IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

Research articleerd

Land Degradation Assessment in El Jicaral Village,Mixteca Region, Mexico
SERGIO AZAEL MAY CUEVAS
Graduate School of Agriculture, Tokyo University of Agriculture, Tokyo, Japan
Email: azaelmay@gmail.com

MACHITO MIHARA*
Faculty of Regional Environment Science, Tokyo University of Agriculture, Tokyo, Japan
Email: m-mihara@nodai.ac.jp
Received 18 December 2013

Accepted 21 September 2014(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Mixteca Region’s land resources are being affected by several degradation
processes caused by mismanagement of farming systems, deforestation and cattleovergrazing. For assessing the land degradation conditions in a local level, this study wascarried out in El Jicaral Village based on the analysis of several variables observed on
topographical maps and satellite images. To confirm the reliability and accuracy of theanalysis, in the present study a land degradation assessment was carried out through fieldobservation. Along with the assessment, a questionnaire survey was conducted forunderstanding more the local situation. The questionnaire survey consisted of 24 questions
which were divided into three sections: the basic information of local farmers, theapplication of agricultural chemicals and the current problems in the farming systems.
There were 69 households interviewed. Although the results of both assessments werecompared, significant difference was not observed between the remote and the field
assessments. In addition, it was considered that land degradation information obtained
through the remote assessment may be useful for small areas as an alternative method
when a field assessment is not possible to be conducted. According to the remoteassessment as well as the survey in the research area, it may be concluded that El Jicaral
Village is facing a serious land degradation process due to land use conditions in thevillage, such as crop cultivation under steep slope conditions, deforestation and cattle
overgrazing. Furthermore, no soil conservation practices are applied and chemical
products are being used without understanding of their negative effects. Due to theseconditions, land degradation is a continuing process in El Jicaral Village.
Keywords local farming, land degradation, Mixteca, Mexico, field survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJETIVES
Mixteca Region is one of the poorest regions in Mexico with land degradation and water scarcity
situation. The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente yRecursos Naturales, SEMARNAT) estimated around 500,000 hectares in the region presented highlevels of land degradation in 1998 (SEMARNAT-CP, 2003). Mixteca Region is located in Oaxaca
State in the southern part of Mexico, with a surface of 15, 600 km2 (INEGI, 2005) and around 450,000 habitants (INEGI, 2010).
Land degradation is a natural and socioeconomic cause-effect phenomenon (Hammad, 2012).
Demand on the land for economic development from an increasing population is driving unsuitableland use changes; hence land degradation through soil erosion, nutrient depletion, salinity, water
scarcity, soil pollution, disruption of biological cycles and loss of biodiversity. The causes are
multiple and complex, such as the expansion of cattle raising, the over-exploitation of forest
resources, deforestation through slash and burn for agricultural practices and for energy needs(UNEP, 2010). Severity of land degradation has been increasing in many parts of the world, wheremore than 30% of forests, 20% of all cultivated areas and 10% of grasslands are undergoingⒸ ISERD130

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

degradation (Bai et al., 2008).
In order to assess the land degradation conditions in a local level, a study was conducted in El
Jicaral Village based on the analysis of several variables observed on topographical maps andsatellite images (May and Mihara, 2013). The results of this assessment showed that more than35% of the study area was under severe land degradation. To confirm the reliability and accuracyof the remote assessment, in the present study a land degradation assessment was conducted bymeans of field observation. At the same time a questionnaire survey was carried out forunderstanding more the local situation. Accordingly, the objectives of this study are to evaluate theviability of the land degradation assessment based on remote assessment compared with the field
assessment and to understand better the causes of land degradation through the results of aquestionnaire survey on land degradation assessment.
METHODOLOGYLand Degradation Assessment
According to Kapalanga (2008) soil erosion represents the most extensive areas of degraded land
worldwide, as more than 83% of the areas have been affected. In the classification of the landdegradation, the processes of soil erosion dominated for rating the degree and extent of the landdegradation. Based on this statement, land degradation assessment was conducted in El Jicaral
Village through the field observation in the study area divided into a mesh of 50 meters by 50meters, the same mesh used in the previous study for the remote assessment (May and Mihara,2013) covering an area of around 0.5 km2 (Fig. 1). The results of land degradation assessment
through this field observation were compared with that through the remote assessment carried out
in the previous study.

Fig. 1 Land degradation assessment in the study area
In the field assessment, GPS was employed for clarifying the location in every cell. Thendetailed observation was conducted based on Morgan Coding System (Morgan, 1995) with rating avalue from 0 to 5 at the assigned cell. The Morgan Coding System constituted with several
parameters developed for integrated soil erosion appraisal in the field as shown in Table 1. Afterobtaining a value based on Morgan Coding System for each mesh, a comparison was done betweenⒸ ISERD

