up to El Águila and the thing he wanted most to remind the officials after being introduced was “Somos indígenas!” (We are indigenous!)

61 “porque es una tradición; es un patrimonio; una costumbre.”(Male, 40s,, Barrio Nuevo)

62 “Por lo general, como nos hemos criado trabajando en el campo” (Male, 40s,, Barrio Nuevo)

92

The Nutritional Value of Local Food Sources: Maize Nutrition

As I have mentioned in Chapter 1, food security “exists when all people, at all times, have

physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary

needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” (FAO 2002). The concept of food

security covers the collective group, the social being, and the individual body. At this last level,

food security means that healthy tissue and organ function are maintained by receiving the

appropriate amounts of nutrients, including vitamins and minerals. Thus the nutritional content

of available foods is important. Although considerable research is conducted on issues of yield,

risk, vulnerability, agrobiodiversity and sustainability, when it comes to crop selection and

experimentation, there is limited consideration for how access to different landraces affects

everyday dietary practices and food preferences within farmer households. In order for plant

breeding projects to be successful, it is necessary to merge productivity issues with the qualitative

consideration of preference and factors such as ease of preparation and perceptions of nutritional

value and health that farmers attribute to different landraces. The significance of these factors is

starting to be recognized within the research community, mainly within interdisciplinary and

participatory research programs (Dickenson et al. 2009). Here the expertise of anthropologists

can play an important role.

Globally, maize provides approximately 15 percent of protein and 20 percent of calories

used by humans (Brown et al. 1988, cited in Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). In Honduras, corn

or maize (Zea mays L.) is the chief annual crop, both in terms of its portion of total harvested area

and as I have shown, its role in human consumption. Roughly 25 percent of all farmland is sown

with maize, and “Hondurans’ per capita maize consumption is among the highest in the world”

(Hintz et al. 2003: 307). Because of this and because of maize’s role as a superfood within

93

Honduran culture, it is important to know the nutritional makeup of this grain, and how

processing changes the nutrients available for use by the human body. With the impact of all the

different factors described in the last chapters in mind, a nutritional analysis was performed from

90 varieties of landraces collected after the 2010 harvest. We hoped that the data from these tests

would show what nutrients are available to rural farmers in Honduras.

Maize kernels provide many macronutrients and micronutrients needed for human

metabolism. In addition to serving as a critical source of macro- and micronutrients, maize is also

a rich source of many phytochemicals (compounds in plants that may affect health but are not

essential nutrients) including carotenoids, phenolic compounds, anthocyanins, and tocopherols.

Several studies with these phytochemicals have shown that they have multiple functional roles,

for example, as antioxidants, as antimutagens, and as reducers of cancer (Hu and Ju 2011: 2026).

However, according to Nuss and Tanumihardijo (2010), the amounts of certain essential

nutrients are poorly balanced or inadequate for

individuals who rely on maize as a major food source.

Structure of the Maize Kernel

Nearly half (42 percent) of the dry weight of the

maize plant is made up from the edible grain. Each

kernel has three compartments, each with their own

unique chemical and nutritional composition (See Figure 5). The kernel is divided into the

endosperm (83 percent), the embryo or germ (11 percent) and pericarp (6 percent) (Custodio et

al. 2010).

Figure 5: Structure of the Maize Kernel

94

Typical Nutritional Composition of Maize:

Genetic background, variety, environmental conditions, plant age, and geographic

location can impact kernel composition within and between maize varieties. These factors allow

for a range in kernel colour (white, yellow, orange, red, black, etc.), quantity of kernels per ear

(300-1000), weight (190-300g per 1000 kernels), spatiality (12-16 kernels per row) and nutrient

composition (FAO 1992, cited in Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). With this in mind, it is

estimated that in general maize contains about 72 percent starch, 10 percent protein, and 4

percent lipids (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010).

Overall protein quality of common maize is lacking. Most maize varieties lack the essential

amino acids lysine and tryptophan, and are deficient in ascorbic acid (vitamin C), B-vitamins,

iron and iodine (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). Protein provides the body with amino acids

needed to build up, maintain and replace tissues in the body. Maize kernels contain about 10

percent protein, which is mainly distributed in the endosperm and germ (Custodio et al 2010). In

addition to providing essential amino acids, maize with more of the amino acid, lysine, is said to

help protect against certain vitamin deficiency diseases and other health complications, such as

improving bioavailability of niacin. In a study of the nutritional quality of Mexican landraces, it

was found that landraces, especially those with blue grains, had high lysine and tryptophan (Vidal

Martínez et al 2008: 15).

Starch molecules are large molecules that the body breaks down into glucose to use as

energy in cells. Starch is maize’s primary carbohydrate and kernel constituent, totalling 72

percent dry weight. The wealth of kernel starch is located in the endosperm. Lipids supply

energy, insulate against extreme temperatures, defend against shock, and sustain cell membranes.

Fats allow for the digestion, absorption, and transport of vitamins A, D, E and other fat-soluble

95

vitamins, as well as being a source of essential fatty acids. The fat content in maize grain varies

between 3.5 and 6 percent of the total weight of grains, with an average of 4.5 percent. Such

content can be increased by the size of the germ, as approximately 85 percent of oil is located in

the germ (Custodio et al 2010).

The seven minerals regularly lacking in human foods are calcium, copper, iodine, iron,

magnesium, selenium and zinc (White and Broadley 2005, cited in Nuss and Tanumihardijo

2010). The germ contains about 80 percent of all minerals within a maize kernel. However

minerals such as zinc are accumulated in the endosperm as well. Other minerals found in maize

grain are iron, magnesium, and calcium (Custodio et al 2010). The minerals are absorbed from

the soil and transported to the grain and other plant structures. Therefore the mineral

composition of soil performs a significant part in the final accumulation of these compounds in

the grain.

To improve the content of minerals in plants, one needs to target strategies that improve

the uptake from the environment, transport within the plant, accumulation in edible tissues, and

reduction of anti-nutrients (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). In nutrient-poor ecosystems, the

application of nitrogen, phosphorus, and/or potassium can increase transfers of iron, zinc, and

calcium from the soil to plant tissues (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). However, caution must be

used because the excessive application of phosphorus or nitrogen can have the opposite effect

and impede mineral uptake (Frossard et al. 2000, cited in Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010:429).

Recent scientific studies have shown that phenolic phytochemicals not only contribute to

colour and flavour of food items, but that they exhibit potential health benefits due to their strong

antioxidant activities. Black, blue and red maize contains anthocyanins, which are flavonoid

96

compounds that are not considered essential nutrients, but are strongly recommended for

optimal health due to their potent antioxidant behaviours (Gropper et al. 2005, cited in Nuss and

Tanumihardijo 2010).

Yellow maize contains provitamin A carotenoids and vitamin E (tocopherols).

Carotenoids are yellow-orange pigments that are divided into two groups: carotenoids (α-and β-

carotene) and xanthophylls (β -cryptoxanthin, lutein, and zeaxanthin). Only three provitamin A

carotenoids, α-carotene, β-carotene, and β-cryptoxanthin, are thought to contribute to the needs

of vitamin A when consumed in sufficient quantities. On average yellow maize contains less than

1mg/g of provitamin A, while white maize lacks carotenoids completely (Nuss and

Tanumihardijo 2010).

Changes during the Grain Harvest, Drying and Processing into Foods:

Around the world, maize kernels are consumed off the cob, parched, boiled, fried,

roasted, ground, and fermented for used in breads, porridges, gruels, cakes, and alcoholic

beverages (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). During harvesting, threshing and drying of maize

grain, the chemical composition of the grain remains unchanged, as breaking apart of the

pericarp and germ-damage are only physical changes. However, these changes make the grain

more vulnerable to attack from pathogens that in turn can generate a change in the chemical

composition. Grain drying can also influence a small loss of some compounds, such as

carotenoids.

Kernels contain the water-soluble vitamin niacin, but unless properly processed, it is

biologically unavailable to humans (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). Long-term consumption of

improperly prepared maize can lead to pellagra (niacin deficiency disease, which causes

97

diarrhoea, dementia, and dermatitis). Cooking maize with lime, heat and/or pressure can break

niacin apart from other compounds in the food and supply upward to 90 percent of daily calcium

(derived from the lime) to people as well as greatly enhance the bioavailability of lysine,

tryptophan and isoleucine (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). However, this also leads to a loss of

thiamine, riboflavin, fat, and fibre (Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010).

Treating maize with lime, which is sometimes called nixtamalization, originated in Central

America, and requires that the maize is cooked in a boiling lime solution for less than one hour

and then steeped overnight. As discussed earlier, the liquid is discarded in the morning and the

cooked-steeped maize, called nixtamal, is then washed and ground into masa (dough) for use in

tortillas and other foods. The lime used can be either calcium oxide or wood ash.

In a study of how nixtamalization effects Guatemalan lowland white maize, Pappa,

Palacios de Palomo, and Bressani (2010) found that tortillas nixtamalized with calcium oxide?

had higher levels of calcium, but those made with ash had high levels of calcium, potassium, iron

and zinc. Participants in this study found that maize nixtamalized with ash was harder to grind

than maize processed with calcium oxide, and that the masa and tortillas from ash were harder,

and need a longer cooking time (Pappa, Palacios de Palomo, and Bressani 2010).

Phytic acid is essential for kernel germination and phosphate storage, but it has been

shown to have adverse affects on the bioavailability of kernel minerals that are essential for

human health (Raboy 2003, cited in Nuss and Tanumihardijo 2010). The milling, soaking, or

heating can degrade or remove about 40 percent of the phytic acid, but this is at the expense of

the minerals it may bind to, making this an only marginally successful process (Nuss and

98

Tanumihardijo 2010). Fermented maize foods provide increased bioavailability of the B-vitamins

niacin, thiamine and riboflavin.

Results from Nutritional Analysis:

Since we only had one sample (200 grains) per variety at any one location, samples were

grouped together to get better statistical data. The grouping by colour (white, yellow, red and

black) was motivated by hearing from the farmers how important colour was for elucidating the

value of the grain. Colour groups were graphed with 1) the mean of the protein values (%), 2) the

mean of ProVitamin A (µg/g), 3) the mean starch (%), 4) the mean crude fat content (%) and 5)

the mean content of anthocyanins (µg/g). Where known, the mid range of values were plotted to

show where our colour groups fell in relation to known average values given by CIMMYT (pers.

com Luis Galicia of CIMMYT). Since mineral content is so dependent on soil and other

environmental aspects, while analysing iron and zinc content, samples were grouped by

geographical department.

Figure 6: MEAN protein content of white, yellow, red and black maize landraces

99

Figure 7: Percent protein content of all varieties according to altitude of plot

When colour groups were plotted against the mean protein for each group (see Figure 6),

it showed that there was significant difference between the colour classes of Black and White

(0.001), and White and Yellow (0.012). Black maize had the highest average protein content and

would be considered high in protein according to CIMMYT standards. Yellow and Red maize

categories are on the higher end of the normal area for protein content. A linear regression of

altitude and percent protein showed that altitude could explain approximately 11 percent of the

variation in the protein content (see Figure 7).

100

Figure 8: Mean provitamin A Content of Maize Colour categories, with the average provitamin Content for Yellow Maize (given by CIMMYT) shown to give context.

Figure 9: Graph of the Showing the Values of provitamin A Content of White, Yellow, Red and Black Maize Landraces, showing the names for some varieties

When colour groups were plotted against the mean of ProVitamin A for each group (see

Figure 8), it showed that there was significant difference (0.0001) between the yellow colour class

and all other colour classes. Figure 9 shows some of the values (ug/g) of the landrace varieties.

Yellow maize had significantly more of the precursors to vitamin A (beta-carotenoids) than did

101

any of the other three groups. There was no significant difference between any of the other

colour classes (see Appendix 5).

Figure 10: Values of anthocyanins showing the outlier in the white colour category.

As can be seen in Figure 10, one sample of white had a high anthocyanin reading. Since white

varieties of maize do not contain anthocyanins, this was considered an outlier and removed for

statistical purposes. When mean anthocyanin content without this outlier was graphed against

the colour groups, it showed that there was significant difference (0.0001) between the Black

group and all other colour classes. The black maize category had significantly more of these

antioxidants. There were no significant differences between White, Yellow or Red colour groups.

102

Figure 11: Mean anthocyanin content of white, yellow, red and black maize landraces without outlier

When colour groups were graphed against the mean starch content and mean crude fat

content of each colour group, they showed no significant difference between the colour classes,

though for all colour categories, the starch content was on the higher end of the normal

distribution of starch. Maiz Rojo, Guayape Criollo, Vallecillos, Matazaneño (Hijo de), Tuxpeño,

Olotillo Blanco, Maiz Harina, Negrito, Matazaneño, Pintado, Negrito, Cristalino, Raquin

Amarillo Chileño, and Capulin Tusa Morada all had over 70 percent starch, which is considered

high. Fat content on the other hand lay on the lower end of normal, with Sesenteño Blanco,

Pongaloya and Amarillo Fino having below 3 percent.

103

Figure 12: Mean starch content of white, yellow, red and black maize landraces

Figure 13: Mean crude fat (ether extract) content of white, yellow, red and black maize landraces

104

For mineral content there was no significant difference, though the regions of Marcala,

Opalaca and Otoro had very high variation in iron content (see Figure 14), while Opalaca and

Victoria regions had high variation in zinc (see Figure 15). The mean of all locations was very

low in the normal distribution for iron, while the mean for zinc was a little higher. A linear

regression for altitude and zinc content showed that as altitude increased there was a slight

decline in zinc content (see Figure 16).

Figure 14: Mean iron content of maize landraces from different regions

105

Figure 15: Mean zinc content of maize landraces from different regions

Figure 16: Linear regression of zinc content values plotted against altitude

I was also able to compare cultural values to those of the nutritional data. During the

group interview, participants and I created a list of maize varieties through the free-listing

exercise, and they were also gathered from a list that I compiled from all of my interviews.

Participants reviewed these names, and checked off a list of values for each variety they were

Rebecca Ivanoff DRAFT THESIS Version 1

106

106

familiar with. In the end, fourteen varieties of maize that we listed during this particular

interview were also sent to CIMMYT for testing. I used these 14 varieties and their

corresponding ranked values to create Figure 17. These data were compared to see if there was

any significant correlation between cultural values and nutritional data.

Figure 17: Cultural and agronomic values of fourteen varieties of landraces

In general, participants told me that the landrace varieties of maize are more nutritious.

