admin

“Happy Geographers’ Day”, “Día del Geógrafo”!

 Other  1 Response »
Jul 232012
 

Grateful thanks to Annie Hansen for alerting us to the fact that 23 July was first proposed as “Día del Geógrafo de México” (“Mexican Geographers’ Day”) in a short paper published in 1999. Héctor Mendoza Vargas proposed that day because it marked the opening, in 1939, of the first National Congress of Geography ever held in Mexico. His suggestion was the winner in a competition to choose a suitable day on which to celebrate the work of geographers. Ever since then, 23 July has been a special day for all geographers in Mexico.

The first National Congress in 1939 ran from 23 July to 31 July, with sessions taking place in the Palace of Fine Arts (Palacio de Bellas Artes) in downtown Mexico City.

The full text of Mendoza Vargas’ short paper proposing 23 July as “Día del Geógrafo de México” can be seen here. It includes some interesting background history.

A Happy Geographers’ Day to all our readers!

Is Mexico experiencing a demographic dividend?

 Other  Comments Off on Is Mexico experiencing a demographic dividend?
Jul 232012
 

Mexico’s 2010 population of 112 million makes it the world’s 11th largest country in terms of population. The rate of population increase is now slowing down as fertility rates fall. The rate of increase, which was 2.63%/yr for the period 1970-1990, fell to 1.61%/yr for the period 1990-2010.

Even as the total population continues to grow over the next few decades, some very important changes are underway in Mexico’s population structure.

The graph divides Mexico’s population into three age categories: under 15 (youth), 15-59 (working age) and 60+ (elderly).

Mexico's population structure, 1970-2010

Mexico’s population structure, 1950-2010

The percentage of the total population of youthful age peaked in about 1970 at 46.2% and has since fallen to 29.3% in 2010. Over the same time period, the percentage of working age population has risen from 48.2% to 61.6%, while the percentage of elderly has gone from 5.6% to 9.1%.

Why is this important?

Perhaps the most obvious change is that government spending on schools and services for youth needs to shift towards spending on health care, pensions and services for the elderly. There are already some suburbs of the Mexico City Metropolitan Area that have experienced a dramatic shift in average age. Perhaps the most notable example is the Ciudad Satelite area, an area originally intended to be, and planned as, a genuine satellite settlement. A few decades later, the urban expansion of Mexico City had swallowed it up. An area which once had many young families now has very few children. The homeowners association of Ciudad Satelite estimates that 75% of the area’s 50,000 inhabitants is now elderly.

The major benefit of the changing population structure would appear to be that, in 2010, there are more wage-earners (and tax payers) for every person of non-working age (assumed for simplicity to be youth under 15, and the elderly aged 60+) than at any previous time. In other words, the total dependency rate is lower than ever before.

Economists argue that this “demographic dividend” should raise GDP, and could offer many significant advantages, such as enabling greater government expenditures on infrastructure or on social services. They point to several countries in East Asia as examples where economic growth spurts went hand-in-hand with a period of demographic dividend.

Despite the claims of economists, I’m not convinced that Mexico will prove to be an equally good example of the benefits of a demographic dividend. In Mexico’s case, the early phase of higher youthful population (and considerable economic growth) was accompanied by a high rate of emigration of working age Mexicans to the USA. Admittedly, emigration has now slowed, or stopped.

As Aaron Terrazas and his co-authors point out in Evolving Demographic and Human-Capital Trends in Mexico and Central America and Their Implications for Regional Migration [pdf file],

“But across Latin America, and in sharp contrast to East Asia, favorable demographic change has failed to translate into economic growth and prosperity. National income per capita has increased only modestly since the start of the demographic dividend, with Mexico outperforming its southern neighbors at comparable points in time. And emigration from the region has continued to grow despite the demographic transitions in Mexico and El Salvador, with the United States absorbing between one-fifth and one-quarter of the region’s annual population growth.”

Whether or not Mexico experiences a demographic dividend, it will not last for ever. In Mexico’s case, it looks set to last only about about 20 years. By 2050, according to current predictions, about 26.4% of the Mexico’s population will be youthful, and 27.7% elderly, while the percentage of working age will have fallen to 45.9%.

Related posts:

 

 

Mexican attitudes on the drug war, violence and crime

 Mexico's geography in the Press  Comments Off on Mexican attitudes on the drug war, violence and crime
Jul 162012
 

Mexican drug cartels and related violence have received enormous attention. For an overview, see Mexico’s drug cartels and their shifting areas of operation, a 2012 update. All Mexicans are aware of the issue and millions have been affected directly. What are their current views and attitudes? A face-to-face survey in April 2012 by the Pew Research Center of 1,200 Mexicans in Mexico sheds light on this issue.

Most Mexicans (80%) support President Calderon’s decision to use the military to fight drug traffickers. On the other hand, less than half (47%) think the campaign against drug traffickers is “making progress”. Fully 30% feel the government is losing ground. While they support use of the military, 74% indicate that human rights violations by the military and the police are a “very big problem”.

Mexicans are not sure which political party is better for dealing with Mexico’s drug problems. Just over a quarter (28%) think President Calderon’s National Action Party (PAN) (28%) would do a better job compared to 25% for the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and only 13% for the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). Fully 23% said that none of the three major parties is capable of resolving the issue. A possible reason for this is that only 14% blame mostly Mexico for the problem, compared to 22% who mostly blame the USA and 61% who blame both countries.

In general, Mexicans want the USA to help solve the drug problem. Fully 75% favor the USA training Mexican police and military personnel and 61% also approve of the USA providing money and weapons to the country’s police and military. On the other hand only a third favor deploying USA troops within Mexico, while 59% oppose this.

Mexicans feel that their country is facing some serious problems. Three-quarters of Mexicans think cartel-related violence (75%) and human rights violations by police and military (74%) are “very big problems”. The related issues of crime (73%), corruption (69%) and illegal drugs (68%) were also identified as “very big problems” by most survey respondents. Apparently, Mexicans do not feel very safe. More than half (56%) said they were afraid to walk alone at night within a kilometer of their home, 61% for women and 51% for men. Unfortunately, Mexicans are not very optimistic that the country’s drug violence problems will go away any time soon. On the bright side, 51% of the surveyed Mexicans felt their economy would improve in the next year compared to only 16% who thought it would worsen.

Related posts:

Mexico’s north-south political divide persists, albeit with minor changes

 Updates to Geo-Mexico  1 Response »
Jul 122012
 

An earlier post discussed the north-south divide apparent in the 2006 presidential election. That year Felipe Calderón of PAN got the most votes in 14 of 17 northern states (blue on the map), while in 13 of 15 southern states Andrés López Obrador of PRD (green) got the most votes. Roberto Madrazo of PRI (pink) did not get the most votes in a single state.

Voting patterns in presidential elections, 2006 and 2012

Voting patterns in presidential elections, 2006 and 2012. All rights reserved.

The voting pattern changed considerably in the 2012 presidential election, but a north-south pattern still emerged. What was somewhat similar in both elections is that López Obrador of PRD retained much of his strength in southern Mexico. In both elections, PRD got most votes in seven southern states: Federal District, Morelos, Tlaxcala, Guerrero, Oaxaca, Tabasco and Quintana Roo. In 2012 PRD won in one other state, Puebla, which favored PAN in the 2006 election. Six southern states switched from PRD to PRI:  Michoacán, México, Hidalgo, Veracruz, Chiapas and Campeche. Puebla switched from PAN to PRD, while Yucatán went from PAN to PRI.

In the north, the pattern changed completely with the PRI replacing PAN as the highest presidential vote-getter. A total of 11 northern states switched from PAN to PRI: Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Sinaloa, Durango, Aguascalientes, San Luis Potosí, Jalisco, Colima and Querétaro. In 10 of these states PAN came second while PRD took second place in Baja California. In 2012 PAN got most votes in only three states–Nuevo León, Tamaulipas and Guanajuato–compared to 16 in 2006.

PRD appears to have lost much of its relatively weak following in northern Mexico. The three northern states PRD won in 2006 all switched to PRI: Baja California Sur, Nayarit and Zacatecas. In 2012, PRD could only manage second place finishes in three states: Baja California, Nayarit and Zacatecas.

While the north-south pattern is still somewhat apparent, the main pattern of the 2012 presidential election is a strong victory for PRI candidate Enrique Pena Nieto. PRI was victorious in 22 of 32 states and came in second in the other ten.

However, PRI fell just short of controlling Mexico’s Congress so it will need support from some other parties to pass needed legislation and reforms. Together with minority coalition partner PVEM (Mexico’s Green Party), PRI won 240 of the 500 seats in the Chamber of Deputies and 62 of the 128 seats in the Senate. On the other hand, PRI has recently indicated support for many reforms similar to those previously proposed by PAN. This implies that needed reforms may have a decent chance of passing.

Further reading, with state by state analysis:

Related posts:

Have Mexicans given up on the dream of moving to the USA?

 Updates to Geo-Mexico  Comments Off on Have Mexicans given up on the dream of moving to the USA?
Jul 092012
 

A recent post noted that net migration from Mexico to the USA has dropped to essentially zero. Does this mean that Mexicans no longer have any interest in moving to the USA? The answer to this question is complicated. Obviously, many Mexicans living in Mexico would like to join their family members in the USA if it were legally possible. Others might feel that their career ambitions or the aspirations of their children might be better served by living in the USA. On the other hand, many Mexicans in the USA might feel that their lives would be better if they lived in Mexico.

A face-to-face survey in April 2012 by the Pew Research Center of 1,200 Mexicans in Mexico sheds light on this issue. According to the survey, 56% had a favorable view of the USA, compared to 52% in 2011. Only 34% had an unfavorable view of the USA, down from 41% in 2011. The views varied significantly by age and education. Sixty percent of 18 to 29-year-olds had a positive view compared to only half of those over age 50. Fully 66% of those with a post-secondary education had a favorable view compared to less than half (48%) of those with less education.

Over half (53%) think that Mexicans who move to the USA have a better life, up sharply from 44% in 2011. This suggests that there is still considerable interest in migration. Only 14% indicated they had a worse life, down from 22% a year earlier. However, 61% said they would not move to the USA if they had the means and opportunity. On the other hand, 37% said they would move to the USA and of these 19% indicated they would move even without legal documentation. Not surprisingly, younger Mexicans and those with more education were more interested in moving to the USA.

The survey data indicate that when/if US unemployment declines and there are again ample job opportunities in the USA, many Mexicans may migrate legally or illegally to fill those jobs. Of course, employment opportunities in Mexico will be a very important factor affecting decisions about migration. While the Mexican economy has recovered from the severe recession far better than the USA, still 62% of surveyed Mexicans described the economy as “bad”, down from 75% in 2010 and 68% in 2011. But Mexicans remain optimistic, 51% say the economy will improve in the next year compared to 32% who think it will remain the same, and only 16% who believe it will be worse. The Mexicans more willing to migrate, those with higher educations and incomes, are more optimistic about Mexico’s economic future. If the gap between US and Mexican economic opportunities continues to shrink in the decades ahead, we can expect Mexicans to become less interested in moving to the USA.

Related posts:

Mexico’s position among the world’s largest economies: 1900 to 2008

 Other  Comments Off on Mexico’s position among the world’s largest economies: 1900 to 2008
Jul 072012
 

Comparing the historical sizes of national economies is extremely challenging. Fortunately, Gapminder has attempted to do this by compiling GDP data for all countries in the world for the period since 1800. (For details, see here and here.) Gapminder’s approach relies on first obtaining for each country historical population size and Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDPpc) and then multiplying these to obtain the GDP. Gapminder relies on quantitative and qualitative data from hundreds of official and unofficial documents and a number of carefully documented assumptions.

Mexico’s total GDP has grown almost 60-fold since 1900 in inflation-adjusted constant 2005 dollars based on Purchasing Power Parity, which measures total goods and services produced by an economy independent of exchange rates. Growth started rather slowly, but accelerated very rapidly at mid-century. From 1940 to 1980, Mexico’s economy almost doubled each decade, moving up from $49 billion in 1940 to $637 billion in 1980, averaging about 6.6% per year. Of course, Mexico’s population was also growing rapidly during those four decades. Growth slowed to 2.0% per year in the 1980s but jumped up to 3.4% in the 1990s. From 2000 to 2008, growth slowed to 2.1% per year, partially as a result of the severe recession in the USA. Mexico’s economy is expected to grow significantly faster in this decade.