131

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

the field assessment and the remote assessment done in the previous study. For the comparison,statistical method using a correlation analysis was employed.
Table 1 Coding system for soil erosion appraisal in the fieldCode012345Indicators
No exposure of tree roots; no surface crusting; no splash pedestals; over 70% plant cover(ground and canopy)
Exposure of tree roots, formation of splash pedestals, soil mounds protected by vegetation, all todepths of 1-10 mm; slight surface crusting; 30-70% plant cover
Tree root exposure, splash pedestals and soil mounds to depths of 1-5 cm; crusting of thesurface; 30-70% plant cover
Tree root exposure, splash pedestals and soil mounds to depths of 5-10 cm; 2-5 mm thickness ofsurface crust; grass muddied by wash and turned downslope; splays of coarse material due towash and wind; less than 30% plant cover
Tree root exposure, splash pedestals and soil mounds to depths of 5-10 cm; splays of coarsematerials; rills up to 1-8 cm deep; bare soil
Gullies; rills over 8 cm deep, blow-outs and dunes; bare soil

Questionnaire Survey Conducted in Study Area
Along with the field assessment, the questionnaire survey was conducted in El Jicaral Village,
Coicoyán de las Flores Municipality, Mixteca Region, Mexico as additional information for theland degradation assessment. This village was chosen because the degree of poverty is high, as wellas it locates in the most land degraded region of the country (PNUD, 2008). El Jicaral Village is anindigenous community with around 1,000 inhabitants, in which people speak in Mixtec, ancientlanguage in the area. The main crops in the village are rain-fed corn, chilly and bean. It locates inthe coordinates 17º 07’ 34.6” Latitude North and 98º 11’ 48.9” Longitude West. The questionnaire
survey consisted of 24 questions, divided into three sections such as ‘Basic information of localfarmers’, ‘Application of agricultural chemicals’ and ‘Current problems in farming systems’ asshown in Table 2.
Table 2 Questionnaire survey for land degradation assessment
Basic information of local
farmersName, Age, Gender
Number of family members
working in agricultural sector
Crops, area cultivated,
destination of production
Water source, breeding ofanimals

Application of agriculturalchemicals
Application of chemicalfertilizers, formula, quantity
Amount of money expendfor chemical fertilizers
Application of pesticides
and herbicides
Application frequency

Current problems in farmingsystem
Main problems in thefarming systemSoil erosion awarenessAttendance to soil
conservation workshops
Concrete information aboutcrops

Fig. 2 Workshop and survey conducted in El Jicaral VillageⒸ ISERD132

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

The survey was conducted in July, 2013 in the village with the assistance of a Spanish-Mixtec
translator at the workshop on ‘Soil conservation for sustainable agriculture’ (Fig. 2). The targets
were local farmers, being older than 18 years old, who have been conducting agriculture in thevillage. From one household, only one representative was invited to attend the workshop. There
were 69 household interviewees in the workshop and it counted 35% of all 200 households in thevillage. Due to their local customs, the survey must be divided into several times for each groupwith around 10 persons.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Land degradation assessment: Field observation, based on the coding system for erosion
appraisal, was conducted in the study site. The observation was supported by the use of GPS, inorder to make the evaluation inside every cell (Fig. 3)

Fig. 3 Land degradation assessment in the field
The results of the field observation were summarized in the map called “field assessment”. On
the other hand, there was the map made with “remote assessment” (May and Mihara, 2013), where
the identification and classification were carried out based on several variables, such as steepness,slope, vegetation density and land use. In the process to make the map with “remote assessment”,
these variables were integrated for evaluating land degradation as shown in Fig. 4.
2254421445354552544215253545223445244525322234452555253223335534433222233355353332222333553

55434442333553

55432322355333555244423555355552222335533325544443355555255452233353332522444355555525223523335552225224435555522222223343554444521235455522225212323333444415125255552222151252334344442321325343222223213233323443232232333222222322333332144225525333321122255253555214422555535552122225525Field assessment

Remote assessment

Fig. 4 Comparison between land degradation assessments by remote and field methodsⒸ ISERD

133

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

After obtaining the land degradation maps with both methods; “field assessment” and “remoteassessment”, a confidence interval at 99% significant level was selected for evaluating thecorrelation between both assessments (Fig. 5).
The results of statistical analysis indicated that there was the correlation between bothassessments at 99% significant level. It means that the remote assessment based on several
variables, such as steepness, slope, vegetation density and land use may be enough for assessing theland degradation in a small scale. This technique is useful when the land degradation assessment isnecessary in small areas and not possible to conduct an on-site assessment.
5

Remote assessment432

y = 0.7586x + 0.7056
R² = 0.3868**

1y=x
00

12345

Field assessment

Fig. 5 Correlation between land degradation assessments
Outcomes from questionnaire survey: The results of the questionnaire survey in the village aresummarized in the following charts as shown in Fig. 6.