There is a significant relationship between the local varieties and the perceived nutritional value

(sig. 0.028), and higher protein in the landraces (sig. 0.043). There is also an inverse relationship

between market value and protein content (sig. 0.038): the more money corn can be sold for, the

lower the protein content. In part, this may be because landraces, which tend to sell for less than

Rebecca Ivanoff DRAFT THESIS Version 1

107

107

improved white varieties, have more germ (the part with the protein). There is also an inverse

relationship between the market value of maize and vitamin A (sig. 0.001). In general, the better

the market value, the lower the nutritional value. This is due to the fact that the yellow maize

(which is high in vitamin A) commands a lower price. Prices do not reflect nutritional content of

protein or vitamin A.

Discussion of results:

When I spoke to a CIAL member about why people tended to downplay their knowledge

of nutritional properties of food, she helped me understand that it probably had to do with the

way I spoke about nutrition. She said, “People do not know what, in scientific terms, is more

nutritious. They may know that yellow maize plumps up the pigs faster than white maize, or that

black is the sweetest and weighs more so you have to eat less, but they do not necessarily know

that this means it has more nutrients.”63 This is, in fact, reflected in what people told me when

discussing the different qualities of maize varieties. As I mentioned above, participants suggested

that yellow maize is “heavier”, but that maize that comes from the mountains (higher altitudes) is

also more filling. High protein foods can lessen hunger and extend satiety more than foods high

in carbohydrates or fats (Rolls and Barnett 1999). Perhaps the high protein content of black and

yellow maize explains the sensation of “feeling full” or “heaviness”. Participants said that

highland maize makes you feel full longer. Starches also have a role to play in feeling full. Indeed

maize contains a lot of starch; our samples had an average of 69.1 percent starch. The range of

digestibility of starches is tallied using the glycemic index (GI). Foods with a lower GI release

63 "La gente no sabe, en términos científicos, lo que es más nutritiva. Ellos pueden saber que el maíz amarillo engorda de los cerdos más rápido que el maíz blanco, o que el negro es el más dulce y pesa más por lo que tiene que comer menos, pero no necesariamente saben que esto significa que tiene más nutrientes. " (Female, 60s, a mid-altitude community).

Rebecca Ivanoff DRAFT THESIS Version 1

108

108

energy slower, leaving you feeling full longer. In a study of tortillas, it was found that blue

tortillas had a lower GI value than white tortillas, and that they also had much higher protein

content and higher lipid content (Hernández-Uribe et al 2007). As is seen in Figure 7, there is a

correlation between altitude and protein content. However, this could just be because coloured

varieties are more prominent at higher altitudes.

Vitamin content was related to nutritional quality in the minds of many of my

participants. When asked what “nutritious” meant during a group interview, I was told by a male

farmer that, “[it was] like fertilizer for the soil, nutrients are good for our growth and health.”

One woman said, “it is something I would give to a child when they are sick.” I was told that, “a

food is nutritious when it has vitamins, such as A, B, and minerals”. In both Crucita Oriente and

Barrio Nuevo, PLAN International had local volunteers who were involved in community-based

growth monitoring of children and health promotion, from which they knew about vitamins and

which deficiencies produced what symptoms. During the group interview I was told,

“We believe that the yellow maize has more nutrition, but we have no idea what

varieties of vitamins are contained in it and what it is good for. We don’t know what

nutrients, what classes of nutrients, are contained in the maize varieties. Does it

have vitamin A or B? Which ones, we don’t know. We hope to see this [from this

study].”64

Knowledge of vitamins is promoted by organizations because VAD is a concern in Honduras. In

a study of Vitamin A deficiency and anemia done in 1999, 14 percent of the children in

Honduras were vitamin A deficient and 32 percent were at risk of VAD (Nestel et al 1999). In the

64 “Creemos que el maíz amarillo tiene más nutrientes, pero no sabemos qué variedades de vitaminas están contenidas en él y lo que es bueno para el. No sabemos qué tipo de nutrientes, lo que las clases de nutrientes, se encuentran en las variedades de maíz. ¿Tiene vitamina A o B? ¿Cuáles, no lo sabemos. Esperamos ver este [de este estudio].” (Female, 60s, mid-altitude community, CIAL).

Rebecca Ivanoff DRAFT THESIS Version 1

109

109

same study a “logistic regression analysis showed that children 12-23 months old living in areas

other than the rural south of the country were at great risk of VAD” (Nestel et al 1999, emphasis

added). This could be because in the poor rural south, and other such marginal areas, yellow

maize is consumed and thus risk of VAD is decreased. In the south, there is a high consumption

of sorghum (see DeWalt and DeWalt 1982; DeWalt 1998), however, white sorghum is valued

above yellow sorghum, just as maize is.

Anthocyanins are only found in coloured maize varieties and thus all varieties with these

beneficial nutrients were coloured local landraces.65 A recent study of landrace and hybrid maize

varieties from the highlands of Mexico found similar results to those presented here (Vázquez-

Carrillo et al. 2011:207). Landraces grains were found to be heterogeneous in terms of grain

size, hardness and color, and higher in protein and phenol content than locally grown hybrid

grains (Vázquez-Carrillo et al. 2011:207). This study also found significant correlations between

phenol content and tortilla colour (Vázquez-Carrillo et al. 2011:207)

Starch content was not significantly different between colour classes (0.130), location

(0.130) or altitude (0.856), however all colour classes lie towards the high end of the normal

distribution, particularly the red group, whose mean is within the range considered high by

CIMMYT. Fats also show no difference between colour classes. This suggests that colour groups

would make one feel full at first and meet the short-term energy needs of the body but the feeling

of satisfaction would not last long when relying on starches or fats.

Given that anemia is a concern in Honduras, it is important to note that all the maize

varieties have low iron content. In 1996, 30 percent of Honduran children were anaemic, while

65 All improved varieties were white.

Rebecca Ivanoff DRAFT THESIS Version 1

110

110

infection along with being underweight respectively amplified the risk of being anaemic by 51

percent and 21 percent (Nestel et al. 1999). Iron intake from other sources, such as green

vegetables, needs to be promoted. Though there was no difference in mineral content between

regions, this could be because of great diversity in soil quality within these regions, which

effectively “washes out” the effects of mineral differences. The linear regression of zinc content

and altitude had an R2 value of 0.081 showing that here is an inverse relationship between zinc

content and altitude: in other words, as altitude increases, zinc goes down. This could be due to a

decline in soil nutrients as altitude increases.

Table 5: Recommended daily allowance of vitamin a, iron, zinc and protein at

different life stages, compiled from Health Canada (2010)

Vitamin A Infants 400ug/day Children 400ug/day Males 900ug/day Females 700ug/day Lactation 1300 ug/day IRON Infants 11mg/day Children 10mg/day Males 8mg/day Females 18mg/day Pregnant 27mg/day Lactation 10mg/day

ZINC Infants 3mg/day Children 5mg/day Males 11mg/day Females 8mg/day Lactation 12mg/day PROTEIN: Infants 11g/day Children 19g/day Males 56g/day Females 46g/day Lactation 71g/day

National average maize consumption is around 226g/day (0.5lbs/day). If an adult male

were to eat only food made from black corn (which has an average of 11.5 percent protein), they

would need to eat 487g (1.07 lbs.) of this maize per day to get sufficient protein; a female would

need to eat 400g (0.88lbs) per day (see Table 5). In other words, they would have to consume

double the average national daily intake of maize to acquire sufficient protein from maize alone.

111

For Vitamin A consumption, a person eating the average national daily maize intake of

226g/day would only get 425.2g per day if eating yellow corn (which has an average of 2.17).

These 425g of Vitamin A per day from yellow corn would provide enough Vitamin A for

children (if it is all bioavailable) but less than half recommended for adult males. If individuals

only ate white corn (with an average Vitamin A content of 0.805), they would get only 44g, a

fraction of their recommended intake. Zinc in our samples had an average of 0.0224mg/g, which

means that a person who ate the national average of half a pound (226g) would get 5.1mg per

day, which is not sufficient for adults. Iron in our samples had an average of 0.0174mg/g, which

means that a person who ate the national average of half a pound (226g) of corn would get only

3.93mg per day of iron which does not met any of the daily recommended intakes.

This nutritional analysis shows that the coloured landrace varieties of maize have a higher

nutritional value for protein, anthocyanins, and Vitamin A. However, even if we disregard the

social, cultural and environmental factors that affect availability, accessibility and use of different

coloured maize varieties, and individuals in the communities started to eat black and yellow

maize primarily, there would still be a severe deficiency of nutrients.

112

CONCLUSIONS:

The research findings presented in this thesis allowed me to explore the combination of

factors that affect the availability, accessibility, stability and use of food in three research

communities in rural Honduras. The key findings are summarized in the following section,

followed by the theoretical considerations of this research. Limitations and further research are

discussed at the end.

Key Findings:

Local perceptions of food characteristics such as ‘heaviness’ or ‘feeling full’ relate to the

colourful maize varieties grown in the high altitudes. The belief that yellow corn has more

vitamins and the fact that landraces have a high nutrition value for protein, anthocyanins and

vitamin A is also confirmed with the nutritional study conducted here. However, it is has shown

that all varieties of maize are low in minerals and nutrients such as iron, and that if individuals

were to eat only coloured varieties there would still be micronutrient deficiencies within the

population. The individuals and organizations that work to re-valorize the landraces need to also

promote an identity that includes the consumption of green vegetables and fruit.

The phenotypic variations between crop varieties, such as their nutrient content, are

clearly not the only factors that affect availability, accessibility and use of these foodstuffs by

households in the Jesus de Otoro valley. The vast environmental differences found within the

valley also affect food security by impacting both what can be grown and families' access to

markets. Historic and current policies around land have also impacted who has access to land

and the decisions and behaviour of households in relation to food. A further sphere of influence

113

on the availability, access and use of food is that of culture. The nutrient analysis will give farmers

more information on the nutritional differences between varieties so that they can choose to plant

crops that better meet their need for foods that are high in vitamins and micronutrients.

Every individual, household, and community responds differently to the dynamic and

fluid system of values that they are exposed to. They interpret and relate to these systems

according to their circumstances, creating different levels of solidarity with their own cohesive

identity groups. While some see a future that is influenced by “the city” and external factors,

others see the future as a continuation from the past and yearn to improve on what they have.

People in the communities struggle with reconciling the modern image of a Honduran while

valuing the landraces and their indigenous identity. The saving of local seeds and doing

experiments to improve these varieties is a striking example of this second viewpoint. Though

cultural values, beliefs, traditions and the symbolic importance of certain foods may not be the

main reason for the continued importance of a certain variety or type of food in the livelihood

strategies of farmers, people must navigate these sometimes conflicting components of identity to

create their own strategies to achieve food security and food sovereignty.

When looking to improve food security, one must study ways in which individual agency

and social structure interact to mutually shape decision processes and behaviours. Looking at the

relationship between identity and eating in the communities visited in rural Honduras, one can

see how food ideals, personal preferences, access to resources, and social and cultural frameworks

can interact with identity in a reflective and changing way. Honduran farmers are presented with

a number of constraints by cultural, social and economic systems. The cultural value of maize as

a superfood to the people of the Otoro Valley means that deviation from this staple is

unthinkable. The value of white maize means it has a higher price that constrains those who have

114

little cash but who want to express their identity as people who eat white tortillas. On the other

hand, those who have access to yellow and other coloured maize, may be stigmatized even if they

prefer the taste of yellow maize tortillas and other foods.

The structures, both formal and constructed, also present these rural farmers with

opportunities. Those with access to yellow maize, utilize it because it is cheaper and tastier. Many

actively celebrate landraces to raise the importance and value of these varieties that are more

accessible because of their lower price and their superior agronomic qualities in marginal areas.

Raising the cultural value of coloured varieties of maize is a way that people are choosing to

value perceptions of their identity as indigenous Lenca farmers. This change in values

distinguishes them from urban Hondurans. People who grow improved varieties, hybrids and

almost exclusively white maize do this to differentiate themselves relative to the indigenous and

rural groups.

Those working to promote healthy eating at the individual, household, community and

population levels are addressing a phenomenon that includes both structure and agency and a

focus on one without the other may be inadequate to produce preferred changes. In order for

plant breeding projects and food security improvement programs to be successful, it is necessary

to merge productivity issues with the qualitative consideration of preferences, such as ease of

preparation and perceptions of nutritional value and health that farmers attribute to different

landraces. Understanding perceptions of nutrition and a healthy diet at the local level is crucial to

understanding and addressing food insecurity. Giving voice to local understandings of nutrition

and culturally shaped preferred qualities of food allows for a process of active involvement by

local players in the formation and development of policies, strategies and programs to combat

food insecurity and malnutrition. In particular there needs to be a concerted effort to promote

115

the value of indigenous, diverse maize varieties as this will have implications in terms of the

intake of certain nutrients. One policy implication would be the merging of nutritional education

with the support for landraces and a pride in Honduran identity.

The dynamic aspects of food identity came up when speaking about nutrition and

teaching people about healthy foods. As one woman in her 60s from a mid-altitude community

who is very involved in the work of FIPAH and other NGOs said,

“I think indigenous food is more diverse, and that it uses more nutritious

varieties, and more vegetables, and that it must be preserved. But it is difficult

to teach people of this when the “city food” such as white tortillas, red beans

and Coca-Cola, are seen as good food, “clean” and upper class, and when

Coke and churros (snack foods) are so cheap ... and more, when there are ads

[for processed foods] everywhere.”66

This statement showed me the challenges farmers in the Otoro Valley have in valuing their

“patrimonio”. Even with information about the nutritional benefits of coloured landraces and of

eating a more diverse diet with fruits and green vegetables, those who want to promote healthy

eating have a hard time navigating the sometimes contradictory cultural preferences, which

interact with local ecological and political constraints. The indigenous and organic movements

within Honduras may thus be seen as helping people resist the cheap, sugary, processed foods

from the city. Movements like Via Campesina allow peasants and indigenous peoples to be

viewed as current actors and not just as remnants of a distant past (Desmarais 2002:94). These

66 “Creo que los alimentos indígenas son más diversos, y tienen variedades más nutritivo, y más verduras, y que deben ser preservados. Pero es difícil hacer entender a la gente de esto cuando los ‘alimentos de la ciudad’, como las tortillas blancas, frijoles rojos y Coca-cola, son vistos como buena comida, ‘limpia’, y de clase superior, y cuando la Coca-cola y los churros son tan baratos…y mas, cuando los anuncios de estos están por todos los lados.” (from fieldnotes during a ride up to a mountain village. All Spanish grammar mistakes are my own)

116

movements struggle to change the terms “campesina/o” and “indígenas” from pejorative ones to

terms of pride. In this context resurrecting the term “peasants” is an act of resistance (Desmarais

2008: 139).

By combining local and laboratory knowledge, this study within the region of the Otoro

Valley in Intibucá Honduras, shows that cultural heterogeneity and contradictions in identity

formation that surround food need to be given serious consideration when attempting to improve

nutrition within poor, rural communities.

