The role of sheep production in the livelihoods of Mexican smallholders: Evidence from a park-adjacent community

• Published in: Small ruminant research Vol. 178; pp. 94 - 101
• Main Authors: Estevez-Moreno, Laura X., Sanchez-Vera, Ernesto, Nava-Bernal, Gabino, Estrada-Flores, Julieta G., Gomez-Demetrio, William, Sepúlveda, Wilmer S.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01-09-2019
• Subjects: Access strategies to assets; Livelihoods; Park-adjacent community; Production orientation Nevado de Toluca; Sheep production; Production orientation Nevado de Toluca; Sheep production; Access strategies to assets; Park-adjacent community; Livelihoods
• ISSN: 0921-4488; 1879-0941
• DOI: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.08.001

•Sheep production is linked to livelihoods of rural people of park-adjacent communities.•Households’ profiles identified were “fattener”, “small breeder”, “non-shepherd breeders” and “shepherd breeders”.•Household strategies for access to sheep are part of different livelihood strategies.•Production orientation, breeding or fattening, are part of different livelihood strategies.
Traditional sheep production is part of the livelihood activities of natural resources' users in some protected areas. The aim of this study was to identify livelihood profiles of sheep producing households, in a park-adjacent community of central Mexico, using both production orientation and households’ strategies for access to sheep as key analytical categories. Data were collected through a questionnaire administered to a total of 62 sheep producing households, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed and four household profiles were identified and described including additional socio-economic and sheep production-related characteristics: “Fatteners”, “Small breeders”, “Shepherd breeders” and “Non-shepherd breeders”. The "shepherd breeders" were highly linked to sheep farming in terms of the human capital engaged in this activity, the income they obtained from it and the way they used it. The “non-shepherd breeders” seemed to be mainly farmers linked to sheep production through joint livestock ventures. “Fatteners” complemented sheep production with non-agricultural activities, under a production system that tends to be more intensive, and “small breeders” combined the extensive management of animals with non-agricultural employment. Shepherding was more frequently performed by the groups of breeders compared with the fatteners. The case of the Ojo de Agua community provides new insights for the analysis of the role of livestock in rural livelihoods and the implications of protected areas' management on the wellbeing of their inhabitants and users.