Growth of major world economies, 1900 to 2008 (Gapminder data)

(GDP in billions of constant 2005 US dollars based on Purchasing Power Parity)

Country19001930195019802008Growth/yr, 1900-2008
Brazil10381069371,8584.9%
Canada23731485771,2113.8%
China3214972169178,8623.1%
France1672672971,0951,8752.3%
Germany2554064161,7342,7012.2%
Indianana2085732,951na
Indonesia2655562288373.3%
Italy721492109151,6142.9%
Japan771652222,1603,9853.7%
MEXICO2336946371,3343.8%
Russianana375na2,089na
South Korea712161651,1774.9%
UK2403514901,0252,0042.0%
USA5061,1562,4146,33912,9603.1%

In 1900, Mexico’s total GDP of $23.3 billion was just ahead of Canada and over twice that of Brazil. However it was behind Indonesia and less than 5% of the USA’s world leading GDP. The Mexican economy was less than one tenth that of Germany and the UK, a seventh that of France and less than a third that of Japan and Italy. The table shows GDP levels for some of the world’s largest economies from 1900 to 2008.

The Mexican GDP expanded by 1.5% per year from 1900 to 1930 despite stagnation during the Mexican Revolution of 1910 to 1920. While this growth rate was better than UK, and tied with China, it was slower than the other countries in the table which expanded rapidly at the start of the 20thcentury. Brazil spurted ahead at 4.4% per year, edging past Mexico as Latin America’s largest economy. Canada expanded by 3.9% per year and doubled Mexico’s GDP. The USA grew by 2.8% per year becoming the first trillion dollar economy by 1923. France and Germany grew at about 1.6% per year, while Japan, Indonesia and Italy expanded by about 2.5% to 2.6%.

From 1930 to 1950, Mexico grew rapidly to $94 billion at a very impressive 4.9% per year, faster than all the other countries except Brazil at 5.3% per year. The USA (up 3.8% per year) and Canada (up 3.6%) also expanded rapidly, while the UK, Italy and Japan grew much slower, in the 1.5% to 1.7% range. The other countries struggled at rates around 0.5% or less. China’s GDP declined by a mind-boggling 4.1% per year during the 20 years from $497 billion down to $216 billion, more than a third less than what it had been in 1820! China’s economy seriously contracted over a 130 year period. The Great Depression hurt most economies; however World War II allies Japan (up 5.8% per year) and Germany (up 3.9%) grew relatively rapidly during the 1930s.

The 1940s and World War II had very dramatic impacts on the major economies. During the decade, Mexico’s GDP led the field with very impressive growth at 6.7% per year, closely followed by Brazil at 6.2%, USA at 5.2% and Canada at 5.0%. Wartime production was a major stimulus to these economies. On the negative side, several countries experienced dramatic war-related loses. China was at war throughout the decade and its economy declined by an incredible 7.0% per year during the 1940s, Germany was down by 3.5%, Japan by 2.6%, South Korea by 2.7% and Indonesia by 2.5%. Compounding these annual changes demonstrates their real significance. Mexico’s GDP almost doubled from $49 billion in 1940 to $94 billion in 1950, while China’s GDP dropped more than half from $447 billion in 1940 to $216 billion in 1950. By 1950, Mexico’s GDP was nearly half that of China and Japan, 1.7 times that of Indonesia and over six times that of South Korea. These four Asian countries would grow very rapidly during the “Asian Miracle” of the second half of the 20th century.

Mexico continued its dramatic growth expanding by 6.6% per year from 1950 to 1980. This was the “Mexican Miracle” which actually started in the 1940s. By 1980, Mexico’s GDP reached $637 billion, surpassing Canada and India; it was above one tenth of the USA’s GDP for the first time in over 100 years. All other economies also grew very rapidly during this thirty year boom period. Japan led the way with 7.9% per year, followed by Brazil at 7.5% per year. China finally broke from its 130 year slump growing at 4.9% per year; in 1956 it finally regained the GDP level it had in 1820. In 1980 Mexico’s GDP was about 70% that of China compared to only 7% in 1930 and 2% in 1820.

From 1980 to 2008, Mexico’s growth slowed a bit but still managed a very respectable increase of 2.7% per year which doubled its GDP from $637 billion to $1.334 trillion. This growth rate was better than that of Japan and all other large western economies (tied with Canada). But it significantly lagged behind four large Asian economies: China (up 8.4% per year), India (up 6.0%), South Korea (up 7.3%) and Indonesia (up 4.8%). China’s GDP increased almost ten-fold from 1980 to 2008. In 1980 India’s GDP was less than that of Mexico, but by 2008 it was over twice as large. Mexico’s GDP in 2008 of $1.3 trillion puts it in 11thplace, behind Italy and just ahead of Spain, Canada and South Korea.

Reviewing the entire 108-year period from 1900 to 2008 reveals the dramatically changes that can occur. Some Asian countries, especially China, really struggled for decades early in the century and then expanded extremely rapidly in recent decades. Compared to the other countries, Mexico did extremely well increasing at an average of 3.8% per year from $23 billion in 1900 to $1.3 trillion in 2008, a 57-fold increase. Brazil and Korea did considerably better, averaging 4.9% per year for 180-fold increases. Even the slowest growth country, the UK, grew by a respectable 2.0% per year for over an eight-fold increase since 1900. All major economies did well making the 20thcentury clearly the best century by far in terms of economic growth. The total GDP of 12 countries (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, UK and USA)in the table with available data grew by 2.0% per year from 1900 to 1950 compared to a very impressive 3.8% per year from 1950 to 2008. The second half of the century was much better than the first; this indicates that economic growth is accelerating and accelerating fast. Will this continue in the decades ahead?

 

Mexico’s importance for trans-continental migrations of birds of prey

 Other  2 Responses »
Jul 052012
 

By virtue of its geography, the Gulf coast state of Veracruz is one of the best places in the world to see the annual migration of birds of prey (raptors) from North America to Central and South America.

Between 4 and 6 million birds (eagles, hawks, vultures, falcons, and kites) make this trip each way each year to trade the harsh winter and scarce food in one hemisphere for better conditions in the other hemisphere. The migration south takes place September-November, and the return migration passes overhead in March-April.

Since most raptors are relatively large birds, and they are accompanied by other species such as storks, white pelicans and anhingas, this annual migration is one of the most awesome birding spectacles anywhere in the world. Each passing flock contains tens of thousands, in some cases hundreds of thousands, of individuals.

The raptors fly during daylight and rest overnight. Their New World songbird cousins, who also migrate in vast numbers, prefer to feed and rest during the day and then fly at night. Most songbirds take a direct migration route from the eastern USA to Central and South America, flying directly over the Gulf of Mexico in a “single, epic 18-hour flight”. Raptors, on the other hand, prefer a more leisurely approach, leap-frogging along the coastal plain.

Why do they fly through Veracruz?

The main reasons are:

1. Relief: Mexico’s mountain ranges, especially the Sierra Madre Oriental {Eastern Sierra Madre) and Volcanic Axis, funnel the birds towards the east coast, but the Gulf of Mexico provides a natural barrier preventing the birds from attempting routes further to the east. At its narrowest, this funnel is only 25 km (15 miles) wide.

2. Climate: The wide coastal plain warms up sufficiently to provide ascending thermal “bubbles” which help keep these large birds aloft and minimize  the energy expenditure required to soar and fly large distances. Raptors use the thermals to soar to about 1000 meters (3000 feet) above the ground, before gliding in their desired direction of travel gradually losing height until they pick up another thermal at a height of about 300 meters (1000 feet), repeating the process as often as needed. On a good day, they will cover more than 320 km (200 miles) in this fashion before resting for the night.

3. Biogeography: The varied landscape, vegetation and animal life in habitats ranging from tropical wetlands to temperature forests, offers plenty of potential food sources for the raptors.

This massive migration has been studied since the early 1990s and scientists continue to tag birds today in order to update their estimates of bird populations and of the precise timing and routes involved. An official counts is held each year from 20 August to 20 November, organized by Pronatura Veracruz. The count is held in two locations: Cardel and Chichicaxtle (see map).

The counts have confirmed that Veracruz hosts the most concentrated raptor migration in the world.

One of the major long-term threats to this migration is habitat change in central Veracruz. Pronatura Veracruz sponsors an environmental education program known as “Rivers of Raptors” which tries to address this issue, helping local landowners appreciate the need for watershed protection and for an end to deforestation.

Pronatura’s work with raptors and the local communities is partially funded by ecotourism, and hawk-watching has become an important component of Mexico’s fledgling “ornithological tourism” market. Other key sites in Mexico for birding tourism include the tropical forests of the Yucatán Peninsula and Chiapas, and the San Blas wetlands in the western state of Nayarit.

Map of Central Veracruz

Map of Central Veracruz; all rights reserved. Click map to enlarge

In fact, Mexico is one of the world’s most important countries for birds, home to 1054 species of birds, 98 of them endemic, including 55 globally threatened species. Mexico has no fewer than 145 recognized “Important Bird Areas” (IBAs) of global significance, which between them cover 12% of the national land area (see summary map below).

Important Bird Areas in Mexico [Birdlife.org]

Important Bird Areas in Mexico [Birdlife.org]

Want to read more about the raptors?

Related posts:

 

Is Mexico the world’s 13th or 14th largest country?

 Other  Comments Off on Is Mexico the world’s 13th or 14th largest country?
Jul 022012
 

One would think that with satellite imagery there would be no question concerning the land area of countries. However, when talking about area there are some definitional issues. Are we talking about “land area” or “total area” which includes land area and inland water bodies such as lakes, reservoirs and rivers? This can be important when talking about the relative size of countries.

Without question Russia is the largest with nearly twice the area of the second place country. What are the second, third and fourth place countries? If we are talking about “land area”, excluding inland waters, then China is second (9.570 million square kilometers), the USA is third (9.162m sq km) and Canada is fourth (9.094m sq km). However, when inland waters are included to get “total area” then Canada is second (9.985m sq km), China is third (9.597m sq km) and the USA is fourth (9.526m sq km). Generally “total area” is the measure used to compare the geographic areas of countries (see table).

Total area of the world’s largest countries (millions of square kilometers)

RankCountryArea (millions of sq. km)RankCountryArea (millions of sq. km)
1Russia17.09811Congo2.345
2Canada9.98512Saudi Arabia2.150
3China9.59713Mexico1.964
4USA9.52614Indonesia1.911
5Brazil8.51515Sudan (post 2011)1.861
6Australia7.69216Libya1.759
7India3.16617Iran1.648
8Argentina2.78018Mongolia1.564
9Kazakhstan2.72519Peru1.285
10Algeria2.381

Generally we might expect a country’s geographic area rank to stay the same from year to year and even decade to decade. However, this is not the case. Prior to 1991 Mexico was considered the world’s 13th largest country. However with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 2011, Kazakhstan became an independent country ranked 9th in total area. This pushed Mexico down to 14th.

When South Sudan split away from Sudan in mid 2011, the area of “new” Sudan was reduced by over 25%. This dropped Sudan from 10th to 15th on the list of the world’s largest countries. It also moved Mexico from 14th back up to 13th place on the list. Such political changes can have enormous impact on the size of countries. For example, prior to 1951 when Tibet was considered an independent country, the size of China was an eighth smaller than it is now. Mexico before 1846 was almost twice its current size and perhaps the fifth largest independent country behind only Russia, China, the USA and Brazil.

Another issue concerns whether Greenland (2.166m sq km)  is counted as a country. While Greenland is officially a dependency of Denmark it has been moving toward independence. In 1985 it left the European Economic Community (EEC) while Denmark remained in the EEC. Greenland has its own Parliament and Prime Minister; in June 2009 Greenland assumed self-determination with Greenlandic as its sole official language. If/when Greenland becomes officially an independent “country” it will be the world’s 12th largest, bumping Mexico back into 14th place. Until this happens, Mexico remains the world’s 13th largest country.

The changes in rank discussed above came about for political reasons. They did not involve any physical changes. With global warming and rising sea levels some countries will actually become geographically smaller. However these changes will not affect the area ranking of the 20 largest countries for at least the next hundred years.

Related posts:

 

Mexico’s GDP and position among the world’s largest economies, 1800 to 1900

 Other  Comments Off on Mexico’s GDP and position among the world’s largest economies, 1800 to 1900
Jun 302012
 

Comparing the historical sizes of national economies is extremely challenging. This post relies on data from Gapminder which has attempted to do this for all the countries in the world for the period since 1800. Gapminder’s approach relies on first obtaining for each country historical population size and Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDPpc; for more details, see Standard of living in Mexico since 1800: some international comparisons) and then multiplying these to obtain the GDP. To obtain historical measures of population and GDPpc, Gapminder relies on quantitative and qualitative data from hundreds of official and unofficial documents and a number of carefully documented assumptions. In some cases they admit that some of their numbers for years before 1900 are essentially well-educated “guesstimates”. [Full details are given in the pdf file “Documentation for GDP per capita by purchasing power parities“.]