Theoretical Considerations:

Using political ecology, it becomes clear that aspects of food, nutrition and health are

situated within a wide set of sometimes conflicting and contradictory realities. As mentioned,

food security sets a goal and food sovereignty defines a way to realize it. The definition of food

security has expanded greatly since the 1970s to include the social and cultural aspects that limit

availability, access, and use of food. Ideas of hunger and nutrition have many cultural

perceptions associated with them. The call for food sovereignty in which peoples define their own

food and agricultural policies means that local cultural perceptions, such as local definitions of

hunger, can be incorporated into strategies in achieving food security. The call by food

sovereignty actors for the right of people to fashion food policy means direct democratic

participation by all people. When calling for a rights-based approach to food security, food

sovereignty requires an authority that holds people responsible to their duties and obligations so

that rights can be met. It also calls for the reflection of underlying and persistent inequalities of

power. In an environment like Honduras where the state is not able to hold people responsible or

to sufficiently regulate food and agrarian policy, the means proposed by food sovereignty to

117

reach food security are hard to come by. One size fits all policies that are put forward do not

meet the needs of many of the most marginalized farmers. The policies that are put forward by

the weak state and influenced by players with extensive power within society do not prioritize or

empower the majority of Honduran farmers. The unconscious and internalized routines and

values that shape the way food is used may also show the conflicts inherent in definitions of both

food security and food sovereignty. As can be seen by looking at the socio-economic and cultural

aspects of food availability, access, and use in the municipality of Jesus de Otoro, a

transformation of culture is needed in order to follow the processes suggested by food sovereignty

to meet food security goals. This research also shows that individual and community agency and

decision-making around food, nutrition, and agriculture may lead to a way of eating that is not

necessarily healthy. This tendency must be considered in the context of the rights of people to

define their own food systems.

Limitations of this Research

An impediment to the ethnographic data was my limited fluency in Spanish, especially

my understanding of the local dialect. This was corrected as much as possible by having Angela,

my research assistant, available during my interviews. She was able to translate local expressions

and to define Spanish words I may not have been familiar with. Another constraint was the

limited time available for research in the field. I was able to spend 4 months in the area, which

allowed me to ask my questions and observe planting of crops and consumption of foods, but it

did not allow me to experience the seasonality of farming life and to see if responses to questions

would have varied by season. Having the experiential knowledge of both FIPAH staff and my co-

advisor Sally Humphries was helpful in correcting any misunderstandings that may have arisen

118

from this. Limitations arising from the nutrient data include the need for more samples of the

same variety, further quantitative ranking of socioeconomic and cultural aspects, analysis of the

bioavailability of nutrients, and the quality content of the protein (such as amounts of tryptophan

and lysine).

Areas for Further Research

Additional studies should be performed using this research as a starting point. Further

nutritional data, in connection with a wider survey that ranks socioeconomic and cultural values,

would be of value to those wanting to study the nutritional intake and food security barriers in

the Otoro Valley. As well, a more thorough testing of varieties that takes into account the

environmental factors of gene expression would allow for more comprehensive knowledge of the

nutrient content of varieties. However, with the current data that shows the lack of nutrients even

within the most nutritious varieties, it is evident that there is a need for culturally appropriate

nutritional educational programming. Further research into pedagogies of culturally appropriate

nutritional education in addressing malnutrition and food insecurity in Honduras can follow

from the documented perceptions addressed here.

119

Appendix 1: Interview questions:

Disponibilidad (acceso a los alimentos / diversidad / semillas / variedades):

¿Son todas las personas que viven en su casa dedica a la agricultura o trabajan en el

hogar, o usted o cualquiera de su familia tienen un trabajo fuera del hogar? Por ejemplo, ¿se

siembran los cultivos, sino también trabajar como un trabajador asalariado? ¿Cómo funciona su

hogar ganar dinero? ¿Cultiva café? ¿Trabaja como recolector de café? ¿Tiene familia en 'la

ciudad' o en América del Norte que envíe dinero? (¿Qué estructura de la familia tienes que

aumenta o restringe su capacidad de acceso a los alimentos) En su hogar sólo tienen uno de los

padres? ¿Tiene mucha gente en su familia para ayudar con los trabajos agrícolas y de trabajo de

la casa? ¿Tienes tu propia tierra? ¿Qué tipo de tierra tienes acceso? ¿Es buena tierra? (¿De qué

manera todo esto afectará su acceso a los alimentos?) ¿Usted alquila tierras para sembrar? Si

usted alquila la tierra, existen restricciones que impiden el crecimiento de más o conseguir más

de su cosecha? ¿Tal vez no se puede plantar una segunda cosecha durante la Postera, o tal vez

no se puede mejorar el suelo en esta parcela? ¿Cómo se obtiene el dinero para alquilar la tierra?

¿Cuándo usted paga el alquiler? ¿Usted compra de fertilizantes y herbicidas? Si es así, ¿cómo se

consigue el dinero para comprar estos productos?¿Qué otras plantas de maíz y frijol qué crecer?

¿Tiene una huerta? ¿También propios animales como pollos y cerdos? ¿Tiene los huevos para

comer? ¿Tiene huevos que usted vende? ¿Tiene otros animales que usted come o que usted

vende?

¿Cómo decidir qué cultivos sembrar? ¿Te gusta que tenga o le gustaría tener acceso a las

variedades de semillas? ¿De dónde sacas las semillas a partir de (amigos, familia, tienda, banco de

semillas, etc.)? ¿Le da regalos, recibir regalos, el comercio, o de intercambio de alimentos y las

semillas de sus vecinos, familiares y amigos? ¿A menudo siembran nuevas variedades de maíz,

frijoles o verduras? ¿Por qué? Si lo hace, es porque usted tiene acceso a nuevas tierras, la nueva

información / conocimiento, o que han perdido sus semillas que ha guardado?

¿Se puede guardar el maíz y los frijoles hasta la próxima cosecha? ¿Está usted en deuda con

alguien, así que usted tiene que vender su cosecha para conseguir dinero para pagarles? Si es así,

¿cómo afecta esto a su seguridad alimentaria? ¿Tienes que comprar el maíz a continuación, a

finales de año, después de vender la suya propia? ¿Podrás ahorrar dinero para ayudarle a

comprar alimentos durante 'Los junios? ¿Qué 'significa junios Los'? ¿Qué significa tener hambre?

120

¿Qué se siente cuando se tiene que comprar maíz? ¿Alguna vez se teme que su familia no tiene

suficiente comida para comer durante todo el año?

Las prácticas dietéticas:

¿Tiene usted acceso a la comida que les gusta comer en todo momento del año? ¿Hay

momentos en los que consumen alimentos que no te gusta? ¿Hay momentos en los que no tienen

acceso a los alimentos que desea consumir? ¿Tiene acceso a los alimentos que usted quiere? ¿Hay

algún alimento que realmente les encanta comer y no podía hacer sin él? ¿Hay alimentos que son

muy saludables y que te gusta comer? ¿Hay alimentos que sabemos que no son saludables para

usted, pero usted come una gran cantidad de? ¿Hay épocas del año cuando se tiene una mayor

diversidad en su dieta? ¿Cuándo y por qué? ¿Cultiva plantas diferentes en un mismo campo (por

ejemplo, frijol de milpa)? ¿Elaboran diferentes plantas que crecen en un campo? ¿Ha habido

ocasiones en las que no son capaces de guardar las semillas? ¿Por qué? ¿Es porque se ven

obligados a comer sus semillas guardadas? ¿Es debido a que su primera cosecha que se plantaron

se perdió con plagas?

Cambio:

¿Tiene usted acceso a las variedades de semillas y tipos de alimentos que no en el pasado?

¿Tiene una huerta grande ahora? ¿Cree que ha habido un cambio en la diversidad de lo que

come? ¿Cree que ha habido un cambio en la diversidad de lo que se siembra? ¿Por qué?

¿Ha de formar parte de un CIAL significaba que su huerta y el campo tiene más diversidad?

¿Tiene más variedad en su huerto? Ha de formar parte de un CIAL significa que usted ha

cambiado su dieta de alguna manera? Si es así, ¿por qué este cambio? ¿Tiene usted acceso a

nuevos conocimientos y las semillas necesitan? Ha de formar parte de un CIAL significa que

usted ha visto el cambio en el acceso a los alimentos de temporada? ¿Qué época del año ha

registrado mayores cambios? (¿Cómo ha obtenido información de formar parte de un CIAL han

incorporado en sus vidas? ¿Por qué ni por qué no?) ¿Cree usted que hay cambios en relación con

los hogares que forman parte de un CIAL? (En caso afirmativo) ¿Qué tipo de cambios es lo que

ves?

121

Appendix 2: Free-Listing Questions

Can you please tell me all the varieties of maize that you grow in your plot? Can you please tell me about all the varieties of maize you buy from the market? Do you receive any additional maize varieties from other farmers? What other foods do you consider to be healthy and ‘good for you’? ¿Puede decirme por favor todas las variedades de maíz que se siembran en su parcela? Por favor, ¿puede decirme todas las variedades de maíz que compra en el mercado? ¿Recibe usted algún variedades de maíz adicionales de otros agricultores? ¿Qué otros alimentos no se tiene en cuenta para estar sano y es bueno (o saludable) para ustedes?

122

Appendix 3: Nutritional Data

Lab #

Local Name

Pedigree Community

Farmer Region

Proteina %

Almidón %

Extracto Etereo %

Fenoles Libres µM/g

Antocianinas (µg/

g)

Al mg/kg

Fe mg/kg

Ti mg/kg

Zn mg/kg

Mn mg/kg

Cu mg/kg

Lut ug/g

Zeax

ug/g

B-Cry ug/g

B-Caro ug/g

ProA ug/g

2004

Negrito MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

La Asomada

Andrés Martínez

Lempira

10.32

71.70

4.361

7.845

211.166

0.40

0

17.2

03

0.02

9

22.3

81

4.85

4

1.33

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2005

Cristalino

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Asomada

Constantino Castañeda

Lempira

10.67

71.67

3.813

6.744

N/A 0.47

5

15.3

57

0.04

7

16.9

74

7.13

7

1.36

9

1.506

0.374

1.376

0.103

0.791

2006

Raquin Tusa Morada

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Asomada

Constantino Castañeda

Lempira

10.92

68.68

3.217

6.647

N/A 0.20

5

15.9

41

0.05

7

20.8

91

4.79

8

1.14

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2007

Chumbagua

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Asomada

Constantino Castañeda

Lempira

9.72

73.06

4.021

5.393

N/A 0.06

1

15.7

57

0.01

8

31.0

51

4.42

4

1.52

2

1.022

0.098

1.213

0.009

0.616

2008

Maison MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Asomada

Ramiro García

Lempira

9.77

70.15

3.548

5.418

N/A 1.12

1

15.0

95

0.07

8

17.8

36

9.79

0

1.51

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2009

Maíz Harina

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Asomada

Ramiro García

Lempira

11.10

69.55

4.836

7.504

N/A 0.22

1

16.2

27

0.08

1

26.8

03

5.69

6

1.16

3

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2010

Olotillo Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

La Iguala

Saturnino Reyes

Lempira

11.51

66.44

3.212

5.387

N/A 0.64

2

17.3

77

0.05

4

23.6

97

5.83

3

1.23

6

1.307

0.316

1.262

0.133

0.764

2011

Olotillo Blanco

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Iguala

Saturnino Reyes

Lempira

10.19

69.47

3.742

5.620

N/A 0.51

3

12.7

52

0.07

4

19.5

12

5.41

3

1.15

5

1.241

0.129

1.394

0.000

0.697

2012

Pongaloya

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Iguala

Celestino Reyes

Lempira

10.51

70.37

2.537

5.978

N/A 2.34

4

20.3

22

0.13

2

21.3

70

8.18

5

1.34

3

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2013

Amarillo Raqui

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

El Zapote

Antonio Espinosa

Lempira

10.80

67.71

3.619

5.846

N/A 1.61

6

22.9

06

0.21

6

17.4

41

6.84

8

1.86

1

1.830

4.960

2.429

0.736

1.951

2014

H5 MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

El Zapote

Tulio Mateo

Lempira

10.22

70.73

3.116

5.375

N/A 0.72

9

22.5

04

0.07

8

30.2

07

5.28

9

1.38

4

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2015

Capulín MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

El Matasano

Ramón García

Lempira

8.15

70.96

3.754

6.915

N/A 1.48

2

21.3

83

0.07

4

25.2

65

5.72

4

1.15

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2016

Negrito MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

El Matasano

Ramiro Garcia

Lempira

9.89

72.13

3.608

8.463

N/A 0.78

1

16.9

16

0.04

2

19.0

49

4.39

1

1.78

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2017

Chumbagua

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

El Zapote

Antonio Espinoza

Lempira

11.10

71.14

3.442

6.895

261.169

0.00

0

17.4

50

0.01

4

22.6

53

6.28

9

0.99

2

1.361

0.561

1.803

0.304

1.205

2018

Mixto MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Monte Verde

Carlos Lorenzo

Opalaca

12.76

63.18

3.294

5.416

N/A 2.00

6

21.5

45

0.21

3

16.1

30

7.60

5

1.55

7

1.239

0.284

1.243

0.000

0.621

123

2019

Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

La Unión

Teófilo Lemus

Opalaca

10.31

70.00

4.013

6.687

N/A 0.64

4

16.8

81

0.07

7

18.1

39

4.91

2

2.27

9

2.687

4.579

2.209

0.965

2.070

2020

Blanco MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

San Pedrito

Teófilo Lemus

Opalaca

10.79

69.90

3.862

5.313

N/A 0.34

8

18.9

74

0.06

9

21.1

95

5.12

1

1.35

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2021

Maíz Harina

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

San Pedrito

Teófilo Lemus

Opalaca

9.27

70.01

3.832

6.838

N/A 0.37

4

17.9

40

0.05

0

17.8

18

5.73

5

0.89

6

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2022

Olotio Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Monte Verde

Matias Vasquez

Opalaca

7.32

68.25

3.922

7.051

N/A 0.18

1

12.8

35

0.04

1

28.0

91

4.75

5

0.93

4

1.767

1.046

1.609

0.435

1.239

2023

Zapalote

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Monte Verde

Jose Vasquez

Opalaca

10.67

69.40

3.489

9.391

308.428

0.40

7

15.0

55

0.04

6

23.0

48

4.83

1

1.94

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2024

Raquin Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Zacate Blanco

Policarpo Amaya

Marcala

10.56

70.03

3.035

6.338

N/A 2.73

5

19.2

58

0.10

9

18.8

24

5.72

3

2.02

2

2.587

14.822

4.583

1.437

3.728

2025

Amarillo Grueso

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Lavatorio

Esau Orellana

Marcala

11.53

69.13

3.689

6.089

N/A 0.78

0

16.2

67

0.06

2

15.6

46

9.73

8

1.65

3

2.750

13.626

3.614

1.450

3.257

2026

Matambre amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Lavatorio

Esau Orellana

Marcala

11.00

67.96

3.192

7.379

13.643

2.25

6

19.2

98

0.10

4

17.4

63

5.44

0

0.83

9

4.047

13.123

3.577

0.932

2.721

2027

Pintado MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Carrizal

Dilcia Gómez

Marcala

10.23

71.76

3.427

7.153

98.171

3.61

7

19.1

95

0.12

9

18.5

91

4.21

1

1.77

3

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2028

Amarillo Fino

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Resbalon

Wilian Gómez

Marcala

12.21

69.99

2.908

5.539

N/A 1.21

5

20.0

47

0.09

5

17.7

74

6.15

7

1.34

4

2.979

18.292

5.448

2.725

5.449

2029

Negrito MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Quiscamonte

Francisca Vásquez

Marcala

13.36

69.83

3.912

9.618

291.548

5.98

9

26.9

25

0.16

6

22.0

69

4.17

0

2.87

2

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2030

Harina MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Zacate Blanco

Pilar Pineda

Marcala

9.16

72.19

4.127

9.395

N/A 1.81

1

18.1

50

0.06

5

17.4

25

4.41

7

1.81

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2031

Blanco Grueso

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Zacate Blanco

Mariano Amaya

Marcala

12.04

69.94

3.404

4.651

N/A 0.96

2

14.1

45

0.07

3

16.5

16

7.71

0

0.99

2

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2032

Guayape Criollo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Crucita Abajo