Though the Gapminder data have limitations, they are about the best source for comparing the GDP growth of Mexico since 1800 with that of other large economies. The Gapminder GDPpc data are adjusted for inflation by using constant 2005 US dollars. They are also based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) which measures total goods and services produced by an economy independent of exchange rates.

During the 19th century Mexico’s total GDP grew at a relatively unimpressive 1.3% per year, which was only about 0.5% above population growth. In 1800, Mexico’s estimated GDP was just over $6 billion, ranking it second in the Americas. Though this was almost nine times the GDP of Canada, and 3.6 times that of Brazil, it was less than that of Nigeria and half that of the USA. China had by far the largest GDP in 1800 at about $290 billion, more than three times the GDP of second place India, over seven times that of Japan and the large European countries (France, Germany and the UK) and over 20 times that of the USA. The table below shows the estimated GDP levels from 1800 to 1900 for some of the world’s current largest economies.

Estimated total GDP of large economies, 1800 to 1900

(GDP in billions of constant 2005 US dollars based on Purchasing Power Parity)

Country1800182018701900Growth/yr, 1800-1900
Brazil1.72.47.010.31.8%
Canada0.71.19.323.13.6%
China286.9328.8279.1320.90.1%
France38.447.1113.5167.31.5%
Germany36.048.5113.2254.72.0%
India91.098.2118.8nana
Indonesia8.39.316.026.31.2%
Italy23.629.344.671.61.1%
Japan31.133.639.676.60.9%
MEXICO6.17.39.123.31.3%
Russia25.626.2nanana
UK34.945.4151.3240.12.0%
USA12.720.1261.3506.03.8%

From 1800 to 1820, just before gaining independence, the Mexican economy grew to $7.3 billion at a sluggish rate of about 0.9% per year. In contrast, Canada and the USA expanded at around 2.3% per year while Brazil’s GDP went up about 1.9% per year. Germany, France, UK and Italy grew at roughly 1.0% to 1.5% per year. The major Asian countries–China, India, Japan and Indonesia–only managed 0.4% to 0.7% per year. The Russian economy essentially stagnated during the 20 year period. China maintained the top position with over three times the GDP of India and over six times those of the large European economies.

By 1870, Mexico’s GDP had inched up over $9 billion growing rather slowly at just over 0.4% per year since 1820; this was slower than the population growth rate. While Mexico’s growth rate was better than the three biggest Asian economies, it severely lagged behind its northern neighbors which grew very rapidly based on industrialization and immigration. Canada’s economy expanded by an impressive 4.4% per year and edged past Mexico. The USA did almost as well at 4.2% per year to move into second place behind China, which declined by a surprising 0.3% per year over the fifty year period. (In China both GDPpc and population declined from 1820 to 1870.)

Brazil grew by a solid 2.1% per year and closed the gap with Mexico. The three largest European economies were also industrializing and grew by roughly 1.7% to 2.0% per year, but they were still overtaken by the USA. While Indonesia’s GDP expanded by about 1.1% per year, growth rates for Japan and India were less than 0.4% per year.

From 1870 to 1900, under the Porifiro Diaz regime, Mexico’s economy grew rapidly at about 3.2% per year up to $23.3 billion. This put Mexico just ahead of Canada which grew slightly more slowly at roughly 3.1% per year. Mexico’s estimated GDP in 1900 was just behind that of Indonesia but over twice that of Brazil which slowed to 1.3% per year. The USA sped ahead at 3.9%. In the early 1880s it became the world’s largest economy by overtaking China which grew slowly at less than 0.5% per year. In 1900 China’s estimated GDP was actually less than it had been 80 years earlier in 1820. By 1900 the USA’s estimated GDP was over $500 billion, about 22 times that of Mexico. Germany grew at an impressive 2.7% per year becoming Europe’s largest economy by moving past the UK which grew at 2.2%, about the same rate as Japan. Growth in France and Italy was significantly slower.

During the full 19th century, Mexico almost quadrupled its GDP but its overall economic performance was fair at best. Its growth rate of just over 1.3% per year was better than the Asian countries which performed poorly during the century. The USA registered a very impressive 3.8% growth per year resulting in a fortyfold GDP increase. Canada was a close second with 3.6% per year and a 34-fold increase. Germany and the UK had seven-fold increases with growth rates near 2.0%, followed by Brazil at 1.8% growth per year. France followed with growth averaging just under1.5% per year. Though these Gapminder GDP levels have some limitations, they do give a pretty good indication of relative historical economic sizes and growth rates.

Mexico’s economic performance was much better in the 20thcentury as was that of all major world countries. A future post will focus on economic growth since 1900.

 

Ever wondered how ropes are made? A photo essay about Villa Progreso, Querétaro

 Other  Comments Off on Ever wondered how ropes are made? A photo essay about Villa Progreso, Querétaro
Jun 282012
 

This account of the rope-making industry in the small village of Villa Progreso in the state of Querétaro, is based on information collected during numerous student interviews conducted in the village in the 1980s.

Villa Progreso in the 1980s

Preparing to start. Rope-maker starts to twist the strands.

Preparing to start. Rope-maker starts to twist the strands.

Villa Progreso is nestled in the hills at the end of a road, east of the town of Ezequiel Montes. The rocky soil is not very fertile, and water is in short supply, so agricultural production is limited, though maguey plants grow well here, even when neglected. The local maguey plants used to supply the raw material for rope-making, the main “secondary” occupation in the village.

However, as the village’s population increased, and as more and more families became dependent on rope-making, another maguey product, ixtle de henequen (henequen fibers), had to be trucked in as the raw material from other states, in particular from Yucatán and Tamaulipas.

The trucks are either rented by the villagers or supplied by the village “distributors” (who eventually buy the finished ropes from the village). About 40 metric tons of henequen are needed each week to keep the rope-makers supplied.

In the 1980s (all monetary figures are from that time), raw henequen was bought by the distributors for about 50 pesos a kilo, and then resold to the villagers at about 95 pesos a kilo. The distributors are “middle men” who, in the words of one student, “make a lot of money doing nothing” and “live in the largest, most expensive homes in the village.”

Once the villagers have purchased a supply of henequen, they perform the various tasks to turn it into ropes. The first step is to “comb” it to make fine fibers and to clean the henequen.

The fibers are then shaken in the wind to further separate them before being stored in a large sack. The ends of the top fibers are then tied onto three wires (see first photo). These wires are made to spin by a wheel.

This is often an old bicycle wheel. Some villagers turn the wheel themselves as they walk backwards feeding fibers onto the wires, via a rope that is wound over the wheel; others rely on children or family members to turn the wheel.

The rope gets longer... and thicker...

The rope gets longer… and thicker…

As the person carrying the sack walks backwards, they continue to feed the three strands of fiber, gradually creating three fine strands of rope. The spinning process is repeated, using the fine strands as the basis, and the rope can be made as thick as you like by successive spins.

The entire family helps

The entire family helps (note cloth tied as sunshade)

The main output from this system is strands of rope of various thicknesses, used for things such as clothes lines. Short strands of henequen are not wasted, but formed into natural cleaning pads.

The work is done by the entire family. One worker pointed out that “it is better to have a large family as like this all can work for each other”. Any workers who have no family have to hire extra workers and are unlikely to make any profit.

On a good day, one family can produce about 72 ropes, each about 5 meters long, which can be sold for around 1800 pesos. However, it takes about 1 kilo of henequen to make 7 or 8 ropes, so the family only makes about 800 pesos [about 5 dollars at the then exchange rate] a day after they have paid for the “raw” henequen. The average family size, including children, in the village was between 5 and 6 individuals. 800 pesos a day is not much income to support the entire family!

The finished ropes are bought by the distributors, who in turn sell it on to other distributors in other places, and so on. The main markets are Mexico City, where about 90% of these ropes are eventually sold.

The workers in the rope-making industry in Villa Progreso have tried to organize themselves, but with only limited success. For example, three years before the interviews, they had formed a cooperative, but decided to quit the group when they realized that the managers of the cooperative also wanted part of the profits. So, at the time of the interviews, they had returned to working independently without any outside help.

Sales of rope fluctuate with the economy, and also seasonally, with the highest demand during the rainy season, partly because these natural fiber ropes tend to disintegrate more quickly during damp conditions.

The final stage, with finished ropes

The final stage, with finished ropes

As one student concluded, “It is very visible here how the middle men (distributors) take advantage of the cheap labor available and make a large profit by only buying and selling raw materials and by buying and selling finished products. thus, the distributors are getting richer by exploiting the workers and the workers are remaining as poor or getting poorer than before. The workers have been pulled into a situation that they can not easily escape from.”

How have things changed since the 1980s?

Sadly, I haven’t had the chance to return to Villa Progreso since then, but things appear to have changed considerably. Newspaper accounts such as “Artesanos dan nuevo aire al ixtle” (“Artisans give new life to Ixtle”), which appeared in the national daily El Universal in 2008, suggest that the residents of Villa Progreso are now emerging from some very hard times.

The price of natural fiber ropes could not compete with cheaper plastic alternatives and the rope-making industry went into near-terminal decline. Many of the able-bodied young men left to look for work north of the border. A small number (mainly the older inhabitants) remained home and continued to make ropes by hand for the limited market that remained for their products.

Now, though, a new industry has arisen based on the henequen fibers (usually known simply as ixtle). Enterprising villagers have turned their hands to fashioning nativity scenes and decorative items out of ixtle. Isaías Mendoza Guzmán is described in the article as making pieces that are more than two meters tall and take three months to complete, clearly indicating a high level of sophistication in the final product.

Villa Progreso now holds an Ixtle and Nopal Fair (Feria del Ixtle y el Nopal) towards the end of April each year in the La Canoa “ecotourism park”.

Villa Progreso is by no means the only place in Mexico where rope-making is an important activity. Similar rope-making methods are used elsewhere in Mexico. For example, John Pint describes in “Mexican artisans of Lake Cajititlán” how rodeo-quality lariats are made in the village of San Miguel Cuyutlán, near Guadalajara. Demand for these high-end products apparently remains strong.

Photo credit:

All photos in this post are by Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

How to get there:

Villa Progreso is about 10 km east of the town of Ezequiel Montes in Querétaro. From Mexico City, take the Querétaro highway (Hwy 57D) north-west to San Juan del Río. Then take Highway 120 past Tequisquiapan to Ezequiel Montes. Once in the town, turn right for the road to Villa Progreso. Allow 2.0 to 2.5 hours for the drive.

Related posts about the same general area:

 

Founder of Grupo Ecológico Sierra Gorda honored by National Geographic

 Mexico's geography in the Press  Comments Off on Founder of Grupo Ecológico Sierra Gorda honored by National Geographic
Jun 252012
 

Mexican environmentalist Martha “Pati” Isabel Ruíz Corzo has been awarded the 2012 National Geographic/Buffett Award for Conservation Leadership in Latin America.

The press release from the National Geographic summarizes a lifetime’s dedication to the Sierra Gorda region of the state of Querétaro:

Martha “Pati” Isabel Ruiz Corzo founded Grupo Ecológico Sierra Gorda (GESG), a local grassroots organization, with her husband and local residents in 1987 to rescue the Sierra Gorda bioregion in Mexico from the destruction of unregulated development. GESG has set the standard in Mexico for a “conservation economy,” establishing a new paradigm in natural protected area management with widespread local community participation.

GESG is a living model of community-based conservation management. Thanks largely to GESG’s efforts and Ruiz Corzo’s leadership, the Sierra Gorda — comprising a third of Mexico’s Querétaro State and considered the area with the most ecosystem diversity in Mexico — is now a UNESCO and federal Biosphere Reserve and is the largest federal protected area with participatory management in the world. It spans 1 million acres, and its 35,000 residents own 97 percent of the Reserve’s territory.

Ruiz Corzo’s efforts to include local communities in the management of the Reserve make her a pioneer in the conservation field. Her leadership has created opportunities for rural, low-income communities in the areas of ecotourism, reforestation, soil restoration, ecological livestock management and other profitable microenterprises.