Reimundo Lorenzo

Otoro

9.30

74.96

3.853

5.949

N/A 0.49

4

12.0

22

0.04

7

19.2

65

4.23

3

1.02

0

1.109

0.145

1.290

0.000

0.645

2033

Rojo MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Campanario ·2

Francisco Reyes

Otoro

11.45

69.38

3.166

12.607

32.126

1.67

9

21.2

61

0.09

6

20.0

71

6.13

6

1.55

3

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2034

Hijo de Matazaneño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Ojo de Agua

Claros Gómez

Otoro

9.39

73.74

3.461

7.323

N/A 1.43

1

18.7

69

0.12

3

21.5

63

8.21

3

2.19

2

1.852

6.721

2.393

1.006

2.202

2035

Raquin MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Ojo de Agua

Claros Gómez

Otoro

10.81

71.46

3.804

5.861

N/A 0.91

1

17.3

41

0.09

3

18.5

94

7.42

0

2.16

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2036

Matazaneño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Ojo de Agua

Claros Gómez

Otoro

9.56

71.90

3.365

7.089

N/A 1.04

0

20.4

26

0.09

2

17.3

40

5.83

7

1.56

8

2.640

12.015

2.550

0.846

2.120

20

Raque Amarill

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

Campanario

Francisca Reyes

Otoro

11.42

68.47

4.102

6.09

N/A 0.65

21.2

0.06

21.0

6.12

1.43

1.9

1.24

1.3

0.0

0.6

124

37

o 19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

2 5 6 03 2 66 7 6 47

7 03

00

51

2038

Maiz Harina

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Campanario 2

Victoria Aguirre

Otoro

12.82

64.57

4.380

7.498

N/A 0.74

5

21.2

75

0.09

5

19.8

77

8.73

5

1.58

4

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2039

Bufio MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Nocoro

Ovidio Valeriano

Vallacillos

10.11

68.02

4.768

7.808

N/A 1.12

7

18.1

63

0.05

9

23.3

12

5.22

1

1.33

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2040

Dulce de montaña

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Nocoro

Ovidio Valeriano

Vallacillos

13.25

68.87

3.990

6.481

N/A 1.16

8

21.9

50

0.05

6

26.4

15

6.33

7

2.20

9

4.490

9.474

2.921

0.857

2.318

2041

Negro Planta Alta

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Nocoro

Ovidio Valeriano

Vallacillos

11.14

66.92

3.916

9.422

277.051

0.90

3

16.7

27

0.03

8

15.9

90

4.96

0

2.08

8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2042

Quirrire MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

San Cristobal

Natanael Vasquez

Vallacillos

9.56

70.82

3.952

5.922

N/A 1.37

9

17.8

79

0.08

5

20.2

75

4.50

8

2.49

8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2043

Quirrire MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Cristobal

Natanael Vasquez

Vallacillos

13.05

64.82

3.672

5.959

N/A 2.30

8

16.8

10

0.07

6

24.0

11

5.53

3

1.17

9

1.749

1.451

1.586

0.340

1.133

2044

Quirrire MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

San Cristobal

Natanael Vasquez

Vallacillos

10.65

70.72

4.023

6.268

N/A 1.06

4

13.2

51

0.05

1

19.3

61

3.92

3

1.45

0

1.440

0.482

1.352

0.019

0.694

2045

Amarillo Planta Alta

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Cristobal

Marvin Meza

Vallacillos

11.02

69.42

3.818

6.535

N/A 1.15

8

18.4

28

0.05

5

22.3

85

5.21

0

1.57

6

1.672

4.982

2.436

1.172

2.390

2046

Habanero

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

San Cristobal

Amilcar Cerrato

Vallacillos

11.77

64.30

3.520

8.996

186.248

1.94

0

20.0

71

0.12

6

26.0

52

6.95

3

1.19

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2047

Rojo Planta Baja

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

San Cristobal

Amilcar Cerrato

Vallacillos

10.60

68.49

3.209

5.938

9.788

1.21

9

20.5

17

0.06

3

17.3

26

4.95

0

1.01

6

3.398

9.826

4.045

0.931

2.953

2048

Amarillo Plata Baja

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Cristobal

Amilcar Cerrato

Vallacillos

10.98

70.95

3.066

6.994

N/A 1.14

6

15.0

08

0.06

3

16.1

17

4.29

6

0.95

6

5.360

8.904

2.874

1.614

3.051

2049

Upareño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Cristobal

Sabino Lopez

Vallacillos

11.72

64.51

3.732

5.974

N/A 1.28

3

22.6

46

0.05

1

26.8

85

6.62

1

1.35

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2050

De los Altos

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Vereda

Santos Benito Ramos

Vallacillos

8.78

69.75

4.173

6.410

N/A 1.41

1

15.2

70

0.06

6

23.3

65

5.71

3

1.60

7

1.417

0.126

1.046

0.000

0.523

2051

Chomon

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

La Vereda

Santos Benito Ramos

Vallacillos

10.22

65.13

3.997

8.423

N/A 2.06

2

18.2

30

0.07

6

21.8

89

5.28

8

1.65

9

6.101

8.489

2.630

1.836

3.152

2052

Olotillo MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Vereda

Ana Maria Flores

Vallacillos

9.14

72.41

3.422

5.017

N/A 1.22

5

15.3

61

0.06

5

22.0

25

7.18

9

0.69

4

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2053

HQ-03 MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

T. de Quebradas

Dimas Arguijo

Vallacillos

9.48

64.86

4.010

5.487

N/A 0.92

1

15.4

71

0.04

7

21.8

26

7.00

2

0.99

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2054

Guayape

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Tuliapita

Rosa Luisa Amador

Vallacillos

9.93

69.02

3.362

6.401

N/A 1.08

8

19.5

35

0.07

9

30.2

17

7.41

4

1.89

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2055

HB-104 MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Tuliapita

Luis Lagos

Vallacillos

9.30

68.83

4.204

7.500

N/A 0.95

2

17.3

27

0.04

2

20.8

02

6.83

1

0.95

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

125

2056

Tuxpeño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Agua Blanca

Dixi Ferrera

Vallacillos

8.70

72.61

4.261

5.546

N/A 1.36

4

15.8

47

0.05

9

19.7

56

4.41

6

0.71

6

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2057

Pacaya Tusa Morada

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

San Isidro

Miguel Huete

Vallacillos

9.95

69.40

4.204

6.863

N/A 0.75

8

21.4

79

0.04

7

21.5

00

6.67

4

0.91

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2058

Olotillo MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Isidro

Rafael Barahona

Vallacillos

10.60

68.96

4.050

7.075

N/A 1.05

3

17.5

43

0.06

8

20.4

79

4.18

9

0.76

2

1.731

1.222

3.067

1.123

2.657

2059

Sesenteño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

San Isidro

Rafael Barahona

Vallacillos

9.57

69.44

4.288

6.524

N/A 0.93

7

18.3

93

0.04

9

21.2

16

4.31

7

1.39

2

3.473

10.264

3.094

1.241

2.788

2060

Amarillo Planta Baja

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Mina Honda

José Corea

Yorito

10.69

69.39

3.488

6.239

N/A 0.77

9

20.8

87

0.06

1

30.4

19

8.28

8

1.65

7

3.036

3.292

1.952

1.057

2.033

2061

Pata de Gallina

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Mina Honda

José Corea

Yorito

11.36

67.64

4.873

6.935

16.457

1.35

8

14.7

71

0.09

0

27.3

31

8.98

5

0.90

6

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2062

Negro MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Mina Honda

José Corea

Yorito

10.26

69.27

4.159

9.557

164.627

0.97

4

14.3

64

0.08

1

26.5

60

7.14

1

1.41

8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2063

Maiz Rojo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Mina Honda

José Corea

Yorito

8.58

76.41

3.441

9.199

24.865

1.41

2

9.60

3

0.09

9

19.0

02

7.28

1

0.88

9

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2064

Pacaya MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Mina Honda

Jose Corea

Yorito

9.88

70.51

4.158

5.926

N/A 7.46

8

16.5

68

0.21

1

26.1

33

4.56

7

0.95

8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2065

Chorotega

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Luquigue

Manuel Hernandez

Yorito

10.08

66.55

3.603

5.704

N/A 0.69

0

17.2

24

0.01

3

22.6

23

4.25

3

1.84

0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2066

Tizate MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Luquigue

Napoleon Aquino

Yorito

7.72

68.61

5.193

8.126

N/A 0.95

9

17.4

22

0.02

0

28.0

30

4.85

3

1.68

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2067

Olotillo Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Luquigue

Filander Martinez

Yorito

9.75

70.60

3.485

5.544

N/A 0.69

8

17.3

37

0.02

6

26.6

93

4.73

5

1.40

7

2.421

2.111

1.587

0.269

1.062

2068

Capulin Tusa Morada

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Esperanza

Odir Palma

Yorito

8.97

71.09

3.301

6.081

N/A 0.58

8

14.0

49

0.03

3

20.7

92

4.73

3

1.12

1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2069

Guayape

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Esperanza

Odir Palma

Yorito

S/M

S/M

S/M S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2070

Sesenteño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Esperanza

Irene Hernandez

Yorito

10.36

64.65

2.448

7.695

N/A 0.66

4

13.1

15

0.05

0

27.0

08

4.12

1

1.96

8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2071

Capulin MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Esperanza

Edgardo Palma

Yorito

S/M

S/M

S/M S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2072

Olotillo Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

La Esperanza

Amilcar Orellana

Yorito

9.18

69.51

3.701

6.711

N/A 0.65

7

14.7

87

0.01

5

27.4

87

5.90

7

1.70

6

1.961

0.658

1.368

0.394

1.078

2073

Cacho de venado

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Higuero Quemado

Margarito Perez

Yorito

9.36

67.22

3.302

6.055

N/A 1.33

9

13.8

09

0.03

3

23.2

73

4.89

7

1.37

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

20

Negro MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

Santa Cruz

Amado Hernan

Yorito

9.55

65.19

3.586

10.9

411.063

0.51

17.0

0.01

20.9

7.17

1.65

N/

N/

N/

N/

N/

126

74

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20 dez 63 4 01 0 24 2 0 A A A A A

2075

Chileño MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Santa Cruz

Santos Herrera

Yorito

10.06

71.35

3.577

5.969

N/A 0.61

8

14.2

19

0.03

8

19.1

94

7.17

0

0.38

3

1.330

0.287

1.046

0.000

0.523

2076

Negro Chileño

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Santa Cruz

CIAL Santa Cruz

Yorito

12.36

69.42

3.980

7.526

184.597

0.45

1

17.3

27

0.01

6

36.1

03

5.25

0

1.65

9

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2077

Santa Cruz

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Santa Cruz

CIAL Santa Cruz

Yorito

S/M

S/M

S/M S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2078

Capulin MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Santa Cruz

Juan Pedro Herrera

Yorito

8.31

66.87

3.050

5.179

N/A 0.43

1

13.5

84

0.00

0

21.9

26

4.09

6

1.34

3

1.006

0.178

1.228

0.153

0.767

2079

Olotio MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Esperanza

Amilcar Orellana

Yorito

8.43

70.00

3.548

5.570

N/A 0.32

2

17.2

09

0.00

8

24.4

05

3.74

7

0.87

9

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2080

Azul MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Santa Cruz

Arturo Gomez

Lempira

13.36

68.82

3.279

8.834

224.812

0.78

3

15.9

48

0.00

7

20.8

50

7.60

5

2.37

5

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2081

Pacaya Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

Santa Cruz

Arturo Gomez

Lempira

11.84

66.50

3.192

6.398

N/A 0.57

8

19.1

90

0.01

6

18.7

07

5.33

3

1.84

5

5.155

11.438

2.554

1.419

2.696

2082

Pacaya MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Altamira

Adan Bustillo

Victoria

8.84

69.49

3.629

6.208

N/A 0.63

8

16.7

47

0.04

9

23.7

03

6.80

7

0.84

0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2083

Vallecillos

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

Monte Galan

Orlando Reyes

Vallacillos

9.93

74.43

3.754

5.440

N/A 0.43

1

16.6

32

0.00

7

24.3

06

5.29

3

1.03

9

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2084

Taberon

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Laguna

Pedro Cruz

Victoria

10.38

70.07

4.052

4.381

N/A 0.52

1

15.3

30

0.00

3

29.5

07

6.90

4

1.14

7

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2085

Maizon MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

El Plantel

Lucia Gutierrez

Victoria

9.96

70.90

3.621

5.745

N/A 0.84

2

17.3

07

0.03

2

26.5

68

3.05

1

1.43

3

0.887

0.126

1.052

0.000

0.526

2086

Bucho MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Fortuna

Jose Santos Murillo

Victoria

12.28

63.51

4.312

6.177

N/A 0.51

0

16.8

05

0.01

6

20.7

07

4.18

1

0.56

9

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2087

Amarillo Palido

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

El Plantel

Jesus Cruz

Victoria

10.99

66.01

3.153

5.743

N/A 0.79

4

23.7

85

0.05

9

35.1

00

4.97

8

1.74

0

4.017

6.081

3.977

1.439

3.427

2088

Negro 1 MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

Guachipilín

Jorge Gabarrete

Victoria

11.69

68.00

3.985

7.020

208.532

0.79

8

15.6

20

0.01

5

26.9

53

6.89

3

1.42

2

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2089

Negro 2 MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22,MNQ 20

El Plantel

Eulofio Cruz

Victoria

12.46

64.82

4.064

10.245

398.613

1.57

7

19.4

62

0.04

9

29.8

75

5.87

9

1.35

0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2090

Olotio Amarillo

MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22, MNQ 16

El Plantel

Eulofio Cruz

Victoria

10.47

62.63

3.625

8.575

N/A 0.77

8

15.0

64

0.04

7

16.4

81

7.85

7

1.00

4

2.220

0.675

1.785

0.444

1.337

2091

Olotio MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

La Laguna

Avilio Ramos

Victoria

S/M

S/M

S/M S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

S/M

2092

Pionner MNQ6, MNQ12, MNQ 17, MNQ

19,MNQ 22

CURLA

Fredy Sierra

CURLA

10.50

66.90

4.320

5.463

N/A 0.36

9

14.9

18

0.00

8

21.8

11

3.83

1

0.80

8

1.932

1.167

1.714

0.620

1.477

127

Appendix 4: List of Foods Eaten in the Otoro Valley

Arroz* Rice Baleadas Wheat tortilla folded in half with mashed fried beans and grated hard

local cheese (queso criollo). Eaten more in the northern parts of Honduras. Catrachas/ Catrachitas* Fried corn tortillas covered with mashed fried beans and cheese Chimol/ Chismol Salsa of tomatoes, peppers, onions, cilantro, lemon juice, vinegar, salt and

pepper Churros* Chips/Snacks (bought in little packets at the corner stores known as

Pulperias) Cornflakes* Cornflakes Elotes* Fresh mature corncobs eaten in August and September while they are in

season. Boiled or roasted. Empanadas* Corn flour pastries stuffed with meat or vegetable filling Enchiladas* Fried maize tortilla topped with meat, sliced boiled egg and/or potato,

and covered with a tomato-chilli sauce and grated cabbage and cheese. (Called a tostada in Mexico)

Encurtido o Chile* Pickled vegetables. Jars of encurtido can be found on many tables in homes and in restaurants to be used as a condiment.

Espagueti* Spaghetti (Often served as very soft noodles mixed with tomato sauce as a side to rice and beans and tortillas)

Fritas* Fritters/Doughnuts of fresh corn Jilote Immature corncob that can be eaten raw and whole, or cooked in soup.

Less mature than elote. Maicillo Sorghum. Eaten extensively in the south of Honduras and across the

boarder. Not many people in the Otoro valley eat it, though interviewees (valley and middle communities) told me they had planted it in the past or had bought a little to make tortillas or to fatten up chickens. Ash is used or than lime to make tortillas of sorghum.

Montucas* y Nacatamales* Fresh tamales with meat Pan de Harina Wheat Bread Pan de Maíz* Bread made from maiz de harina (a floury, starchy corn that is dried and

ground to make flour) Pastelitos/ Pasteles* Corn flour stuffed with rice, beef, and vegetables and/or potatoes and

either fried or baked. Pupusas Thick corn tortilla filled with a blend of the following: cheese, cooked pork

(chicherron), squash (ayote), or (pataste), refried beans, or queso con loroco. Found in the town of Otoro but are uncommon in the communities. Common in larger cities and in the south, and in El Salvador, where they are said to originate.

Quesadillas* Cheese inside a folded tortilla Riguas* Sweet corn pancake cooked in plantain leaves Rosquillas* Doughnuts

128

Sopa de Gallina Indio* Creole Chicken soup (with yellow corn) Tajadas* Fried Plantains (like plantain chips) Tamal Sipe* Tamal of fresh corn Tamales * Corn dough (masa) stuffed with a meat mixture then wrapped in cornhusks

or banana leaves and steamed in a big pot. Tamales De Viaje* Travel Tamales (tamal of dried corn, which can be made with maize that

has used ash to remove the paricarp) Tamalitos de elote* Fresh corn tamales Ticucos* Tamale with whole beans Torta De Pescado* Fish Cake: the river and lake in the valley does have some fish, but the

water is very polluted. Fish is also brought in from Lago Yajoa, and you can even find shrimp and other seafood in town (likely because it is along a major transportation route)

Torta De Queso* Cheese Cake Tortillas* Tortillas: most commonly eaten food. Either made from yellow or white

corn, and sometimes with the more exotic red or blue corn, tortillas are made from corn that has been soaked and cooked in lime and then ground. They require no fat of any kind and are cooked on an ungreased comal (griddle).

Tortillas de guineo negro Corn and plantain tortillas Totopostes* Sweet, thin toasted corn tortillas Ajo Garlic Apio* Celery Arvejas Peas (grown in the CIAL gardens) Ayote/ Pipián/ Zapallo* Squash Bledo* Wild Green of the Amaranth Family, which grows in the

milpa/cornfields. Calabaza* Pumpkin Camaca* Guazuma ulmifolia, Tree with medical properties Camote* Sweet potato Cebolla* Onion Cebollino Chive Chilacayote Chilacayote (Gourd / Squash) Chile Verde Sweet Pepper Coliflor Cauliflower Culantro ancho* Eryngium foetidum. Native plant with long, tapered leaves with serrated

edges that has similar but stronger taste/smell than Cultantro de castilla. Culantro ancho does grow in the wild, but its tiny seeds are easily planted in huertos, and solares, where they are grown for household consumption or for the local market. Used for flavouring beans, soups, etc.

129

Culantro de castilla Cilantro/Coriander. Introduced species that has flat parsley-like leaves. Diente León* Dandelion (collected from milpas) Ejote/ Habichuela* Green Bean Espinaca* Spinach, but also a local wild plant that is not Spinacia oleracea Herba Morra* Solanum spp. Izote, Flor de * Izote flowers (Yucca spp.) cooked/fried when young Lechuga Lettuce (grown CIAL gardens and in Ojo de Agua for sale in the market) Lechuga china BukChoy: grown in the CIAL gardens Llantén Plantain (Angela told me about this one) Malanga*/ Badú* Malanga/ Taro Materas* Small Onions Mostaza* Mustard Greens, grows wild in the miplas/fields Orégano Oregano Pacaya* Pacaya Papas* Potatoes (in the highlands, and imported from La Esperanza region) Pataste/ Patastillo* Chayote Pepino* Cucumber Perejil* Parsley (in CIAL gardens) Rábano* Radish (part of PLAN) Remolacha* Beet (in CIAL gardens) Repollo* Cabbage Ruda Rue (seen, specially in Ojo de Agua and Rincon, but not talked about

during interviews) Tomate* Tomato Verdolaga* (in the past) Purslane- Common weed in agricultural fields, Portulaca oleracea. Valeriana Valerian, planted by FIPAH as live barriers in El Aguila. Yuca* Cassava/ Yucca Zanahoria* Carrot (grown in the CIAL gardens and those promoted by PLAN) Aguacate* Avocado Banano/ Plátano/ Guineo/ Mínimo*

Bananas / Plantains many grown in the fincas or solares around the houses.

Ciruela Plum, planted by FIPAH and ANAFAE in El Águila. Coco Coconut Durazno Peach (eaten in while still green and sour, or made into juice) Fresas Strawberries (grown esp. in the south near La Esperanza) Guaba/ Guayaba Guava Guanábana Soursop (various varieties) Lima Lime Limón/ limón real Lemon

130

Mandarina Mandarin Mango Mango Manzana Apple (grown in the highlands, being planted by ANAFAE for live

barriers) Maracuyá y granadilla Passion fruit, purple and orange varieties Marañones Cashews (the red fruit is eaten with salt) Melón Melon (for sale in the markets in Otoro) Moras* Blackberries (picked in El Águila and other mountain communities) Nance* Nance Naranja* Orange Nectarina Nectarine, planted by FIPAH and ANEFAE in El Águila Papaya* Papaya (not talk about in interviews but seen as shade tree in fincas and in

solares) Paterna* Large Green Pod with white cotton around the dark green soft beans

inside. Pera Pear (in El Águila, and ANEFAE were also planting some as live barriers) Piña* Pineapple (grown on the north side for the lower valley in Barrio Nuevo,

Coclan and Ojo de Agua) Sandía Watermelon (Grown in the CIAL garden in Maye in the valley.

Sold in town, from farther down the valley past Barrio Nuevo) Tamarindo Tamarind (no one mentioned this one, but one used to grow in the garden

of the old FIPAH office) Uvas* Grapes (Julio planted specially, not a common cultivar) Zapote* Sapodilla (Julio planted specially) Chinapopo* Large, climbing bean that is grown in the mountains usually with the

corn, Phaseolus coccineous. Frijol Mantequilla Butter bean/Lima Bean (Phaseolus lunatus). Grown in the CIAL garden in

Cedral. Frijol Milpero* Bean from the milpa (grown amongst the corn) Frijoles* (Colorado y Negro de Varios Variedades)

Beans (several varieties of red and black)

Gandul Pigeon Pea (to make chilate according to IHDER) Lentejas Lentils Nuez Nut Leche* Milk Mantequilla Sour cream butter Quesillo Fresh Cheese (texture of fresh mozzarella) Queso; Criollo y Queso Unripened Fresh Cheese; hard salty creole cheese, and fresh white cheese.

131

Blanco, Criollo Corriente Requesón Soft fresh cheese (ricotta-like) Aceite Oil Manteca Lard or Vegetable Fat Margarina Margarine Cerdo* Pork (Pig is especially eaten at Christmas) Chorizo Sausage Huevos* Eggs (chicken, ducks) Mondongo Tripe (Soup, traditional of the north coast) Pato* Duck Pavo/ Jolotes* Turkey Pescado Fish (esp. tilapia) Pollo* Chicken Res Beef (many beef cows in the valley but most families did not eat beef

regularly) Venado, Armadillo/ Cuzuco, Tepezcuintle, Iguana o otros animales salvajes *

Deer, Armadillo, Tepezcuintle/Paca (large spotted rodent of the mountain forests), iguana (in the valley) or other wild animals

Azúcar* Sugar (white sugar and soap are two things that people in the mountains

bought in the valley) Caña De Azúcar * Sugar cane Dulces/ Confite Sweets / Candy Miel (y Miel del Bosque) Honey (and Forest Honey) Consume, cubitos Consume Sal Salt Alcohol (cerveza, ron, guaro, aguardiente, etc)

Alcohol

Atol Agrio Fermented corn meal drink Atol de Avena/ Osmil Oat Atol, watery Oatmeal Atol Chuco* Fermented corn meal drink with ayote seeds and black or coloured beans. Atol Dulce* Fresh corn drink often with cinnamon, pimiento, sugar and sometimes

milk. Café* Coffee (usually drunk strong and with a lot of sugar) Chicha* Homemade fermented yellow-corn alcoholic beverage, which like Chilate Drink made from toasted corn flour with suntul (rhizome of a local wild

132

plant) and sugar. It is drunk out of a guacal (cup made of calabash) Chocolate Drink made from toasted corn-flour with cinnamon, sugar, (soya was

sometimes added for protein) Frescos Sodas (often very sugary, colourful drinks sold by the 3 liters) Horchata (con morro/ jicaro, azúcar, arroz y leche)

Horchata made with morro, sugar, rice and milk, usually for celebrations, birthday parties, etc. Also sold on Tuesdays in ‘el moll’

Poleada Drink make from toasted corn flour, toasted ground pumpkin/squash (eyote) seeds with cinnamon, and sugar.

Pozol Boiled dried corn drink Té Tea (black tea is sold in town, but families also make herbal teas, such as

té de pimienta gorda from the leaves of the allspice tree) * Spoken about during semi-structured interviews

133

Appendix 5: Statistical Output

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable:Protein%

(I) Colour (J) Colour Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red 1.060080 .5693246 .253 -.433750 2.553910

White 1.614299* .4031614 .001 .556459 2.672140 Yellow .701075 .4190115 .345 -.398354 1.800504

Red Black -1.060080 .5693246 .253 -2.553910 .433750 White .554219 .4843223 .663 -.716576 1.825015 Yellow -.359005 .4975939 .888 -1.664623 .946613

White Black -1.614299* .4031614 .001 -2.672140 -.556459 Red -.554219 .4843223 .663 -1.825015 .716576 Yellow -.913224* .2932717 .013 -1.682729 -.143719

Yellow Black -.701075 .4190115 .345 -1.800504 .398354 Red .359005 .4975939 .888 -.946613 1.664623 White .913224* .2932717 .013 .143719 1.682729

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.387. *. The mean difference is significant at the 0

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:ProVitamin A ug/g

(I) Colour (J) Colour Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red -.5210658143 .39969200504 .563 -

1.5698031066 .5276714781

White -.1745307121 .28303781989 .926 -.9171833374 .5681219132 Yellow -

2.0149495450* .29416535073 .000 -

2.7867992931 -

1.2430997969 Red Black .5210658143 .39969200504 .563 -.5276714781 1.5698031066

White .3465351022 .34001651351 .739 -.5456218418 1.2386920461 Yellow -

1.4938837307* .34933375952 .000 -

2.4104878571 -.5772796044

White Black .1745307121 .28303781989 .926 -.5681219132 .9171833374 Red -.3465351022 .34001651351 .739 -

1.2386920461 .5456218418

Yellow -1.8404188329*

.20589022351 .000 -2.3806466903

-1.3001909754

Yellow Black 2.0149495450* .29416535073 .000 1.2430997969 2.7867992931 Red 1.4938837307* .34933375952 .000 .5772796044 2.4104878571 White 1.8404188329* .20589022351 .000 1.3001909754 2.3806466903

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .683.