Over the past 25 years, GESG has organized environmental education for the community members, who regularly take part in clean-up campaigns, solid waste management, soil restoration and other conservation activities. Community volunteers operate 115 recycling centers. Thanks to the residents’ stewardship of the Reserve, more than 13,000 hectares of regenerated forest and woodland has been recovered over 15 years.

Ruiz Corzo and her team have developed online and on-site courses that allow others to replicate the GESG model, which is now being applied beyond the borders of Mexico.

Ruiz Corzo also has pioneered the concept of valuing the “natural capital” of the region — the Sierra Gorda has been validated by the Rainforest Alliance and is the first forest carbon project to achieve this milestone in Mexico.

The Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve covers 383,567 hectares of the state of Querétaro. Eleven core protected areas have a combined area of 24,803 hectares with 358,764-hectares of buffer zone surrounding them. The reserve is home to about 100,000 people (including cattle ranchers, seasonal farmers and forestry workers) living in 638 settlements in five municipalities:

  • Jalpan de Serra
  • Arroyo Seco
  • Landa de Matamoros
  • Pinal de Amoles
  • Peñamiller

The reserve is ecologically diverse, with a large number of distinct ecosystems; it is one of the most biodiverse areas in central Mexico. The major reason for such diversity is that the reserve straddles the Nearctic and Neotropical bio-regions. It ranges in altitude from 300 meters above sea level to more than 3,000 meters. The reserve has 14 distinct vegetation types, home to 6 feline species (including the jaguar) and 334 bird species.

Forestry is controlled, but illegal logging persists, especially on the fringes of the reserve.

Out-migration has reduced population pressures on the reserve, and remittances have helped raise household incomes, so decreasing local demand for wood as fuel in favor of gas.

Related posts:

Standard of living in Mexico since 1800: some international comparisons

 Other  Comments Off on Standard of living in Mexico since 1800: some international comparisons
Jun 232012
 

Comparing historical standards of living for different countries over long periods of time is extremely challenging. This post relies on data from Gapminder which has attempted to do this for all countries in the world since 1800. Their approach relies on quantitative and qualitative data from hundreds of references and a number of carefully documented assumptions. They obtained input from a very wide range of official and unofficial documents and combined these to come up with their best estimates. In some cases they admit that some of their numbers for years before 1950 are essentially well-educated “guesstimates”. [For more details, see “Documentation for GDP per capita by purchasing power parities” (pdf file).]

Though the Gapminder data have some limitations, they are about the best source for comparing standards of living in Mexico since 1800 with a number of other middle income countries. The measure of standard of living used in this post is the Gapminder indicator of Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDPpc) at constant 2005 US dollars based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) which measures total goods and services produced by an economy independent of exchange rates.

The data indicate that Mexico’s GDPpc has grown over eleven-fold since 1800 from over $1,000 to almost $12,000. This increase sounds very impressive but actually represents an average annual increase of under 1.2% per year. The eleven-fold increase demonstrates the power of compounding. The growth has not been constant. During the 19thcentury Mexico’s GDPpc actually decreased slightly up until 1870, but then expanded relatively rapidly under the Porfirio Diaz regime, almost doubling between 1870 and 1900. For the century as a whole it increased an average of about 0.5% per year. The rate of increase more than doubled during the first half of the 20th century to 1.2%. It doubled again to 2.5% during the second half of the 20th century, which included the so-called “Mexican Miracle”, which started in the 1940s. After 2000, as a result of the very severe recession in the USA, Mexico’s growth slowed to 0.6% per year for the period 2000-2011. Growth is expected to increase significantly during the present decade.

Income growth in Mexico since 1800 (Gapminder data) 

(Incomes values are at constant 2005 US dollars based on Purchasing Power Parity)

Country18001900195020002011Growth/yr, 1800-2011
Argentina8724,0116,32310,77114,5951.3%
Brazil5095981,9047,81910,1921.4%
Chile7022,3063,61210,10613,6111.4%
China9868024272,7847,9311.0%
Cuba1,124na4,9585,8249,4691.0%
India5635855881,6072,9720.8%
Indonesia5146046662,6273,9991.0%
Iran7501,3472,8168,26011,6661.3%
South Korea59667070815,69225,2561.8%
MEXICO1,0541,7223,07410,35911,7541.2%
Peru6979963,2895,7058,4201.2%
Russia824nana7,79214,3181.4%
South Africa759na4,7667,3349,2841.2%

The table compares the 1800 to 2011 GDPpc of Mexico with 12 other middle and low income countries. In 1800, Mexico was ahead of all other countries in the table except Cuba. By 1900, Argentina had moved past and its GDPpc was more than double that of Mexico. Argentina’s GDPpc growth rate for the 19thcentury was over three times that of Mexico. Chile also moved ahead of Mexico. On the other hand, Brazil grew very slowly at only about 0.2% per year during the century; it actually declined between 1870 and 2000. By 1900, its GDPpc was about equal to that of India and a third that of Mexico.

In 1800, China’s GDPpc trailed Mexico by only about 6.5%; but declined by about 0.2% per year during the 19thcentury when China’s economy seriously stagnated as a result of opium wars and numerous internal rebellions which took from 20 to 40 million lives. By 1900, China’s GDPpc was less than half that of Mexico. India, South Korea and Indonesia also grew very slowly during the century. Their GDPpcs went from about half that of Mexico to about a third. There was no Asian economic miracle during the 19th century.

By 1950, Mexico trailed Argentina, Chile, Peru, Cuba and South Africa. From 1900 to 1950, the GDPpc of Mexico grew by a respectable 1.2% per year; however Peru and Brazil grew twice as fast. At the other end, the Asian countries did rather poorly. For example, China’s GDPpc declined by an amazing 1.2% per year from 1900 to 1950, when the country suffered from competing warlords, a protracted civil war, and Japanese invasion. By 1950, China’s GDPpc was less than half of what it had been in 1800 and also was behind India and less than a seventh that of Mexico. From 1900 to 1950, India’s GDPpc grew by only 0.01% per year while Indonesia and South Korea did only marginally better. The mid 20thcentury wars were very damaging to the Asian economies.

By 2000, Mexico had almost caught up with Argentina and had surpassed Chile, Peru, Cuba and South Africa. While Mexico’s growth from 1950 to 2000 of about 2.5% per year was very impressive, Brazil grew even faster at 2.9% per year. South Korea’s GDPpc surged ahead by an amazing 6.4% per year during the second half of the 20th century; it increased over twenty-fold from about $700 to over $15,000. China also grew at a very impressive 3.8% per year posting over a six fold increase. These two countries recovered briskly after their numerous wars and kept moving ahead at a rapid clip.

During the years between 2000 and 2011, Mexico had the worst performance of the countries in the table, growing at only 1.6% per year. China grew over eight times faster than Mexico; India and Russia grew almost five times faster. The growth rates of the other Latin American countries in the table – Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Cuba and Peru – were over twice that of Mexico. However, the Mexican economy is closely tied to the USA where GDPpc grew less than half as fast as Mexico. As mentioned previously, Mexico is expected to grow briskly during the rest of this decade.

It is interesting to look over the full 211 year period from 1800 to 2011. Interestingly throughout the whole period the GDPpc of Iran slightly trailed that of Mexico. The gap between these two countries closed a bit during the 211 year period. As a result of its rapid surge in recent decades, South Korea grew the fastest at 1.8% per year; it moved from one of the poorest in 1800 to the richest in the table. Other solid growth rates were posted by Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Iran and Russia. The slowest growth occurred in India, at only 0.8% per year, followed by Indonesia and China at slightly less than 1.0% per year. However, these Asian countries are now growing considerably faster than the other countries in the table. Looking at income growth over the last two hundred years puts the current situation in perspective. It is interesting to speculate on what the next two hundred years will bring, something we will return to in future posts.

Related posts:

Rocks and relief fieldtrip: Tequisquiapan and the Peña de Bernal

 Other, Teaching ideas  Comments Off on Rocks and relief fieldtrip: Tequisquiapan and the Peña de Bernal
Jun 212012
 

There is a close connection between geology and relief in many parts of Mexico. In this post we describe a one-day fieldwork excursion in the Tequisquiapan area of the central state of Querétaro that looks at this connection. The fieldwork is suitable for high school students but could easily be extended to provide challenges for college/university students.

The fieldwork starts with a fieldsketch from near Tequisquiapan. Any suitable vantage point will do, provided it offers a clear view northwards to the very distinctive Peña de Bernal (seen in the background of the photo below). At this point, a simple line sketch should suffice to help students identify the following four different kinds of terrain:

  • flat or gently sloping plain, used for cultivation
  • low hills, with gently sloping sides, which look to be covered in bushes and cacti [scrub vegetation]
  • high mountains, with steeper slopes, also with no obvious signs of cultivation
  • the Peña de Bernal itself, a distinctive monolith with exceptionally steep sides

There is no need to identify any rocks or use any geological terms (students can add appropriate labels later!). Engage the students in a discussion about why there might be four different kinds of relief visible in this area, and how their ideas or hypotheses could be investigated further. Conclude the discussion by explaining that they are now going to look for evidence related to the idea that these four different kinds of relief are connected to significant differences in geology.

View looking north from "Las Cruces" near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

View looking north from "Las Cruces" near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

The next stop is a small roadside quarry on the flat area. The most accessible quarry many years ago was located a short distance south of Tequisquiapan on the east side of the highway, but any quarry on the flat land will serve to reveal the rocks that form the plain.

Roadside quarry, near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved

Roadside quarry, near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved

[Warning: Ensure that you park off the highway; when examining the rock in the quarry, avoid any overhanging sections, and do not do anything to cause slope instability or collapse].

The rocks in the quarry are in layers (sedimentary) and very distinctive. The individual particles of the rock are rough to the touch and sand-sized, so this is some kind of sandstone.

Some layers are more or less horizontal, but in places successive layers are laid down at a much steeper angle. This is “current bedding” and indicates that the rocks were formed by water, perhaps where a river entered a lake. The individual particles in the rock are not well-rounded, so have not traveled all that far.

Within each major layer, the material shows signs of sorting, with fine material sitting on top of coarse material. In some places, the sandstone contains small pebbles, so this rock is a sandstone conglomerate. Small casts of fossil shells can be seen in places, further suggesting it is a sedimentary rock deposited in a former lake.

A very thin white layer is present (at about head height in the photo). This layer is totally different to the sandstone conglomerate. It is fine material that has been compacted. Given the volcanic history of central Mexico, this is almost certainly a thin layer of volcanic ash that covered older rocks before being covered in turn by the next layer of sediments.

With some guidance, students should be able to work most of this out for themselves! The last stage at this stop is to ask why this rock forms the flat land in the area, rather than the hills. (Answer: softer, weaker, less resistant, easier to erode, etc).

The next stop is to take a look at the rock forming the low hills. The highway between Tequisquiapan and Ezequiel Montes (see map) conveniently cuts through a low ridge at San Agustín. This affords an opportunity to take a close look at the rock forming that ridge. [Warning: Ensure that you find a safe parking spot, and take every precaution, since traffic along this highway can be heavy and very fast-moving]

The rock at San Agustín is darker and much harder than the rock in the quarry. It has clear crystals in it, apparently arranged haphazardly. From its color (grey) and grainsize (fine), it is a rhyolite [a fine grained, acid igneous rock].  It is far more difficult to erode than the sandstone on the plain, so it forms upstanding ridges and low hills in the landscape.

From San Agustín, drive through Ezequiel Montes and on to the town of Bernal, one of Mexico’s “Magic Towns“. The next part is the most physically-challenging part of the excursion since it is necessary to climb at least part-way up the Peña de Bernal! [Warning: this is very steep in places, and climbing beyond the mid-way “chapel” is definitely not recommended]. Examining the rocks of the Peña de Bernal reveals that they are lighter in color than the rhyolite and fine-grained, but with larger crystals (phenocrysts) in some places. This rock must have cooled very slowly (or the phenocrysts would not have had chance to form) and this is an intrusive igneous rock known as microgranite. Eagle-eyed students should also find some other rocks while climbing the Peña de Bernal. In places, it is possible to find good specimens of a very hard, banded metamorphic rock that was formed when heat and/or pressure transformed pre-existing rocks. The banded rock is a gneiss [pronounced “nice”].

The presence of intrusive igneous rocks (formed underground) together with metamorphic rocks strongly suggest that the Peña de Bernal is an example of a volcanic plug. It represents the central part (and all that now remains) of a former volcano, whose sides, presumably composed of ashes and lava, have long since eroded away.