134

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:ProVitamin A ug/g

(I) Colour (J) Colour Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red -.5210658143 .39969200504 .563 -

1.5698031066 .5276714781

White -.1745307121 .28303781989 .926 -.9171833374 .5681219132 Yellow -

2.0149495450* .29416535073 .000 -

2.7867992931 -

1.2430997969 Red Black .5210658143 .39969200504 .563 -.5276714781 1.5698031066

White .3465351022 .34001651351 .739 -.5456218418 1.2386920461 Yellow -

1.4938837307* .34933375952 .000 -

2.4104878571 -.5772796044

White Black .1745307121 .28303781989 .926 -.5681219132 .9171833374 Red -.3465351022 .34001651351 .739 -

1.2386920461 .5456218418

Yellow -1.8404188329*

.20589022351 .000 -2.3806466903

-1.3001909754

Yellow Black 2.0149495450* .29416535073 .000 1.2430997969 2.7867992931 Red 1.4938837307* .34933375952 .000 .5772796044 2.4104878571 White 1.8404188329* .20589022351 .000 1.3001909754 2.3806466903

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .683. *. The mean difference is significant at the 0

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:Anthocyanins (?g/g)

(I) Colour (J) Colour Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red 196.20826931* 25.160171169 .000 130.19141270 262.22512593

White 238.76878967* 17.816918792 .000 192.01962547 285.51795386 Yellow 245.15440992* 18.517384594 .000 196.56731902 293.74150082

Red Black -196.20826931*

25.160171169 .000 -262.22512593

-130.19141270

White 42.56052035 21.403664753 .201 -13.59977592 98.72081662 Yellow 48.94614061 21.990175120 .125 -8.75307885 106.64536006

White Black -238.76878967*

17.816918792 .000 -285.51795386

-192.01962547

Red -42.56052035 21.403664753 .201 -98.72081662 13.59977592 Yellow 6.38562025 12.960562634 .961 -27.62112792 40.39236843

Yellow Black -245.15440992*

18.517384594 .000 -293.74150082

-196.56731902

Red -48.94614061 21.990175120 .125 -106.64536006

8.75307885

White -6.38562025 12.960562634 .961 -40.39236843 27.62112792 Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 2707.980. *. The mean difference is significant at the 0

135

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:Starch%

(I) Colour (J) Colour Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red -2.293159 1.2748238 .282 -5.638122 1.051805

White -1.264969 .9027534 .502 -3.633671 1.103733 Yellow -.211221 .9382449 .996 -2.673048 2.250606

Red Black 2.293159 1.2748238 .282 -1.051805 5.638122 White 1.028190 1.0844879 .779 -1.817359 3.873738 Yellow 2.081938 1.1142054 .250 -.841585 5.005461

White Black 1.264969 .9027534 .502 -1.103733 3.633671 Red -1.028190 1.0844879 .779 -3.873738 1.817359 Yellow 1.053748 .6566900 .382 -.669317 2.776813

Yellow Black .211221 .9382449 .996 -2.250606 2.673048 Red -2.081938 1.1142054 .250 -5.005461 .841585 White -1.053748 .6566900 .382 -2.776813 .669317

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 6.952.

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:Crude Fat (ether ectract) %

(I) Colour (J) Colour

Mean Difference (I-

J) Std. Error Sig.

95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD Black Red .034074347 .2353375182 .999 -.583419194 .651567888

White -.001494184 .1666518650 1.000 -.438765942 .435777574 Yellow .203379154 .1732037236 .645 -.251083787 .657842095

Red Black -.034074347 .2353375182 .999 -.651567888 .583419194 White -.035568531 .2002007581 .998 -.560868008 .489730945 Yellow .169304807 .2056867261 .843 -.370389101 .708998715

White Black .001494184 .1666518650 1.000 -.435777574 .438765942 Red .035568531 .2002007581 .998 -.489730945 .560868008 Yellow .204873338 .1212275792 .336 -.113211291 .522957968

Yellow Black -.203379154 .1732037236 .645 -.657842095 .251083787 Red -.169304807 .2056867261 .843 -.708998715 .370389101 White -.204873338 .1212275792 .336 -.522957968 .113211291

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .237.

136

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable:Iron mg/kg

(I) Region (J) Region

Mean Difference (I-

J) Std. Error Sig.

95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD

Lempira Marcala -1.389074183 1.2449100282 .921 -5.159559381 2.381411015 Opalaca .566369233 1.3735771673 1.000 -3.593812836 4.726551303 Otoro -1.128304933 1.3016114527 .976 -5.070522929 2.813913062 Vallacillos -.071178297 .9521569954 1.000 -2.954996224 2.812639630 Victoria .256316254 1.2449100282 1.000 -3.514168944 4.026801452 Yorito 2.284633184 1.0073248998 .273 -.766272936 5.335539305

Marcala Lempira 1.389074183 1.2449100282 .921 -2.381411015 5.159559381 Opalaca 1.955443417 1.5357059592 .862 -2.695781536 6.606668370 Otoro .260769250 1.4716898221 1.000 -4.196568682 4.718107182 Vallacillos 1.317895886 1.1740023435 .919 -2.237829715 4.873621488 Victoria 1.645390437 1.4217874444 .908 -2.660807113 5.951587988 Yorito 3.673707368 1.2191726754 .052 -.018826568 7.366241304

Opalaca Lempira -.566369233 1.3735771673 1.000 -4.726551303 3.593812836 Marcala -1.955443417 1.5357059592 .862 -6.606668370 2.695781536 Otoro -1.694674167 1.5820190228 .935 -6.486168470 3.096820137 Vallacillos -.637547530 1.3096544425 .999 -4.604125498 3.329030437 Victoria -.310052979 1.5357059592 1.000 -4.961277932 4.341171974 Yorito 1.718263951 1.3502945118 .862 -2.371401450 5.807929352

Otoro Lempira 1.128304933 1.3016114527 .976 -2.813913062 5.070522929 Marcala -.260769250 1.4716898221 1.000 -4.718107182 4.196568682 Opalaca 1.694674167 1.5820190228 .935 -3.096820137 6.486168470 Vallacillos 1.057126636 1.2339663277 .978 -2.680213146 4.794466418 Victoria 1.384621187 1.4716898221 .965 -3.072716744 5.841959119 Yorito 3.412938118 1.2770173875 .120 -.454791315 7.280667550

Vallacillos Lempira .071178297 .9521569954 1.000 -2.812639630 2.954996224 Marcala -1.317895886 1.1740023435 .919 -4.873621488 2.237829715 Opalaca .637547530 1.3096544425 .999 -3.329030437 4.604125498 Otoro -1.057126636 1.2339663277 .978 -4.794466418 2.680213146 Victoria .327494551 1.1740023435 1.000 -3.228231050 3.883220152 Yorito 2.355811481 .9182504985 .151 -.425313125 5.136936088

Victoria Lempira -.256316254 1.2449100282 1.000 -4.026801452 3.514168944 Marcala -1.645390437 1.4217874444 .908 -5.951587988 2.660807113 Opalaca .310052979 1.5357059592 1.000 -4.341171974 4.961277932 Otoro -1.384621187 1.4716898221 .965 -5.841959119 3.072716744 Vallacillos -.327494551 1.1740023435 1.000 -3.883220152 3.228231050 Yorito 2.028316930 1.2191726754 .642 -1.664217006 5.720850866

Yorito Lempira -2.284633184 1.0073248998 .273 -5.335539305 .766272936 Marcala -3.673707368 1.2191726754 .052 -7.366241304 .018826568 Opalaca -1.718263951 1.3502945118 .862 -5.807929352 2.371401450 Otoro -3.412938118 1.2770173875 .120 -7.280667550 .454791315 Vallacillos -2.355811481 .9182504985 .151 -5.136936088 .425313125 Victoria -2.028316930 1.2191726754 .642 -5.720850866 1.664217006

137

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:Iron mg/kg

(I) Region (J) Region

Mean Difference (I-

J) Std. Error Sig.

95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD

Lempira Marcala -1.389074183 1.2449100282 .921 -5.159559381 2.381411015 Opalaca .566369233 1.3735771673 1.000 -3.593812836 4.726551303 Otoro -1.128304933 1.3016114527 .976 -5.070522929 2.813913062 Vallacillos -.071178297 .9521569954 1.000 -2.954996224 2.812639630 Victoria .256316254 1.2449100282 1.000 -3.514168944 4.026801452 Yorito 2.284633184 1.0073248998 .273 -.766272936 5.335539305

Marcala Lempira 1.389074183 1.2449100282 .921 -2.381411015 5.159559381 Opalaca 1.955443417 1.5357059592 .862 -2.695781536 6.606668370 Otoro .260769250 1.4716898221 1.000 -4.196568682 4.718107182 Vallacillos 1.317895886 1.1740023435 .919 -2.237829715 4.873621488 Victoria 1.645390437 1.4217874444 .908 -2.660807113 5.951587988 Yorito 3.673707368 1.2191726754 .052 -.018826568 7.366241304

Opalaca Lempira -.566369233 1.3735771673 1.000 -4.726551303 3.593812836 Marcala -1.955443417 1.5357059592 .862 -6.606668370 2.695781536 Otoro -1.694674167 1.5820190228 .935 -6.486168470 3.096820137 Vallacillos -.637547530 1.3096544425 .999 -4.604125498 3.329030437 Victoria -.310052979 1.5357059592 1.000 -4.961277932 4.341171974 Yorito 1.718263951 1.3502945118 .862 -2.371401450 5.807929352

Otoro Lempira 1.128304933 1.3016114527 .976 -2.813913062 5.070522929 Marcala -.260769250 1.4716898221 1.000 -4.718107182 4.196568682 Opalaca 1.694674167 1.5820190228 .935 -3.096820137 6.486168470 Vallacillos 1.057126636 1.2339663277 .978 -2.680213146 4.794466418 Victoria 1.384621187 1.4716898221 .965 -3.072716744 5.841959119 Yorito 3.412938118 1.2770173875 .120 -.454791315 7.280667550

Vallacillos Lempira .071178297 .9521569954 1.000 -2.812639630 2.954996224 Marcala -1.317895886 1.1740023435 .919 -4.873621488 2.237829715 Opalaca .637547530 1.3096544425 .999 -3.329030437 4.604125498 Otoro -1.057126636 1.2339663277 .978 -4.794466418 2.680213146 Victoria .327494551 1.1740023435 1.000 -3.228231050 3.883220152 Yorito 2.355811481 .9182504985 .151 -.425313125 5.136936088

Victoria Lempira -.256316254 1.2449100282 1.000 -4.026801452 3.514168944 Marcala -1.645390437 1.4217874444 .908 -5.951587988 2.660807113 Opalaca .310052979 1.5357059592 1.000 -4.341171974 4.961277932 Otoro -1.384621187 1.4716898221 .965 -5.841959119 3.072716744 Vallacillos -.327494551 1.1740023435 1.000 -3.883220152 3.228231050 Yorito 2.028316930 1.2191726754 .642 -1.664217006 5.720850866

Yorito Lempira -2.284633184 1.0073248998 .273 -5.335539305 .766272936 Marcala -3.673707368 1.2191726754 .052 -7.366241304 .018826568 Opalaca -1.718263951 1.3502945118 .862 -5.807929352 2.371401450 Otoro -3.412938118 1.2770173875 .120 -7.280667550 .454791315 Vallacillos -2.355811481 .9182504985 .151 -5.136936088 .425313125 Victoria -2.028316930 1.2191726754 .642 -5.720850866 1.664217006

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 8.086.

138

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable:Zinc mg/kg

(I) Region (J) Region Mean Difference

(I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound Tukey HSD

Lempira Marcala 3.536914558 1.6822709436 .362 -1.558214847 8.632043964 Opalaca .838753600 1.8561413315 .999 -4.782980708 6.460487908 Otoro 1.893252790 1.7588926727 .933 -3.433942458 7.220448039 Vallacillos -.493155998 1.2866681212 1.000 -4.390114811 3.403802814 Victoria -4.536301192 1.6822709436 .113 -9.631430597 .558828214 Yorito -3.595103596 1.3612175751 .128 -7.717851909 .527644716

Marcala Lempira -3.536914558 1.6822709436 .362 -8.632043964 1.558214847 Opalaca -2.698160958 2.0752290965 .850 -8.983450990 3.587129073 Otoro -1.643661768 1.9887228551 .981 -7.666948526 4.379624990 Vallacillos -4.030070557 1.5864520209 .160 -8.834991175 .774850061 Victoria -8.073215750* 1.9212888092 .001 -13.892263594 -2.254167906 Yorito -7.132018154* 1.6474915621 .001 -12.121810515 -2.142225794

Opalaca Lempira -.838753600 1.8561413315 .999 -6.460487908 4.782980708 Marcala 2.698160958 2.0752290965 .850 -3.587129073 8.983450990 Otoro 1.054499190 2.1378128331 .999 -5.420339521 7.529337902 Vallacillos -1.331909598 1.7697613199 .989 -6.692022948 4.028203751 Victoria -5.375054792 2.0752290965 .144 -11.660344823 .910235240 Yorito -4.433857196 1.8246790298 .201 -9.960300969 1.092586577

Otoro Lempira -1.893252790 1.7588926727 .933 -7.220448039 3.433942458 Marcala 1.643661768 1.9887228551 .981 -4.379624990 7.666948526 Opalaca -1.054499190 2.1378128331 .999 -7.529337902 5.420339521 Vallacillos -2.386408789 1.6674825100 .783 -7.436748154 2.663930576 Victoria -6.429553982* 1.9887228551 .029 -12.452840740 -.406267224 Yorito -5.488356387* 1.7256582378 .033 -10.714893803 -.261818970

Vallacillos Lempira .493155998 1.2866681212 1.000 -3.403802814 4.390114811 Marcala 4.030070557 1.5864520209 .160 -.774850061 8.834991175 Opalaca 1.331909598 1.7697613199 .989 -4.028203751 6.692022948 Otoro 2.386408789 1.6674825100 .783 -2.663930576 7.436748154 Victoria -4.043145193 1.5864520209 .157 -8.848065811 .761775425 Yorito -3.101947598 1.2408496177 .174 -6.860134945 .656239750

Victoria Lempira 4.536301192 1.6822709436 .113 -.558828214 9.631430597 Marcala 8.073215750* 1.9212888092 .001 2.254167906 13.892263594 Opalaca 5.375054792 2.0752290965 .144 -.910235240 11.660344823 Otoro 6.429553982* 1.9887228551 .029 .406267224 12.452840740 Vallacillos 4.043145193 1.5864520209 .157 -.761775425 8.848065811 Yorito .941197596 1.6474915621 .997 -4.048594765 5.930989956

Yorito Lempira 3.595103596 1.3612175751 .128 -.527644716 7.717851909 Marcala 7.132018154* 1.6474915621 .001 2.142225794 12.121810515 Opalaca 4.433857196 1.8246790298 .201 -1.092586577 9.960300969 Otoro 5.488356387* 1.7256582378 .033 .261818970 10.714893803 Vallacillos 3.101947598 1.2408496177 .174 -.656239750 6.860134945 Victoria -.941197596 1.6474915621 .997 -5.930989956 4.048594765

139

Based on observed means. The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 14.765. *. The mean difference is significant at the 0

Variedad Criol

lo Rendimento

Sabor

Color

Valor Comercial

Nutricion

Protiena

Almidon

Aciete

Hiero

Zinc ProA

Negrito 1 3 4 4 2 4 11.23 68.59 3.932

17.949

24.434

0

Blanta Baja (Amarillo)

1 3 3 3 3 3 10.83 70.17 3.277

17.947

23.268

2.542

Raquin (Amarillo) 1 4 4 3 3 3 10.76 70.74 3.419

18.3 19.436

1.243

Maiz de Harina (Blanco)

1 3 4 4 5 4 10.59 69.08 4.294

18.398

20.481

0

Rojo 1 3 2 3 1 3 10.21 71.51 3.311

17.644

18.748

0.738

Sesenteno (Amarillo)

1 4 4 3 3 3 9.96 67.04 3.368

15.754

24.112

1.394

Olotillo Amarillo 1 5 5 4 3 5 9.8 63.73 3.6774

15.824

23.822

1.357

Guayape (Blanco) 0 3 3 4 5 4 9.61 71.99 3.362

15.779

30.217

0.215

Mataseneno (Amarillo)

1 4 4 4 3 4 9.56 72.82 3.413

19.598

19.451

2.162

QPM (Blanco) 0 4 3 4 4 4 9.48 64.86 4.010

15.471

21.826

0

HB104 (Blanco) 0 3 2 4 5 2 9.3 68.83 4.204

17.327

20.802

0

Olotillo Blanco 1 4 3 4 4 5 9.25 70.94 3.582

15.107

21.981

0.232

Capulin (Blanco) 0 3 2 4 4 2 8.25 69.92 3.754

13.817

25.265

0.256

Tizate (Blanco) 1 4 3 3 4 3 7.72 68.61 5.193

17.422

28.030

0

140

Bibliography:

Abbott, J. A. 2005 Counting beans: Agrobiodiversity, Indigeneity and Agrarian Reform. The Professional

Geographer 57:198-212. Aguirre G., J. A., M. R. Bellon, and M. Smale. 2000 A regional analysis of maize biological diversity in Southeastern Guanajuato, Mexico.

Economic Botany 54:60–72. Ahmed MM, Mohammed J, and Ehui S. 2000 Household-level economic and nutritional impacts of market-oriented dairy production

in the Ethiopian highlands. Food and Nutrition Bulletin 21:460–465. ASOCIAL et al., and Classen, L. 2008 Campesinos Cientificos. In L. Fortmann (Ed.), Participatory research in conservation

and rural livelihoods: Doing science together. Oxford: Blackwell. Balcha, G. and T. Tanto 2008 Conservation of genetic diversity and supporting informal seed supply in Ethiopia In

Farmers, seeds and varieties: supporting informal seed supply in Ethiopia. Thijssen, M.H., Z. Bishaw, A. Beshir and W.S. de Boef (Eds.). pp. 141 Wageningen, Wageningen International.

Batterbury, S. 2001 Landscapes of Diversity: A Local Political Ecology of Livelihood Diversification in

South-Western Niger. Ecumene 8(4):437-464. Bellon, M. R., Adato, M., Becerril, J., and Mindek, D. 2006 Poor farmers’ perceived benefits from different types of maize germplasm: The case of

creolization in lowland tropical Mexico. World Development 34(1):113–129. Bellon, M. R., and J. Risopoulos. 2001 Small-scale farmers expand the benefits of improved maize germplasm: A case study

from Chiapas, Mexico. World Development 29(5): 799–811. Bermudez-Madriz, Juan Luis, María del Rocío Saenz, Jorine Muiser, and Mónica Acosta. 2011. Sistema de salud de Honduras. Salud pública Méx. 53 (s2):s209-s219. Beaudette, A. 1999 Household well-being and natural resource management in three rural communities in

the municipality of Yorito, Yoro, Honduras. Unpublished MA thesis. Ontario: University of Guelph.

Biersack, A., and Greenberg, J. B. (eds)

141

2006 Reimagining political ecology. London: Duke University Press, Duke University Press. Bisogni C, Connors M, Devine C, Sobal J. 2002 Who we are and how we eat: a qualitative study of identities in food choice. Journal of

Nutritional Education and Behavior. 34:128-139. Blaikie, P. 1985 The Political Economy of Soil Erosion in Developing Countries. New York: Longman. Blaikie, Piers M. and Harold Brookfield 1987 Land Degradation and Society. Methuen, London. Blum, L., Pelto, P. J., Pelto, G. H. & Kuhnlein, H. V. 1997 Community Assessment of Natural Food Sources of Vitamin A. Guidelines for an

Ethnographic Protocol. International Nutrition Foundation for Developing Countries (INFDC), Ottawa, Canada.

Boland and Brautigam. 2010. Economic Analysis of Options for Food Aid Policy in Honduras. International Food

and Agribusiness Management Review. 13(2):51-68. Bordi, IV 2006 The "authentic" taco and peasant women: Nostalgic consumption in the era of

globalization. Culture and Agriculture, 28, 97-107. Bouis, H.E., R.D. Graham, and R.M. Welch. 1999 The CGIAR micronutrient project: Justification, history, objectives and summary of

findings. Paper presented at a workshop on: Improving human nutrition through agriculture: The role of international agricultural research. IRRI, The Phillipines.

Boussard, Caroline 2003 Crafting Democracy. Civil Society in Post-Transition Honduras. Lund: Bloms Tryckeri. Boyce, J. K. 1996 Ecological distribution, agricultural trade liberalization, and in situ genetic diversity.

Journal of Income Distribution 6:265–286. Boyer, Jefferson 2010 Food security, food sovereignty, and local challenges for agrarian movements: the

Honduras case. Journal of Peasant Studies 37 (2): 319–351. Bryant, R. 1992 Political ecology: an emerging research agenda in third-world studies." Political

Geography 11(1): 12-36. Bryant, R. L. and S. Bailey 1997 Third world political ecology. London: Routledge.

142

Bryant, R. L. 1998 Power, knowledge and political ecology in the Third World: a review. Progress in

Physical Geography, 22, 79–94. Bush, Simon 2004 A Political Ecology of Living Aquatic Resources in Lao PDR, PhD thesis, School of

Geosciences, University of Sydney. Callens. K and B. Seiffert 2003 Methodological Guide: Participatory Appraisal of Nutrition and Household Food

Security Situations and Planning of Interventions from a Livelihooods Perspective. FAO. Rome. Available: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/006/ad694e/ad694e00.pdf

Carbonari, Flavia, Juan Carlos Parra and William Reuben 2010 Learning by Doing: Applying a Country-led PSIA Approach to Improve Policy Making

in the Agro Sector in Honduras. World Bank. En Breve 153. Carr, E.R. 2006 Postmodern conceptualizations, modernist applications: Rethinking the role of society in

food security. Food Policy 31(1):14-29. Chambers, Robert 1997 Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last, Intermediate Technology, London. CIDA 2011. Canada Helps Stamp out Bugs and Poverty in Honduras. Available at

http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/acdi-cida.nsf/eng/FRA-31715301-QVB Classen, L., S. Humphries, J. FitzSimons, S. Kaaria, J. Jimenez, F. Sierra, and O. Gallardo 2008 Opening Participatory Spaces for the Most Marginal: Learning from Collective Action

in the Honduran Hillsides. World Development 36 (11): 2402-2420. Cornwall, A., & Jewkes, R. 1995. What is participatory research? Social Science & Medicine,

41(12): 1667-1676. Counihan, C, and P. Van Esterik 1997 Introduction. In Food and Culture: A Reader. C. Counihan and P. Van Esterik, eds. Pp.

1-7. New York: Routledge. Custodio, Octavio, Luis Alberto Galicia, Catalina Islas, Natalia Palacios, Aldo Rosales, and

Gricelda Vásquez 2010 Curso-Taller: Metodologías de laboratorio para análisis de calidad nutricional e

industrial en maíz Abril 19 al 24 del 2010. Proyecto CIMMYT-SAGARPA. Desmarais, Annette Aurélie 2002. Peasants Speak: The Via Campesina: Consolidating an International Peasant and Farm

143

Movement. Journal of Peasant Studies 29(2):91-124. 2007 La Vía Campesina: Globalization and the Power of Peasants. Fernwood Publishing and

Pluto Press: Halifax and London. DeWalt, B. R. 1983 The cattle are eating the forest. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 39(1):18-23. 1998 The political ecology of population increase and malnutrition in Southern Honduras. In

A. H. Goodman and T. L. Leatherman (eds.), Building a new biocultural synthesis, pp. 296–316. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

DeWalt, K. M. 1984 Nutritional Strategies and Agricultural Change in a Mexican Community. Ann Arbor,

Michigan: UMI Press. DeWalt, B.R., and K.M. DeWalt 1982 Cropping Systems in Pespire, Southern Honduras. Farming Systems Research in

Southern Honduras Report No. 1. Lexington: Department of Anthropology, University of Kentucky.

1987. Nutrition and agricultural change in Southern Honduras. Food and Nutrition Bulletin

9(3):36-45. Dewalt, Billie R.; Stonich, Susan C. 1996 The political ecology of deforestation in Honduras. In Tropical deforestation: The

human dimension, Leslie E. Sponsel, Thomas N. Headland and Robert C. Bailey, eds. pp 187-215. New York: Columbia University Press.

Dickinson, N., G. Macpherson, A.S. Hursthouse, and J. Atkinson. 2009 Micronutrient deficiencies in maternity and child health: a review of environmental and

social context and implications for Malawi. Environ Geochem Health 31(2):253-72. Duvick, D.N., and K.G. Cassman. 1999 Post-green revolution trends in yield potential of temperate maize in the North-Central

United States. Crop Science 39:1622-1630. Escobar, Arturo 1996 Constructing Nature: Elements for a Poststructural Political Ecology. In .Liberation

Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements. R. Peet & M. Watts (eds), p.46-68. Routledge, London.

Escobar, Arturo 1998 Whose Knowledge, Whose Nature? Biodiversity, Conservation and the Political Ecology

of Social Movements, Journal of Political Ecology (5) 53-82. FAO.

144

1994. Extension woman to woman: training peasant women liaisons to reach peasant women. A case study of lessons learned through FAO projects in Honduras. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/U8654E/U8654E00.htm

2001. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2001. Rome: FAO; Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/y1500e/y1500e00.htm

2002. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2001. Rome. FAO. 2003. Trade Reforms And Food Security: Conceptualizing the Linkages . Rome. Available at:

ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y4671e/y4671e00.pdf 2005. Protecting and promoting good nutrition in crisis and recovery. Rome: FAO. Available

at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/y5815e/y5815e00.pdf 2006 “Community Diversity Seed Fairs in Tanzania Guidelines for seed fairs” The LinKS

project gender, biodiversity and local knowledge systems for food security. June 2006, Report no 51. Available: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/ag387e/ag387e00.htm#Contents

2007. Guidelines for measuring household and individual dietary diversity. FAO: Rome. 2010. State of Food Insecurity in the World 2010. FAO, Rome. Finnis, E. 2007 The political ecology of dietary transitions: Changing production and consumption

patterns in the Kolli Hills, India. Agriculture and Human Values 24(3):343-353. Finnis, Elizabeth, Clotilde Benitez, Estela Fatima Candia Romero and Maria Jose Aparicio

Meza Forthcoming 2012. Changes to Agricultural Decision-making and Food Procurement

Strategies in Rural Paraguay. Latin American Research Review 47(2). FIPAH 2010. Resultados de Línea Base SOS Honduras. Unpublished document. Friedman, Jonathan 1994 Cultural Identity and Global Process. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Goode, J. 1989 Cultural Patterning And Group-Shared Rules In The Study Of Food Intake. In

Research Methods In Nutritional Anthropology. Pelto, G.H., P.J. Pelto And E. Messer (Ed.) Tokyo, Unu. Pp. 127-159

Graham, M.A. 1999 Child Nutrition and Seasonal Hunger in an Andean Community (Department of Puno,

Peru). San Clara, United States: University of California at Davis, Department of Anthropology and Sociology. Mimeographed document.

Graham, R. D., and R. M. Welch. 2000 Plant food micronutrient composition and human nutrition.” Communications in Soil

Science and Plant Analysis 31(11–14), 1627– 1640. Grossman, L. S.

145

1998 The political ecology of bananas: Contract farming, peasants and Agrarian change in the Eastern Caribbean. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Guevara-Escudero, José 1983 Nineteenth-Century Honduras: A Regional Approach to the Economic History of

Central America, 1839-1914. PhD-thesis, Department of History, New York University. Hahn, Robert A., and Marcia C. Inhorn 2009 Introduction: Anthropology and Public Health. In Anthropology and Public Health:

Bridging Differences in Culture and Society, eds. Robert A. Hahn and Marcia C. Inhorn, pp. 1-31. New York: Oxford University Press.

Halweil, B. 2007 Still No Free Lunch: Nutrient Levels in the US Food Supply Eroded by Pursuit of High

Yields. The Organic Center, September. Hatloy, A., Hallund, J., Diarra, MM. and Oshaug A. 2000 Food variety, socioeconomic status and nutritional status in urban and rural areas in

Koutiala (Mali). Public Health Nutrition 3:57- 65. Health Canada 2010 Dietary Reference Intakes. Available at www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/alt_formats/hpfb-

dgpsa/pdf/nutrition/dri_tables-eng.pdf Hernandez-Uribe, JP. Edith Agama-Acevedo, Jose Juan Islas-Hernandez, Juscelino Tovar and

Luis A Bello-Perez 2007 Chemical composition and in vitro starch digestibility of pigmented corn tortilla. Journal

of the Science of Food and Agriculture 87 (13): 2482-7. Hintze, L. H., M. Renkow, and G. Sain. 2003 Variety Characteristics, Transactions Costs, and Maize Adoption in Honduras.”

Agricultural Economics 29(3): 307-317. Hoddinott, John & Yohannes, Yisehac, 2002 Dietary diversity as a food security indicator. FCND briefs 136, International Food

Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Howard, Patricia Ballard 1987 From Banana Republic to Cattle Republic: Agrarian Roots of the Crisis in Honduras.

PhD dissertation, Ann Arbor, Michigan University Microfilms. Howard-Borjas, Patricia 1989 Implicaciones de la expansión ganadera en la población, el empleo y la alimentación.

Alternativas de política a la actual crisis. Resumen ejecutivo. Documento de trabajo, Proyectos SECPLAN/OIT/FNUAP, Tegucigalpa.

146

Humphries, S., Gallardo, O., Jimenez, J., & Sierra, F. with members of the Association of CIALs of Yorito, Sulaco and Victoria

2005 Linking small farmers to the formal research sector: Lessons from a participatory bean breeding programme in Honduras (pp. 1–14). AgREN Network Paper No. 142. London: ODI.

Humphries, S., J. Jimenez, F. Sierra, and O. Gallardo 2008 Sharing In Innovation: Reflections of a Partnership to Improve Livelihoods and

Resource Conservation in the Honduran Hillsides. In Participatory Research in Conservation and Rural Livelihoods: Doing Science Together. L. Fortmann (Ed.) pp. 36-54. Oxford: Blackwell.