Conclusion:

After students have had chance to work most of this out for themselves, a look at the local geological map should confirm that their deductions are reasonable. As can be seen on the map below, the flat area is indeed an alluvial plain (sandstone), with low rhyolite hills and ridges in places, and higher rhyolite mountains in the background, with the distinctive Peña de Bernal made of igneous and metamorphic rocks at the northern edge of the map.

In this particular part of Mexico, as in many other areas, the link between geology and relief is very strong! Happy exploring!

Sketch map, Geology of the Tequisquiapan area

Sketch map, Geology of the Tequisquiapan area; click to enlarge

Related posts:

Cancellation of controversial Cabo Cortés mega-resort project in Mexico

 Mexico's geography in the Press  1 Response »
Jun 172012
 

Good news for Mexico’s coastline! The controversial Cabo Cortés mega-resort project in Baja California Sur, Mexico, has been cancelled, with President Felipe Calderón announcing that in “such an important area for the Gulf of California and the country … we should all be absolutely certain that [the project] will not cause irreversible harm”. However, Calderón did not rule out the possibility that a revised, more sustainable project might meet government approval.

As detailed in several previous geo-mexico.com posts, the Cabo Cortés project had been opposed by local residents, fishermen, environmental groups including Greenpeace and many academics:

The president of the Mexican Center for Environmental Law, Gustavo Alanis, hailed the government’s decision as “a triumph for conservation, environmental protection and nature.” He said that it is “a message in favor of legality and the rule of law in the environmental sphere” that would make clear to potential investors that they are welcomed as long as they respect nature and comply with existing environmental laws.

The geography of Tequisquiapan, a spa town in the state of Querétaro

 Other  Comments Off on The geography of Tequisquiapan, a spa town in the state of Querétaro
Jun 142012
 

The town of Tequisquiapan is an excellent place for geographers!

For one thing, it has a monument claiming to be The geographic center of Mexico. While this is hotly disputed, it is a fun place to start!

Tequisquiapan is an attractive spa town which has many hotels, restaurants and stores. It has grown substantially in recent years, attracting former Mexico City dwellers tired of the traffic congestion, smog and challenges of living in the big city. Mid-week, Tequisquiapan is largely deserted, with the air of a ghost town, waiting for revival. Revival occurs every weekend as the wealthier residents of Mexico City flee the city in search of clean air and blue skies. The town’s restaurants begin to fill and the discos gear up for action lasting into the early hours. Many of the weekenders now own second homes in Tequisquiapan.

Upmarket homes in Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved

Upmarket homes in Tequisquiapan

Why is Tequisquiapan such an attractive choice for them? The key attractions (see Tequisquiapan, Querétaro: a delightful spa town)  are:

  • a small town atmosphere, with winding cobblestone streets, lined by attractive and neatly kept one-story buildings
  • the town boasts a dozen or more “three star” or better hotels, all with thermal swimming pools, and a multitude of handicraft shops and galleries
  • an 18-hole golf course, open to the public
  • a specialist handicrafts market, a lively permanent market and, on weekends, numerous small street stalls selling precious stones and jewelry (for enticing pictures, see Tequisquiapan, provincial Mexican charm  on MexConnect.com)
  • the town is small enough to walk around and bathed in sunshine virtually all year round
  • an annual cheese and wine festival in early summer
  • it is less than two hours by car from Mexico City
Annotated Google Earth image of Tequisquiapan area

Annotated Google Earth image of Tequisquiapan area

Anyone interested in urban geography will find that Tequisquiapan’s layout is quite unusual (for Mexico).  Some streets in the center of the town wander aimlessly rather than conforming to the traditional Mexican grid pattern. By way of comparison, a newer area of settlement across the highway (see image above) exhibits perfect grid pattern.

Bougainvillea-covered wall in Tequisquiapan

Behind the stone walls of the many fine hotels, the spa waters of Tequisquiapan offer their temptation. Why hike the streets when you can laze by a pool? The water is tepid rather than hot but very welcome, given the arid heat that envelops this area most of the year.

Towards the south-east, the town has grown around existing farmland, so homes surround an undeveloped core of agricultural land.

To the north, a former hacienda (Hacienda Grande) has been converted into a residential area built around a golf course. The irrigated fairways are strikingly visible on Google Earth.

Tequisquiapan is one of the few Mexican towns of its size and age to have a gated community in the downtown core, immediately off the main plaza.

Physical geographers won’t be disappointed either. Also near the center, upmarket houses have been built on the neck of a cut-off meander which has left an “island” with the river on either side. Floods on this river are now unlikely since it is controlled by the Centenario dam which has created a reservoir, Presa el Centenario, used for water sports.

The flat valley floor around Tequisquiapan has become a rich farming area, particularly well known for its vineyards. A network of aqueducts and irrigation channels helps farmers overcome the vagaries of the annual dry season.

 

Aqueduct near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

Aqueduct near Tequisquiapan

The fact that this area has a pronounced dry season means that most local streams are intermittent; they run only for short periods during and immediately after the rainy season. The rest of the year, their channels are dry, providing a perfect opportunity for physical geographers to walk along them studying their features and landforms, without even getting their feet wet!

Irrigation channel near Tequisquiapan. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

Irrigation channel near Tequisquiapan

On balance, given all these points of geographical interest, maybe Tequisquiapan is right to call itself the “geographic center” of Mexico after all!

Photos:

All photos in this post are by Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

Avocado exports have tripled in five years but Mexico’s avocado farmers face a new problem

 Updates to Geo-Mexico  1 Response »
Jun 112012
 

Avocados originated in Mexico and the country remains the world’s leading producer. Farmers in Michoacán (where 92% of Mexico’s avocados are grown) harvested 1.1 million tons of avocados in the 2010-2011 harvest season, 40% of the world total. About 125,000 hectares, or 11.5% of all agricultural land in Michoacán, is currently under avocado orchards.

Avocado-growing states in Mexico.

Avocado-growing states in Mexico

The value of avocado exports has tripled over the past five years. Exports in 2011 totaled almost 400,000 metric tons and were worth 990 million dollars, compared to 338 million dollars in 2006. The main export markets are the USA (80%), Japan (9%) and Canada (6%).

Part of the reason for strong exports is due to an increased demand from US consumers but it is also due to new menus in fast food chains. The addition of avocados in 2010-11 to the menus of Burger King and Subway restaurants has since been followed by competitors such as Wendy’s, so US demand for avocados should continue to grow.

Avocado growing has not been entirely plain sailing in recent years. Growers organizations have reported that costs of the inputs of water, fertilizers and electricity required for avocado growing have all risen sharply.

Avocado growers are also having to confront a relatively new challenge that increases the cost of doing business. According to an article in Mexico City daily La Jornada, growers are now being forced to pay “protection money” to criminal gangs operating in Michoacan’s avocado-growing zone.

The article claims that avocado producers in 13 municipalities in the state of Michoacán face almost daily demands for “protection” payments if they are to continue farming and avoid kidnappings and other forms of violence. It goes on to say that many smaller growers near Uruapan, Zitácuaro and Ziracuarétiro have chosen to rent out or sell their avocado orchards and move away from the area entirely.

In addition, one of the criminal groups is demanding up to $1,000 pesos (75 dollars) a plant for every avocado plant purchased from specialist nurseries. Several different groups are alleged to be involved. Avocado packers and truck drivers are also made to pay “fees” which can amount to between 40% and 60% of their normal income, according to anonymous representatives of national organizations speaking to the press.

The situation affects avocado growers in many places, including Los Reyes, Uruapan, Salvador Escalante, Acuitzio, Tacámbaro, Ario, Teretán, Apatzingán, Tacíntaro, Nuevo Parangaricutiro, Peribán, Tingüindín and Zitácuaro.

At one time, there were as many as 22,000 avocado growers, half of them working only small orchards. The protection rackets have meant that new plantings have become the preserve of a relatively small number of larger farms, and it is currently estimated that the total number of growers has shrunk to around 17,500.

Related posts:

Remittances are on the rise

 Updates to Geo-Mexico  Comments Off on Remittances are on the rise
Jun 092012
 

The annual total of remittances sent back to families in Mexico by migrant workers in the USA increased year-on-year to 22.731 billion dollars in 2011, and looks set to rise again this year.

Mexico’s central bank (the Bank of Mexico) recently released figures showing that remittances to Mexico increased in April 2012 by more than 8% compared to the same month a year earlier, bringing the cumulative total for the first four months of this year to 7.4 billion dollars, 6% higher than in the same period in 2011.

These increases in remittance flows come despite increasing evidence that the net flow of migrants leaving Mexico to work in the USA has come to a standstill:  Net migration flow from Mexico to the USA falls close to zero or has possibly reversed.

For more detail about remittances in Mexico, see:

 

Mexico’s geomorphosites: the Peña de Bernal, Querétaro

 Other  1 Response »
Jun 072012
 

The Peña de Bernal, in the central state of Querétaro, is one of Mexico’s most distinctive geomorphosites. Geomorphosites are “landforms that have acquired a scientific, cultural/historical, aesthetic and/or social/economic value due to human perception or exploitation” (Panizza M., 2001). See Geotourism and geomorphosites in Mexico for a brief introduction to the topic.

The Peña de Bernal is a dramatic sight, which only gets more imposing the closer you get. How high is the Peña de Bernal? We are unable to give you a definitive answer (it depends where you start measuring from) but claims of 350 meters (1150 feet) sound about right, assuming we start from the town.

Peña de Bernal. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved

The Peña de Bernal. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

According to its Wikipedia entry, this is the “third tallest monolith in the world”, apparently only exceeded by the Rock of Gibralter and Sugarloaf Mountain in Rio de Janeiro. Others, including Melville King, have described it as the “third largest rock in the world”. These claims may (or may not) be exaggerated, but in reality it is definitely a very steep and tiring climb, even to reach the small chapel that has been built half-way up! The photo below is taken from this chapel, looking out over Bernal and the local farmland and vineyards.

View from the Peña Bernal, with the town of Bernal in the foreground.

View from the Peña de Bernal over the small town of Bernal. Photo: Tony Burton; all rights reserved.

How was the Peña de Bernal formed?

The most likely explanation is that this monolith represents the hardened magma (molten rock) from the central vent of a former volcano. This rock was much more resistant to erosion that the layers of ash and/or lava that formed the volcano’s flanks. Centuries of erosion removed the sides, leaving the resistant core of the volcano exposed as a volcanic neck. We will examine this idea in slightly more detail in a future post.

The town of Bernal

The town of San Sebastián Bernal is also well worth visiting. Having become a magnet for New Age types, it now boasts several decent restaurants, good stores and a range of hotels including high quality “boutique” hotels. Bernal was designated one of Mexico’s “Magic Towns” in 2005. To learn more about the town of Bernal and see some fine photos, we highly recommend Jane Ammeson’s article “The magic of Bernal, Querétaro: wine, opals and historic charm.”

At the Spring Equinox (March 21), the town is invaded by visitors “dressed in long, white robes or gowns, and red neckerchiefs” who come seeking “wisdom, unity, energy and new beginnings”. (Loretta Scott Miller writing in El Ojo del Lago, July 1997).

How to get there:

From Mexico City, take the Querétaro highway (Hwy 57D) north-west to San Juan del Río. Then take Highway 120 past Tequisquiapan as far as the small cross-roads town of Ezequiel Montes. Turn left for about 11 kilometers, then right… and you’re there! Taking this route gives you glimpses of the Peña de Bernal from afar. Allow 2.0 to 2.5 hours for the drive.

Other geomorphosites worth visiting:

Mexico has literally thousands of geomorphosites. Among those described in previous posts are:

 

Connections between the Economic Complexity Index and Mexico’s GDP growth

 Books and resources  4 Responses »
Jun 042012
 

A previous post—How “complex” is the Mexican economy?—discussed The Atlas of Economic Complexity and noted that Mexico’s Economic Complexity Index (ECI) of 1.145 ranked it 20th among 128 countries. ECI indicates a wide range of complex knowledge capabilities related to productive enterprises. Mexico has a very high ECI given its income level; all other countries in the top 20 have significantly higher incomes than Mexico.

According to the Atlas, during the rest of the decade Mexico’s GDP should grow relatively rapidly to catch up with its ECI. Analyses in the Atlas indicate that during the last few decades countries with higher than expected ECIs compared to their income levels experience more rapid economic growth. While this relationship is empirically true, it should be noted that it does not explicitly include other factors thought to be important to economic growth (see Section 4 of the Atlas). Some of these other factors are governance and institutional quality, corruption, political stability, measures of human capital and competitiveness indicators. The Atlas implies that these other factors contribute to and thus are indirectly part of the Economic Complexity Index.