Humphries, Sally, José Jiménez, Omar Gallardo, Marvin Gomez, Fredy Sierra, and members of

the Association of Local Agricultural Research Committees of Yorito, Victoria and Sulaco. 2012 Honduras: Rights of farmers and breeders’ rights in the new globalizing context. In The

Custodians of Biodiversity Sharing Access and Benefits to Genetic Resources. Manuel Ruiz and Ronnie Vernooy (Eds.) pp 79-93. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

Hu, Qing-ping and Jian-guo Xu. 2011 Profiles of Carotenoids, Anthocyanins, Phenolics, and Antioxidant Activity of Selected

Color Waxy Corn Grains during Maturation. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59 (5):2026–2033. Hvalkof S. and A. Escobar 1998 Nature, Political Ecology, and Social Practice: Toward an Academic and Political

Agenda". In Alan Goodman and Thomas Leatherman, (eds). Building a New Biocultural Synthesis: Political-Economic Perspectives in Biological Anthropology. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development

(IAASTD) 2009. Agriculture at a crossroads. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,

Science and Technology for Development. Island Press, Washington D.C. International Development Research Centre (IDRC) 2005 CAFTA Study: Efectos del CAFTA-RD en el sector rural de Honduras by Daniel Cruz

and Efrain Diaz. http://web.idrc.ca/es/ev-87183-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html 2007. Sending money home: the impact of migration and remittances in Olancho.

http://web.idrc.ca/en/ev-118700-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html Inestroza M., Jesús Evelio 2007 Jurla en el Valle de Otoro: Historia de Jesús de Otoro y de los pueblos antiguos del valle

(1536-2007). Banco Central de Honduras: Tegucigalpa. Ivanoff, R

147

2006. The Consequences of the Reliance on Mendelian Genetics within Plant Breeding Institutions. Undergraduate fourth year independent study, under Sally Humphrires. University of Guelph: Guelph, Canada. Jansen, K 1998 Political ecology, mountain agriculture and knowledge in Honduras. Amsterdam: Thela

Publishers. Jansen, H., Siegel, P., Alwang, J., & Pichon, F. 2005 Geography, livelihoods and well-being in rural Honduras: An empirical analysis using

an asset-base approach. In Paper for the conference on poverty, inequality, and policy in Latin America, University of Goettingen, Germany: July 14–16, 2005.

Jelliffe, D. B. 1967 Parallel food classification in developing and industrialized countries. American Journal

of Clinical Nutrition, 20, 279–281. Kalipeni, E. and J. R. Oppong 1998 The refugee crisis in Africa and implications for health and disease: A political ecology

approach. Social Science and Medicine 46(12): 1637–1653. Kennedy, G., G. Nantel, and P. Shetty. 2003 The Scourge of ‘hidden hunger’: Global Dimensions of Micronutrient Deficiencies.”

Food, Nutrition and Agriculture 32: 8-16. Knight, G. Roger 2009 A House of Honey: White Sugar, Brown Sugar, and the Taste for Modernity in Colonial

and Postcolonial Indonesia. Food and Foodways 17 (4). Kocsis, Joanna L. 2011. Extreme Weather, Climate Change and the Livelihoods of Hillside Households in the

Jesus de Otoro Valley, Honduras. University of Guelph Masters Thesis. Kramer, Frank 1986 Market Incorporation and Out-migration of the Peasants of Western Honduras. PhD

dissertation, University of California, University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

La Vía Campesina 2007. Declaration Of Nyéléni. Available at:

viacampesina.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=282&Itemid=38 (accessed April 2011).

Lapper, Richard, and James Painter 1985 Honduras: State for Sale. Latin America Bureau, London. Leatherman, Thomas L. and Alan Goodman

148

2005 Coca-colonization of diets in the Yucatan. Social Science & Medicine 61:833–846. MacClancy, J. and H. Macbeth 2004 Introduction: how to do anthropologies of food. In Macbeth, H. and MacClancy, J.

(eds.) Researching Food Habits: methods and problems. Oxford: Berghahn Martínez, M 2009 Compensación del Servicio Ambiental Hídrico para un Manejo Participativo de la

Cuenca de Cumes. Intibuca, Honduras. Junta Administradora de Agua de Jesús de Otoro (JAPOE).

Maxwell, S. & Smith, M. 1992. Household food security; a conceptual review. In S. Maxwell & T.R. Frankenberger,

eds. Household Food Security: Concepts, Indicators, Measurements: A Technical Review. New York and Rome: UNICEF and IFAD.

McMichael, P. 2008. Peasants make history, but not just as they please . . . In S.M. Borras Jr., M. Edelman

and C. Kay eds. Transnational agrarian movements confronting globalization. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 37–60.

Mehta, M. 1996 Our lives are no different from that of our buffaloes: Agricultural change and gendered

spaces in a central Himalayan valley. In D. Rocheleau, B. Thomas- Slayter, and E. Wangari (eds.), Feminist political ecology: global issues and local experiences, (pp. 1880–208). London: Routledge.

Mertz, Ole, Cheikh Mbow, Anette Reenberg, and Awa Diouf. 2009 Farmers’ perceptions of climate change and agricultural adaptation strategies in rural

sahel. Environmental Management 43 (5): 804-16. Messer, E. 1976 The Ecology of a Vegetarian Diet in a Modernizing Mexican Community. In: T. K.

Fitzgerald, ea., Nutrition and Anthropology in Action.117-124. Van Gorcum, Assen, Netherlands.

1984 Anthropological perspectives on diet. Annual Review of Anthropology 13: 205–249. 1989. Methods for determinants of food intake. In Research Methods in Nutritional

Anthropology, G. H. Pelto, P. J. Pelto, and E. Messer, eds. Hong Kong: United Nations University.

Mintz, S. W. 1985. Sweetness and Power. The Place of Sugar in Modern History, New York: Viking. 1999. “Sweet Polychrest,” Social Research 66(1):85–101. Mintz, S. W. and C. M. Du Bois 2002 The Anthropology of Food and Eating. Annual Review of Anthropology 31: 99-119.

149

Moffat, T. and E. Finnis 2005 Considering social and material resources: The political ecology of a peri-urban squatter

community in Nepal. Habitat International 29(3): 453–468. Nestel, Penelope, Alejandro Mellara, Jorge Rosado, and Jose O. Mora. 1999. Nutrition of Honduran mothers/ caretakers. Pan-American Journal of Public Health

5(3):164-171. Nuss, Emily T. and Sherry A. Tanumihardjo 2010. Maize: A Paramount Staple Crop in the Context of Global Nutrition. Comprehensive

Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety - CRFSFS , vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 417-436. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) 2007 Honduras.” Health in the Americas (2). Pappa, María Renée; Patricia Palacios de Palomo; Ricardo Bressani 2010. Effect of Lime and Wood Ash on the Nixtamalization of Maize and Tortilla Chemical

and Nutritional Characteristics. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition (2010) 65: 130-135. Peet, Richard & Michael Watts 2004 Liberation Ecology: Development, Sustainability, and Environment in an Age of Market

Triumphalism. In R. Peet & M. Watts (eds), Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements. Routledge, London, p.1-45.

Perales, H., S. B. Brush, y C. O. Qualset. 2003 Maize landraces of Central Mexico: an altitudinal transect. Economic Botany 57: 7-20 Pine, Adrienne 2008. Working Hard, Drinking Hard: On Violence and Survival in Honduras. By Adrienne

Pine, University of California Press, CA. Posas, Mario 1992 La Autogestión en el Agro Hondureño. El caso de la Empresa Asociativa Campesina

"Isletas" (EACI). Editorial Universitaria, Tegucigalpa. Quaye, W. Frempong, G. K., Jongerden Juivenkamp, G 2009 Exploring Possibilities to Enhance Food Sovereignty within the Cowpea Production-

Consumption Network in Northern Ghana. Journal of Human Ecology 28(2): 83-92. Richards AI. 1939 Land, Labour, and Diet in Northern Rhodesia: an Economic Study of the Bemba Tribe.

London: Oxford University Press. Ricker, T. 2004 Competition or massacre? Central American farmers’ dismal prospects under CAFTA

The Multinational Monitor 25 (4).

150

Robbins, P. 2004 Political ecology: A critical introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Rocheleau, Dianne, Barbara Thomas-Slayter and Esther Wangari 1996 Feminist Political Ecology – global issues and local experiences. London, Routledge. Rolls, Barbara J. and Robert A. Barnett. 1999. Volumetrics: Feel Full on Fewer Calories HarperCollins. Romero Velasquez, Tania Marcela 2009 Cartografia y caracterizacion de ecosistemas de la subcuenca del Rio Cumes, Jesus de

Otoro, Intituca Honduras. Zamorano, Honduras. Rowlands, Jo 1997 Questioning Empowerment: Working with Women in Honduras, an Oxfam

publication, Oxford. Ruel, M. T., and H. E. Bouis 1998 Plant breeding: A long- term strategy for the control of zinc deficiency in vulnerable

populations.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 68(2), 488S–494S. SAG 2006 Plan Estratégico Operativo del Sector Agroalimentario 2006-2010

www.sag.gob.hn/files/PEO/PEO_Agric_06_10.pdf 2011 Por disminución en la producción de maíz: Distribuidores de insumos agrícolas y la

SAG se unen contra la “macha de asfalto” http://www.sag.gob.hn/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2994&Itemid=116

Schanbacher, William D. 2010 The Politics of Food: The Global Conflict between Food Security and Food Sovereignty.

Santa Barbara, California: Praeger Security International. Smith, M., F. Castillo, and F. Gomez 2001 Participatory Plant Breeding with Maize in Mexico and Honduras. Euphytica, 122:

551–65. Stonich, Susan C. 1993 "I Am Destroying the Land!" The Political Ecology of Poverty and Environmental

Degradation in Honduras. Westview Press, Boulder. Stonich, S.C. & DeWalt, B.R. 1989 The Political Economy of Agricultural Growth and Rural Transformation in Honduras

and Mexico. In S. Smith and E. Reeves (eds), Human Systems Ecology: Studies in the Integration of Political Economy, Adaptation, and Socionatural Regions. Westview, Boulder, p.202-230.Sutton D. (2001) Remembrance of Repasts: an Anthropology of Food

151

and Memory. Oxford: Berg. Sunderlin, W. and Rodriguez, J.A. 1996 Cattle, broadleaf forests and the agricultural modernization law of Honduras: The case

of Olancho. Occasional Paper 7, Centre for International Forestry Research, Jakarta, Indonesia.

Temmer, Jennifer Katherine 2010. CIALs: A community solution to food security and improved natural resource

management in Honduras. M.Sc., University Of Guelph. Thorpe, Andy 2002. Agrarian Modernization in Honduras. Lewiston, N.Y. E. Mellen Press. Tucker, Catherine M. 2008. Changing Forests: Collective Action, Common Property, and Coffee in Honduras.

Berlin: Springer. Tucker, Catherine; Eakin, Hallie; and Castellanos, Edwin J. 2010 Perceptions of risk and adaptation: Coffee producers, market shocks, and extreme

weather in Central America and Mexico. Global Environmental Change 20, 23-32. Turshen, M. 1984 The political ecology of disease in Tanzania. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University

Press. UNODC 2010: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Homicide Statistics. Available at:

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Homicide_level.xlsx

United Nations World Food Program 2005 Honduras: Market profile for emergency food security assessments. Rome: FAO. Vazquez-Carrillo G., Garcia-Lara S., Salinas-Moreno Y., Bergvinson D.J., Palacios-Rojas N. 2011. Grain and tortilla quality in landraces and improved maize grown in the highlands of

Mexico. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 66(2):203-8. Vasquez-Leon, M, Liverman D. 2004. The political ecology of land-use change: Affluent ranchers and destitute farmers in the

Mexican municipio of Alamos. Human Organization. 63:21-33 Vidal Martínez , Víctor A., Gricelda Vázquez Carrillo, Bulmaro Coutiño Estrada, Alejandro

Ortega Corona, José Luis Ramírez Díaz, Roberto Valdivia Bernal, Manuel de J. Guerrero Herrera, Francisco de J. Caro Velarde, Óscar Cota Agramont.

2008. Calidad Proteínica En Colectas De Maíces Criollos De La Sierra De Nayarit, México. Revista Fitotecnia Mexicana, septiembre Vol 31. Number Especial 3: 15-21.

152

Vivek, B.S., A.F. Krivanek, N. Palacios-Rojas, S. Twumasi-Afriyie, and A.O. Diallo. 2008

Breeding quality protein maize (QPM): Protocols for developing QPM Cultivars. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT www.cimmyt.org/english/docs/manual/protocols/qpm_protocols.pdf

von Braun, J., Bouis, H., Kumar, S. and R. Pandya-Lorch 1992 Improving food security of the poor: Concept, policy, and programs. Washington, D. C.

IFPRI, USA. Walker, Peter 1998 Politics of Nature: An Overview of Political Ecology. Capitalism Nature Socialism. Volume 9 (1):131-144 Warren, A., S. Batterbury and H. Osbahr 2001 Soil Erosion in the West African Sahel: a review and application of a “local political

ecology” in South West Niger. Global Environmental Change 11: 79-95. Wegner, L., and G. Zwart, 2011. Who will feed the world? The production challenge. Oxfam, Oxford. Welch, R. M., and Graham, R. D. 2002 Breeding crops for enhanced micronutrient content.” Plant and Soil 245: 205– 214. Whitney, Eleanor Noss, Hamilton, Eva May Nunnelley, and Rolfes, Sharon Rady. 1990. Understanding Nutrition, 5th ed. St. Paul : West Pub. Williams, Robert G. 1986 Export Agriculture and the Crisis in Central America. University of North Carolina

Press, Chapel Hill. Wilson, W., and D. Dufuor 2006 Ethnobotanical evidence for cultivar selection among the Tukanoans: Manioc (Manihot

esculenta Crantz) in the Northwest Amazon.” Culture and. Agriculture 28(2): 122–130. Wilk, R 1997 “Real Belizean Food”: Building Local Identity in the Transnational Caribbean. In C.

Counihan, & P. Van Esterik, Food and Culture: a reader (pp. 308-326). New York: Routledge.

World Bank 2004 Honduras: Drivers of sustainable rural growth and poverty reduction in Central

America: Honduras case study. Vol. 1: Executive summary and main text report # 31192-HN.

2006. Honduras. Poverty Assessment. Attaining Poverty Reduction. (In Two Volumes)

Volume I: Main Report. June 30, 2006 Report # 35622-HN.

153

Young, Michael W 1986 The worst disease: The cultural definition of hunger in Kalauna. In Shared wealth and

symbol: Food, culture and society in Oceania and Southeast Asia, pp 111-126. ed. Lenore Manderson New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zimmerer, K.S. 1996. Discourses on soil loss in Bolivia: Sustainability and the search for the

‘socioenvironmental ‘middle ground.’ In Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements, eds. R. Peet and M. Watts, pgs. 110-124. Routledge: London.

Zimmerer, K, and T. Bassett. 2003. Political ecology: An integrative approach to geography and environment. New York:

Guilford Press.