The analysis in the Atlas predicts that Mexico’s annual growth in real per capita GDP will be 3.5% from 2009 to 2020, ranking it 10th in the world in growth rate (see table). (The growth rates for some other countries are given in footnote 1 below.)  Mexico’s annual growth in real per capita GDP is impressive given that its growth was only 0.8% per year for 1999 to 2009, the same as that for the USA. Growth in these two countries was slowed significantly during this period as a result of the very severe recession, the worst since the great depression. This rather slow growth is surprising given that Mexico’s ECI increased from 1998 to 2008 was ranked 30th worldwide. Though the Mexican economy suffered significantly during this period, it continued to develop new productive capabilities and become more complex. This added complexity is expected to generate accelerated economic growth in the current decade.

RankCountry% growth in GDP/person, 1999-2009Expected % growth in GDP/person, 2009-2020, Income/person, 2009Expected income/person, 2020
1China9.64.33,7445,962
2India5.64.31,1921,886
3Thailand3.14.03,8936,023
4Belarus7.94.05,0757,806
5Moldova4.84.01,5162,321
6Zimbabwe449.03.8 - 6.2676?
7Ukraine5.23.72,4683,694
8Bosnia-Herzegovina4.13.64,5256,669
9Panama3.93.67,15510,529
10MEXICO0.83.58,14311,894

The low growth rate of 0.8% per year for 1999 to 2009 represents “real” per capita growth corrected for inflation and population growth. In nominal terms, Mexico’s total GDP growth from 1998 to 2008 was 1.8% per year. It is expected to grow 4.8% per year for 2009 to 2020, which ranks its 22nd in the world, behind numerous poor African countries with rapidly growing populations. Of large or populous world countries, the only ones ranked ahead of Mexico are India (ranked 8th), the Philippines (12th), Egypt (14th), Pakistan (18th) and China (20th).

In summary, the Atlas of Economic Complexity predicts that the Mexican economy will grow very rapidly during the rest of this decade and beyond. Let’s hope that this prediction becomes a reality.

Footnote 1:

For comparison: Indonesia ranked 21st at 3.3%, Pakistan 27th at 3.1%, Guatemala 35th at 3.0%, South Africa 41st at 2.9%, Turkey 43rd at 2.8%, Brazil 48th at 2.7%, Argentina 54th at 2.6%, Russia 59th at 2.6%, USA 91st at 2.0%, Canada 104th at 1.7% and Nigeria 118th at 1.1%.

Source:

Ricardo Hausmann, Cesar Hidalgo, et. al. “The Atlas of Economic Complexity“, The Observatory of Economic Complexity (Harvard HKS/CDI – MIT Media Lab). Retrieved 19 May 2012.

Transit of Venus will be visible from Mexico, 5 June 2012

 Other  Comments Off on Transit of Venus will be visible from Mexico, 5 June 2012
May 312012
 

Next week, clear skies permitting, a Transit of Venus will be visible from all of Mexico (as well as the USA, most of Canada, etc). During a transit of Venus, the planet Venus passes slowly in front of the sun from the perspective of a viewer on Earth.

CAUTION: Never observe the sun directly, even during a transit of Venus, or your eyesight may be permanently damaged. Transit viewers should take similar precautions to those needed to observe an eclipse.

Such events are rare. This will likely be the last chance to see one in your lifetime since the next transit of Venus will be in more than 100 years time!

Map showing areas where transit of Venus is visible

Map showing areas where transit of Venus is visible [Credit: NASA

Back in the eighteenth century, scientists from France anxious to observe the 1769 transit of Venus were forced to seek permission from Spain to join a party of Spanish astronomers setting up a temporary observatory in a Spanish colony which was predicted to offer the best views. These astronomers congregated at a site very near the present-day settlement of San José del Cabo on the southern tip of the Baja California peninsula. A short distance away, a creole astronomer Joaquín Velázquez de León, who had traveled from Mexico City, set up camp to make his own independent observations. Scientific trips at this time were not without their perils; only days after the transit, three members of the Franco-Spanish party, including the two principal astronomers, died after contracting yellow fever.

The next transit of Venus occurred in the year 1874. Mexico has a particular connection to this transit. To observe this event, and take scientific measurements, Mexico’s first ever international scientific expedition was undertaken. A distinguished group of Mexican scientists traveled to Japan to study this event. By the time they returned, they had been all the way around the world.

Mexico has a long history of astronomy. Several indigenous groups, including the Zapotecs in Oaxaca and the Maya in the Yucatán Peninsula undertook sophisticated astronomical observations, enabling the successful prediction, not only of annual events such as the summer solstice, but also of longer-term phenomena such as eclipses. Mexico (admittedly not called that at the time!) hosted one of the earliest international astronomical conferences in the world.

According to some, the Maya predicted that the world will come to an end on 21 December next year. The claims are based on the fact that the current Maya calendar cycle “ends” on that day. The Maya have several simultaneous calendar counts. Each long cycle count, or B’ak’tun, lasts 394.3 years. The very first B’ak’tun began on 11 August 3114 BC, the date when the Maya believe they were created. The 13th B’ak’tun ends on 21 December 2012, hence the concern propagated by panic-mongers.

The Maya themselves don’t seem too worried by these alarmist claims. They worked out years ago that their 14th B’ak’tun cycle will start the next day, 22 December 2012, and run to sometime in 2406. On the other hand, is it just a simple coincidence that on 21 December 2012, at the exact moment of the winter solstice at 23:11 UST, the sun will be precisely aligned with the center of the Milky Way galaxy, as seen from Earth— the first time this has happened for 26,000 years?

Will the claims be proven true? Unlikely, but perhaps we won’t plan to write any posts about the geography of Mexico for publication after 22 December 2012 until we’re absolutely sure…

Need more evidence about the Maya prediction? As a starting-point, try:

How “complex” is the Mexican economy?

 Books and resources  3 Responses »
May 282012
 

In his classic book, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith proposed that division of labor and economic specialization were the keys to increases in productivity and the wealth of nations. While Smith was primarily talking about the degree of specialization within nations, specialization among nations and comparative advantage were also important. Obviously, in the 21st century there is specialization within and among all nations, but some are more specialized or more complex than others. But how can economic complexity be measured?

Fortunately this question is addressed head-on by Ricardo Hausmann, Cesar Hidalgo and their co-researchers in “The Atlas of Economic Complexity“ (Harvard HKS/CDI – MIT Media Lab, 2011). They argue that highly complex economies produce sophisticated products that require a very wide and diverse set of knowledge capabilities. Very few countries have the capabilities to produce such sophisticated products which might include the very specialized equipment and very precise measuring instruments needed to produce highly complex chemicals or pharmaceuticals. Other examples might include the range of knowledge capabilities needed to build a nuclear power plant or space station. Obviously very few nations with very complex economies have these capabilities.

At the other end, a very large number of countries with less complex economies have the range of capabilities needed to produce simple products like basic foods, mineral ores, lumber, garments, shoes, glass, kitchen utensils, candles and furniture.

In producing an atlas that covered a large number of countries, the authors were limited by the availability of data. They decided to use information on exports because the data were available and the range of exports reveal the complexity of an economy. Unfortunately, accurate data are only available on the trade of physical products; they are not available for services which are the dominant sector for modern economies. On the other hand, the sophistication of product exports does a good job of capturing the complexity of economies.

In developing their Economic Complexity Index or ECI, the authors developed a product complexity index based on the number of countries capable of making and exporting specific products as well as the diversity of products exported by specific countries. The Atlas presents ECIs for the 128 countries that had reliable data, populations over 1.2 million and trade over $1 billion.

RankCountryEconomic Complexity IndexIncome/person (2009 US$)
1Japan2.31639,738
2Germany1.98540,670
3Switzerland1.93563,629
4Sweden1.85943,654
5Austria1.80745,562
6Finland1.71544,581
7Singapore1.63936,537
8Czech Republic1.62818,139
9U.K.1.55835,165
10Slovenia1.52323,726
11France1.47341,051
12South Korea1.46917,078
13USA1.44745,989
14Hungary1.43012,868
15Slovak Republic1.37916,176
16Italy1.30835,084
17Denmark1.26755,992
18Ireland1.23151,049
19Israel1.16426,256
20MEXICO1.1458,143

The 20 countries with the highest Economic Complexity Indices are presented in the table, along with their 2009 per capita income. Japan is clearly the most complex economy followed by Germany, Switzerland, Sweden and Austria. The USA is ranked 13th and Canada is 41st. Fourteen of the top 20 countries are European; most are high income, highly industrialized countries. Countries with large natural resource exports tend to rank low in economic complexity. Norway is 33rd, Russia 46th, New Zealand 48th, Brazil 52nd, Saudi Arabia 68th, Australia 79th.

Mexico is ranked 20th which is very impressive since all others in the top 20 have significantly higher incomes. Mexico does very well compared to other large emerging economies: China is 29th; Turkey is 43rd, Russia is 46th, India is 51st, Brazil is 52nd, South Africa is 55th, Argentina is 57th and Indonesia is 61st. Mexico’s economic complexity has grown significantly in the past 50 years. It grew from 0.39 in 1964 to 1.14 in 2008; this increase ranked it 14th of 99 countries. (Countries improving faster than Mexico include: Thailand 2nd, Indonesia 5th, Brazil 7th, and Turkey 10th.) Over 60% of Mexico’s growth occurred between 1998 and 2008 when its ECI jumped from 0.80 to 1.14.

The Atlas argues that countries such as Mexico, with high levels of complexity given their income level, are expected to grow more rapidly in future years. We will explore this topic further in a future post.

Related posts:

 

How important is the fishing industry in Mexico?

 Excerpts from Geo-Mexico  Comments Off on How important is the fishing industry in Mexico?
May 262012
 

The fishing industry now accounts for only 0.24% of gross national product. The relatively shallow waters off the Pacific coast and abundance of plankton in waters cooled by the Californian current make for particularly good fishing in the north-west. Together, Sinaloa (23%) and Sonora (22%) account for about 45% of the national total. Fishing is also economically important in Veracruz (8%), Baja California Sur (6%), Campeche and Baja California (5% each) and Yucatán.

Mexico's fishing fleet

Mexico's fishing fleet

Almost three quarters (72%) of the total annual catch of 1.5 million metric tons is landed at Pacific coast ports such as Guaymas, Mazatlán and Manzanillo. Gulf coast ports like Tampico, Veracruz and Campeche, together with Caribbean coast ports such as Puerto Morelos and Progreso, account for a further 25% of the catch. The remaining 3% comes from inland lakes, rivers and fish farms.

In terms of value, the most important species are shrimp, tuna and sardines. Fresh-water fish farms are becoming more common, with many of them specializing in the production of high value species such as trout and indigenous white fish. Mexicans consume only 13 kg (29 lbs) of fish per person per year on average, considerably less than the equivalent figures for the USA (21 kg), Canada (24 kg) or Spain (44 kg).

Related posts:

 

How does Mexico’s electoral process compare to other countries?

 Other  Comments Off on How does Mexico’s electoral process compare to other countries?
May 232012
 

On 1 July 2012 Mexicans go to the polls to elect a new six year president, a new senate and chamber of deputies. At the same time, voters in some states–Jalisco, Nuevo León, Guanajuato, Querétaro, Sonora, San Luis Potosí, Morelos, Federal District, Campeche and Colima– will cast their ballots in elections for state and local officials.

How free and fair are Mexican elections compared to those in other countries?

Before addressing this question, it is useful to acknowledge that elections in Mexico have improved dramatically in the past two decades, largely as a result of progressive reforms including the establishment of a strong and independent National Elections Commission (Instituto Federal Electoral, IFE). Prior to the late 1990’s one party, PRI (Partido Revolucionario Insititucional, Institutional Revolutionary Party) dominated most elections at the national, state and local level. Starting in 2000, when an opposition party, PAN (PAN or Partido Acción Nacional, National Action Party), won the presidency, elections in Mexico have been quite competitive. In 2006 a third party, PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, Party of the Democratic Revolution), lost the presidency to PAN by less than 0.6% (35.89% to 35.31%). Since 1994 the winner of the presidency has not garnered 50% of the votes, leading some to argue that Mexico should conduct runoffs between the two highest vote-getters.

CountryScoreCountryScoreCountryScore
Uruguay10.00Peru9.17Turkey7.92
Canada9.58MEXICO8.75Indonesia6.92
Chile9.58Argentina8.75Venezuela5.67
India9.58Israel8.75Nigeria5.67
Brazil9.58South Africa8.75Russia3.92
USA9.17Guatemala7.92China0.00
Colombia9.17

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) annually develops a “democracy index” which includes a factor titled “electoral process and pluralism”. Scores on this factor are based on 12 questions concerning the conduct of free, fair and transparent elections open to all groups and all voters as well as the orderly transfer of power to those winning elections. Based on the EIU scores for 2011, countries with the perfect score of ten were Uruguay, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, Australia and New Zealand. Mexico is tied with Argentina, Israel and South Africa, trails Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Peru but is much closer to the top than the bottom (see table). Mexico is a point and a quarter below a perfect ten and almost a point ahead of Guatemala, three ahead of Venezuela and almost five ahead of Russia. China is last with a score of zero along with Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, North Korea, and other authoritarian regimes.

It will be interesting to see how the EIU scores Mexico after the 2012 elections.

 Related posts:

 

How does democracy in Mexico compare to other countries?

 Other  Comments Off on How does democracy in Mexico compare to other countries?
May 192012
 

This is a very important year for Mexico’s democracy. On 1 July 2012 Mexicans will go to the polls to elect a new president, who will hold office for six years, a new Senate and new Chamber of Deputies as well as numerous state and local officials. How does Mexico’s democracy compare with that of other countries?

“Democracy” is a slippery concept; it is not at all easy to define and is very difficult to measure. In the abstract “democracy” is a form of government in which ultimate power is vested in the people or their freely elected representatives. In common usage, democracy implies active civil participation in free and fair elections, effective and efficient governance, basic human and minority rights as well as freedom of religion, expression and organization. Obviously these concepts are not easily measured.

The most widely used measures for international comparisons are provided by Freedom House which relies on experts to rate countries on “Political Rights” and “Civil Liberties” (Freedom in the World 2012). Assessing “political rights” is based on free and fair elections, effective political pluralism and participation as well as government properly functioning in the interest of the electorate. Measuring “civil liberties” investigates freedom of speech, press, assembly and religion, a fair and just legal system, personal autonomy and individual rights, as well as active participation of nongovernmental and labor organizations. The Freedom House process results in measures from one (the highest) to seven (the lowest).

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has also developed a “Democracy Index” based on experts’ ratings and public opinion surveys on five components – electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation and political culture. The EIU process gives each county a score from a high of ten to a low of one  on overall democracy as well as the five components.

CountryFreedom House
Political Rights
1 - 7		Freedom House
Civil Liberties
1 - 7		Economist Index
Democracy Index
10 - 1
Canada119.08
USA118.11
Chile117.54
South Africa227.79
Brazil227.12
Argentina226.84
India237.30
Indonesia236.53
MEXICO336.93
Colombia346.63
Guatemala345.88
Venezuela555.08
Russia653.92
China763.14

Mexican democracy is somewhere in the middle when compared to other countries. The table compares democracy in Mexico with that in selected other countries based on the measures used by Freedom House and the EIU. Mexico was designated as a “flawed democracy” [see note 1] by the EIU in 2011, along with 52 other countries including France, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Indonesia and Ghana. Mexico’s score of 6.93 out of ten ranked it 50th of 167 countries, one ahead of Argentina and a few places behind Brazil. It has made some relative progress since 2008 when it ranked 55th of 167.

In 2012 Freedom House placed Mexico in the highest level of the “partly free” category. In 2010 Mexico was at the bottom of the “free” category; it dropped out of this category because its “political rights” score went 2 to 3, with 1 being the highest. Mexico had maintained a score of 2 from 2000 to 2010, but went to 3 in 2011. Apparently the experts must have noticed deterioration in the electoral process, political pluralism and participation or the functioning of government. The downgrading was probably related in some way to Mexico’s Drug Wars.

In 2010 Freedom House placed Mexico among 35 “Countries at the Crossroads” that are on the way to becoming consolidated democracies, but still have several challenges to overcome. Among these are the legacy of authoritarian rule, a culture which tolerates corruption and impunity, the persistence of private and public monopolies, lack of political accountability and transparency, and perhaps most importantly the growing influence and violence of drug cartels. These all skew the political playing field and undercut democratic progress, the political morale of the electorate, and openness of the media. On the positive side, active participation in recent elections has led to peaceful transitions of power. Civil society is gaining strength. New institutions such as the Federal Electoral Institute and the Federal Institute for Access to Information are making a difference. Significant improvements to the overall political situation will require concentrated efforts over an extended period of time.

It is interesting that according to Freedom House democracy in Mexico has deteriorated since 2008, while the Economist (EIU) perceived an improvement. This difference indicates how difficult and subjective assessments of democracy can be. For example in the table below “partly free” Mexico scores higher on the EIU’s democracy index than either Argentina and Indonesia which are classified as “free” by Freedom House.

Given the very important election being held in Mexico this year, a future post will investigate how Mexico’s electoral processes compare with those in other countries.

Note:

[1] “Flawed democracies”:  “These countries … have free and fair elections and even if there are problems (such as infringements on media freedom), basic civil liberties will be respected. However, there are significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.” Economist Intelligence Unit, “Democracy index 2011: Democracy under stress”, p 31. Democracy Index 2011.

 Related posts:

 

How serious is corruption in Mexico?

 Other  Comments Off on How serious is corruption in Mexico?
May 122012
 

Recent allegations of bribery related to Wal-Mart de México beg two questions:

  • How serious is corruption in Mexico?
  • How does corruption in Mexico compare to that of other countries?

Fortunately for us, these questions have been comprehensively investigated by Transparency International (TI), a global civil society organization dedicated to reducing corruption. TI defines corruption as “abuse of entrusted power for private gain”.

Its recent study, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2011” focuses on “perceptions” because corruption is a hidden activity that is difficult to measure. The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) draws on a wide array of surveys and polls of international experts, business opinion surveys and country residents. It is based on 17 data sources from 13 different institutions. The focus is on bribery, kickbacks and embezzlement involving politicians, public officials and civil servants. Anti-corruption efforts are also considered.

Given the difficulties associated with measuring and interpreting corruption, the CPI has received considerable criticism. (For example, see this Wikipedia entry on  Corruption Perceptions Index). Despite this criticism, the CPI provides a viable approach to comparing corruption in various countries.

According to this index, perceived corruption in Mexico has become considerably worse in the past few years. In terms of freedom from corruption, Mexico’s 2011 score of 3.0 ranks it below the middle, in rank #100 out of 182 countries, tied with 11 other countries including Argentina and Indonesia. It is interesting to note that some individual Asian, African, European and Latin American countries are considerably ahead of Mexico (see table), but others are considerably behind.

CountryRankCountryRankCountryRank
New Zealand1South Africa64Argentina100=
Canada10Italy69=Indonesia100=
UK16Ghana69=Egypt112
Chile22Brazil73Guatemala120
USA24China75Nigeria143=
South Korea43Colombia80Russia143=
Saudi Arabia57India95Venezuela172
Turkey61MEXICO100=Somalia182

Within Latin America, Mexico is far better than Venezuela, Haiti and Paraguay. However, it is way behind Chile, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Brazil. As a regional leader, Mexico should do much better in terms of corruption.

Back in 2008, Mexico’s score of 3.6 placed it significantly above the middle. It was then ahead of Brazil, India, China, Saudi Arabia and Turkey; now it trails these five countries. Why Mexico’s score has dropped significantly since 2008 is not exactly clear, but is probably related to the escalation of the drug wars.

Mexico has signed several multilateral anti-corruption agreements, and recently passed a stiff anti-corruption law. However, legal instruments alone will not reduce corruption in Mexico, according to Emilio Godoy in his article “Tangled Web of Corruption Debilitates Mexico” (IPS, 10 May 2012). What is needed is aggressive government action as well as dramatic cultural changes among public and private sector officials. This will not be easy, given the existing long-established systems based on patronage, nepotism, cronyism and organized crime.

If Mexico is going to continue attracting foreign investment and experience economic and social growth in the years ahead, it will have to do much better with respect to its level of corruption.

Mother and child health in Mexico: how does Mexico compare to the rest of the world?

 Updates to Geo-Mexico  1 Response »
May 102012
 

Linked to Mother’s Day [10 May in Mexico], Save the Children just published their 13th annual report on the“State of the World’s Mothers”.

The report investigates childhood malnutrition and relates it to the well-being of mothers. The focus is on the first 1,000 days from the time of conception to the child’s second birthday. Proper nutrition and health care during these 1,000 days are critically important to brain development and the welfare of the child throughout its lifetime.

Mother and child in a Mexican market

Mother and child in a Mexican market. Photo: Tony Burton.

For decades, development experts have recognized that health, education and economic opportunity of mothers are crucially important to the quality of life of their children. Mothers’ level of education is often the most important factor.

The impacts last for numerous generations. Not only do the children of more educated mothers do better, but their grandchildren and great grandchildren also do better. On the other hand, malnourishment during the first 1,000 days is linked to low education and economic opportunity for the child. It can result in daughters getting pregnant earlier and having less healthy children. This vicious circle can continue for generations.

How does Mexico stack up with other major countries around the world? The results for Mexico are a bit mixed. From 1990 to 2010 Mexico recorded an impressive decrease in malnutrition of 3.1% per year. (The measure of malnutrition used in this comparison was children too short for their age, “stunting”). Mexico has cut malnutrition almost in half (47%) since 1990. This decrease ranks it 11th among the 165 countries analyzed. Much of this progress is associated with Mexico’s Oportunidades Program. The ten countries that did better than Mexico include China (6.3%), Brazil (5.5%), and Vietnam (4.3%). Fifteen countries suffered increases in malnutrition during the 20 year period, including Somalia (6.3%/year), Afghanistan (1.6%/year) and Yemen (1.0%/year).

On the other hand, the study points out that, given its level of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, Mexico’s level of malnutrition is higher than it should be. Other under-performers include the USA, Singapore, India, Indonesia, Guatemala, Peru, South Africa and Venezuela. These countries tend to have very inequitable distributions of income. Surprisingly, Brazil, with one of the worst levels of income inequality, was among the group of countries with lower malnutrition than expected given their GDP per capita. Other over-performers include Chile, Ukraine, China and Vietnam. Obviously, in all countries malnutrition is much worse among the poor.

The study divides the 165 countries into the three Tiers used by the United Nations. The Tiers are labeled I-“more developed”, II – “less developed” and III – “least developed”. Tier I is limited to Japan and European countries. Mexico is one of 80 countries in Tier II (“less developed” countries).

The UN has a “Women’s Health Index” for Tier II, comprised of lifetime risk of maternal death, percent of women using modern contraception, percent of births attended skilled attendant, and female life expectancy at birth. Within this group, Mexico ranks 19th in “Mother’s (Health) Index” compared to Cuba (ranked 1st), Argentina (4th), Brazil (12th), China (14th), South Africa (33rd), Turkey (47th), Iran (50th), Philippines (52nd), Indonesia (59th), Saudi Arabia (63rd), Egypt (65th), Guatemala (68th), India (76th), Pakistan 78th) and Nigeria (80th).

The differences between ranks appear to overstate the real differences. For example, the scores on the individual variables for Mexico (19th) and Argentina (4th) are relatively close. The chance of maternal birth-related death is one in 500 for Mexico versus 600 in Argentina. In Mexico 95% of births are attended by a trained worker compared to 98% in Argentina. Two thirds (67%) of Mexican women use modern contraception methods compared to 64% in Argentina. Life expectancy for women is 80 years in both countries.

The UN “Children’s Health Index” for Tier II is comprised of under age five mortality rate, percent of children under 5 moderately or severely underweight for age, gross primary enrollment ratio, gross secondary enrollment ratio and percent of population with access to safe drinking water.

Mexico ranks 18th among Tier II countries in terms of “Children’s (Health) Index” compared to Cyprus (1st), South Korea (2nd), Brazil (7th), Argentina (8th), Turkey (10th), Egypt (21st), Iran (26th), China (34th), South Africa (56th), Guatemala (63rd), Philippines (64th), Indonesia (70th), Pakistan (76th), India (77th) and Nigeria (82th). Here again, the differences between ranks appear to overstate the real differences.

While Mexico has made impressive progress concerning mother’s and baby’s health, it still lags behind Argentina and Brazil not to mention virtually all European countries. The biggest concern is rural areas of Mexico, especially southern Mexico, which seriously trail urban Mexico in terms women’s and child’s health. For example, infant mortality rates are highest in Chiapas, Oaxaca and Guerrero, followed by Veracruz, Hidalgo and Puebla. On the bright side, rural areas are making great progress thanks to programs like Oportunidades.

Happy Mother’s Day!

 

The growth and expansion of Wal-Mart in Mexico

 Mexico's geography in the Press, Updates to Geo-Mexico  Comments Off on The growth and expansion of Wal-Mart in Mexico
May 052012
 

Much recent attention in the USA and Mexico has focused on the allegations of bribery related to Wal-Mart de México.  Interestingly, the company has a rather long history in Mexico. It started in 1958 when Jerónimo Arango and his brothers Placido and Manual started a company called Cifra and opened a deep discount store in Mexico City named Aurrera Bolivar. It was inspired by the E.J. Korvette discount store in New York City. The store was an immediate success, helped by sponsorship of the popular TV show, La Pregunta de los $64,000 pesos (“The $64,000 Pesos Question”).

Wal-Mart's expansion across Mexico, 1993-2007

Wal-Mart's expansion across Mexico, 1993-2007. Click map to enlarge

By 1965 Cifra had eight Aurrera stores in the Mexico City area as well as a Superama grocery store and VIPS restaurant. Cifra and Jewel-Osco of Chicago formed a joint venture and by 1970 they opened the first Bodega Aurrera discount warehouse stores and Suburbia department stores. Their first hypermarket, Gran Bazar, followed in 1976. Shares in the company were sold to the public in 1977.   By serving low-income customers, the company managed to survive the financial crisis of 1982.  In fact during the 1980s it increased sales by an average 20% per year reaching US$550 million by 1989.

Rapid growth continued in the 1990s. By 1992 there were 38 Almacenes Aurrera supermarkets, 29 Bodega Aurreras, 34 Superamas, 29 Suburbias (department stores), 59 VIPS, as well as 15 El Portón restaurants. Almost all of these were located in the densely populated Mexico City and surrounding State of Mexico. Phenomenal growth continued in 1992 with 23 new units added. Cifra B shares increased forty-fold in just five years from the start of 1988 through the end of 1992. At that time, Cifra had a sophisticated, state-of-the-art data system for inventory control and monitoring customer preferences.

In 1991 Cifra formed a joint venture with the US firm Wal-Mart (founded in 1962, four years after Cifra). Unlike Cifra, whose early growth was based on an enormous urban area, Wal-Mart USA’s incredible early growth concentrated on rural areas. Initially the joint venture focused on trade and the members’ only Club Aurrera, which was soon renamed Sam’s Club. The first map shows the distribution of Wal-Mart stores in 1993. Expansion of new outlets throughout Mexico was only slightly slowed by the 1994 financial crisis.

By 1995, there were 22 Sam’s Clubs, and 11 Wal-Marts, 35 Almacenes Aurrera, 58 Bodegas Aurrera, 36 Superamas, 33 Suburbias, as well as 114 VIPS restaurants. One of the new Wal-Mart Supercenters was the largest in the world. The signing of NAFTA in 1994 strengthened the joint venture. In 1997 Wal-Mart USA acquired majority interest in Cifra creating Wal-Mart de Mexico or Walmex. The company, which previously had been heavily concentrated in Metro Mexico City, was soon aggressively opening new units in cities throughout the country (see maps).

Recent news reports allege that this aggressive growth may have been facilitated by payments of bribes to expedite construction permits. As of March 2012, Walmex was operating no fewer than 2,106 retail units throughout Mexico. They include 127 Sam’s Clubs, 213 Walmart Supercenters, 94 Suburbias, 385 Bodega Aurreras, 88 Superamas, 358 VIPS and El Portón restaurants, and over 840 Bodega Aurrera Expresses and other small outlets.

Wal-Mart de México is the country’s largest retailer, with sales of over US$24 billion, and largest private-sector employer, with 209,000 employees. These figures make Walmex the dominant player in its sector, well ahead of its Mexican supermarket rivals: Soriana ($8 billion); Comercial Mexicana (Mega, $4.5 billion) and Chedraui ($4.4 billion).

The 2007 map shows how Wal-Mart has now expanded into some areas where the population density is relatively low. The early expansion of Wal-Mart was into areas with high population density, where a single, well-placed store could easily be accessed by a lot of people, and therefore have the potential to be highly profitable. Even with the 2007 distribution, however, there is still a marked north-south divide in access to Wal-Mart, which reflects income disparities in Mexico.

In 2009/10 Walmex acquired Walmart Centroamérica and is now named Wal-Mart de México y Centroamérica, adding 622 retail outlets in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, to bring the total number of units it operates (including Mexico) to 2, 728 retail outlets (with sales of about $29 billion) compared to Wal-Mart USA’s 4,468 outlets (with 2011 sales of $447 billion).

Source for maps:  

The maps have been redrawn, based on maps in “Supplier Responses to Wal-Mart’s Invasion of Mexico”  by Leonardo Iacovone, Beata Smarzynska Javorcik, Wolfgang Keller, James R. Tybout. Working Paper 17204  of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Related posts

 

Happy “Cinco de mayo” (5 May)!

 Other  Comments Off on Happy “Cinco de mayo” (5 May)!
May 052012
 

Geo-Mexico wishes all readers a Happy “Cinco de Mayo” (5 May)! The holiday of Cinco de Mayo (5 May) commemorates the Battle of Puebla, fought on May 5, 1862. The battle marks Mexico’s only major military success since its independence from Spain in 1821. Today, in a curious example of cultural adaptation, the resulting holiday is actually celebrated more widely in the USA than in Mexico!

For an account of the history behind the Cinco de Mayo, and for an explanation of why the holiday is now celebrated more in the USA than in Mexico:

In Mexico, the Cinco de Mayo is celebrated with a parade in the City of Puebla each year, but, in another strange twist of geography,  the only re-enactment takes place in Mexico City:

Mexico’s highest volcanoes

 Excerpts from Geo-Mexico  Comments Off on Mexico’s highest volcanoes
Apr 302012
 

In a previous post, we saw how most of Mexico’s volcanoes are located in a broad band that crosses central Mexico known as the Volcanic Axis (Eje neovolcánico). In this post, we provide brief descriptions of some of the major volcanoes in Mexico.

Starting in the west, the first active volcanoes are Everman and Barcenas in the Revillagigedo Islands. Two of the westernmost volcanoes on the mainland are near Colima. At 4260 m (13,976 ft), the inactive Nevado of Colima, Mexico’s sixth-highest peak, is as tall as the highest mountains in the contiguous USA. Its younger brother, Colima Volcano (or Volcán de Fuego) is lower (3820 m) but highly active and considered potentially very dangerous. It has erupted in cycles for several hundred years, and is capped by a dacitic plug characteristic of a silica-rich Pelean volcano. Such volcanoes have the potential to erupt suddenly, not emitting vast quantities of molten lava, but shooting out less spectacular, but far more devastating, clouds of red‑hot asphyxiating gasses.

Tequila Volcano, overlooking the town where the beverage is distilled, is also in Jalisco. In neighboring Michoacán state, the most noteworthy volcanoes are Jorullo (which last erupted in 1759) and Paricutín, which began life in a farmer’s field in 1943 and ceased activity in 1952, but only after its lava had overwhelmed several small villages.

Closer to Mexico City, the Nevado of Toluca (4680 m) has a drive-in crater and is a favored destination for Mexico City families in winter to take their children to play in the snow. It is Mexico’s fourth highest peak (see table below).

VolcanoStatesHeight (meters)Height (feet)
Pico de OrizabaVeracruz; Puebla5 61018 406
PopocatapetlMéxico; Morelos; Puebla5 50018 045
IztaccihuatlMéxico; Puebla5 22017 126
Nevado of Toluca México 4 68015 354
MalincheTlaxcala; Puebla4 42014 501
Nevado of Colima Jalisco4 26013 976
Cofre de PeroteVeracruz 4 20013 780
TacanáChiapas 4 08013 386
TelapónMéxico 4 06013 320
El AjuscoFederal District3 93012 894
Colima VolcanoJalisco; Colima3 82012 533

Continuing eastwards, we reach several other volcanoes that are among Mexico’s highest volcanic peaks (and are also included in the table).

The most famous volcano in the Volcanic Axis is the still active Popocatepetl (“Popo”), which rises to 5500 meters (18,045 feet). Alongside Popocatepetl is the dormant volcanic peak of Iztaccihuatl (5220 m or 17,126 ft). On a smog-free day, both are clearly visible from Mexico City. The southern suburbs of Mexico City are overshadowed by a smaller active volcano, Ajusco, which reaches 3930 m (12,894 ft).

The Nevado de Toluca volcano

The Pico de Orizaba, a dormant volcano on the border between states of Veracruz and Puebla, is Mexico’s highest mountain. At 5610 m (18,406 ft) it is the third highest peak in North America. By way of contrast, not very far away, in the outskirts of the city of Puebla, is the world’s smallest volcano!

Only a few volcanoes appear to be located outside the Volcanic Axis and therefore in an anomalous location to the general pattern. They include two volcanoes in Chiapas which lie south of the Volcanic Axis: El Chichón (which erupted in 1982) and Tacaná (4080 m).

Related posts:

 

Why is biomass density in Mexico relevant to climate change?

 Maps, Other  Comments Off on Why is biomass density in Mexico relevant to climate change?
Apr 282012
 

How can we measure the health of forests and other forms of natural vegetation? It has become commonplace to read about biodiversity and many conservation programs rightly stress its importance in the global scheme of things. In a previous post, we examined the biodiversity of Mexico and saw how it is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world.

Biodiversity may be a useful indicator of likely ecological resilience in the face of changing circumstances such as global climate change, but it does not tell the whole picture. In simple biodiversity measures, each species is counted and treated as being equally important. Species close to extinction are singled out for conservation efforts in an attempt to preserve a viable wild population of that species. If all else fails, specimens are transferred to botanical gardens or seeds are collected and stored in the hope that the species can be reintroduced and reestablished in a suitable location at some point in the future.

Biomass production in Mexico (Trees and bushes)

Biomass density in Mexico (trees and shrubs); from deJong et al, 2006.

But are all plant species equal? Should a giant redwood count the same as a dandelion? Certainly in terms of their ability to store carbon, larger plants are more valuable than smaller plants, though the total number of each species also matters. Storing carbon is important. When trees are cut down and burned (to clear the way for agriculture or settlement, for example) this stored carbon is released into the air and contributes to the processes causing global warming.

The term biomass is used to describe the total mass of living organic matter in a plant or in an area. The total biomass of a plant includes its bark, leaves and twigs. In a tropical forest, biomass includes every tree, shrub, sapling, vine, epiphyte and flower. About 50% of the biomass in most forests is carbon. The amount of biomass varies seasonally and is not necessarily stable over time, since plants increase their biomass as they grow. In a forest, the balance that matters in terms of sustainable forestry is the balance between the forest’s production of “new” biomass (through photosynthesis) and the consumption of some of its biomass by chopping, burning and natural decay. Clearly, human activity can directly impact this balance, but so too can natural events such as forest fires.

Bio-geographers have a great interest in assessing biomass since it provides a starting point for numerous models that attempt to estimate the effects of releasing some, or all, of this stored carbon on future global climates. Increasingly, their estimates from the use of remote sensing and satellite images are proving to be quite reliable when tested by comparing them to the biomass of the same area calculated from on-the-ground fieldwork.

The measure of biomass shown on the map is biomass density. Biomass density is the total amount of above ground living organic matter expressed as oven-dry metric tons per hectare. This map immediately reveals why conserving Mexico’s southern rainforests is so important. They are not only the most biodiverse areas of Mexico, their high biomass density values show that they also have far more than their fair share of Mexico’s total biomass. Conserving and managing these forests therefore needs to be a priority strategy in Mexico’s efforts to limit and mitigate climate change.

Sources:

The map comes from “Advances of Mexico in preparing for REDD” by Bernardus H.J. de Jong, Leonel Iglesias Gutiérrez and José Armando Alanís de la Rosa. Presentation given at the UNFCCC Workshop on Methodological Issues relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries. Tokyo, Japan, 25 to 27 June 2008.

To read more about estimating biomass, see Estimating Biomass and Biomass Change of Tropical Forests: a Primer. (FAO Forestry Paper – 134) by Sandra Brown. FAO Forestry Paper 134. 1997.

Related posts:

 Older Entries  Newer Entries