16%
Other
activities
49%

Agriculture
51%

84%

Family members engaging inFamilymembers
engaging in
agriculturalactivities
1%
Agricultural activities(average)
7%

Yes

No

Breeding of animals
Yes 2%No4%

Breeding of animals

13%

79%

94%

Peanuts

BananaMaizeCropBeans
Peanuts
cultivationCornBeanBanana

Rain

River

Rain Water

River

Ground water
Ground water

Source of water

Source of water

Crop cultivation

Fig. 6 Basic information of local farmers

It was observed that 35% of the interviewed households dedicated to agricultural activities
were between 31 to 40 years old and that 65% was female, this is due to the strong social
phenomenon of migration for male. Also, around half of all members at interviewed households
were engaged in agricultural activities. The interviewed households at 84% did not breed animals,Ⓒ ISERD

134

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

and the main crop was corn. It counted at 79% of all cultivated areas hold by interviewed
households, followed by beans at 13%. In addition, the main water source for the crop cultivation
was rain water at 94%, and followed by river and ground water.
6%

4%

14%

80%

No

46-0-096%

Herbicides and pesticides

Others

Usefertilizers
No of46-0-0
Others

NoUseHerbicidesof agriculturalchemicalsand Pesticides
noof agricultural
Fig.
7 Application ofUse
agriculturalchemicals chemicals
Use offertilizers
Concerning the usage of agricultural chemicals, 80% of the interviewed households appliedchemical fertilizers and 96% applied herbicides and pesticides to their farmlands as shown in Fig. 7.
Some parts of these products are promoted in the Mexican governmental programs.
4%
2%

1%
9%

5%

13%

28%
16%

20%

72%

68%

Plagues

Strong Wind

62%

Landslide

Pest
Strongwind
Low fertility
Slope

Landslide
StonesSlope Stones

Yes

Yes

NoNo

Nutrient Loss
DegradationNutrientof soil loss

Decrease in productivity
noDecrease of productivity

Low fertility
Degradationof soilNowindknowledge
Slash-and-burn practice Soil erosion
Problems
in the farming system

Problem in the farming system

Slash-and-burn practiceLand degradation awarenessFig. 8 Current problems in farming systems
Among the problems that farmers face in the village, the main one is pest problem that 68% of
the interviewees responded. Especially, the damage by worms like ‘gusano cogollero’ (Spodoptera
frugiperda) is severe in the village. The main insecticide applied for the worm is chlorpyrifos. Also,for controlling weeds, the herbicide entitled Paraquat is the most common in the village. Howeverin the village, slash-and-burn farming is not common, as only 28% of the interviewees have been
conducting.
Also, the results of questionnaire survey for land degradation assessment indicated that theinterviewees had certain awareness on land degradation as well as nutrient loss associated with soil
erosion. They also know that the processes of land degradation cause low in land productivity (Fig.
8).
The results of questionnaire survey also indicated that farmers have a perception on landdegradation accelerating in the village. Nevertheless, under the current conditions of poverty andless knowledge on sustainable agriculture or land conservation, the farmers have no otheralternatives of farming systems. They just continue the same farming even in sloping upland fields
for obtaining short-term benefits to survive.
All the interviewed farmers are willing to join land conservation program for sustainableagriculture if there are any opportunities.

Ⓒ ISERD

135

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2014) 5-2

CONCLUSION
This study dealt with land degradation assessment through field observation, in addition to remoteassessment based on topographical maps and satellite images. Along with the assessment, aquestionnaire survey was conducted for understanding more the local situation. According to theremote assessment as well as the field observation through the survey in the research area, it may
be concluded that El Jicaral Village is facing a serious land degradation process due to land use
conditions in the village, such as crop cultivation under steep slope conditions, deforestation andcattle overgrazing. Furthermore, no soil conservation practices are conducted and chemicalproducts are being used without understanding of their negative effects. Due to these conditions,land degradation is a continuing process in El Jicaral Village.
Although farmers have a perception on land degradation accelerating in the village, they haveno other alternatives of farming systems, but just continue the same farming even in sloping uplandfields for obtaining short-term benefits to survive. All the interviewed farmers in the village arewilling to join land conservation program for sustainable agriculture if there are any opportunities.
REFERENCES
Bai, Z.G., Dent, D.L., Olsson, L. and Schaepman, M.E. 2008. Global assessment of land degradation andimprovement. 1 Identification by remote sensing. ISRIC Report 2008/01, 70. Wageningen, Netherlands.
Feras, M. 2007. Land suitability classification using different sources of information: Soil maps andpredicted soil attributes in Jordan. Geoderma, 140 (1-2), 73-80.
Hammad, A.A. and Tumeizi, A. 2012. Land degradation: socioeconomic and environmental causes andconsequences in the eastern mediterranean. Land Degrad. Develop. 23, 216-226.
INEGI. 2005. Marco Geoestadístico Municipal, México.
INEGI. 2010. Censo de Población y Vivienda, México.
Kapalanga, T.S. 2008. A review of land degradation assessment methods. Land Restoration Training
Programme. Iceland.
May Cuevas, S.A. and Mihara, M. 2013. Land use assessment for proposing sustainable development in El
Jicaral, Mixteca Region, Mexico, International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development, 4 (2),21-26.
Morgan, R.P.C. 1995. Soil erosion and conservation. Cranfield University, Ed. Longman, UK.
PNUD 2008. Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo. Informe sobre desarrollo humano 20072008.
Semarnat-CP. 2003. Evaluación de la degradación del suelo causada por el hombre en la República
Mexicana, escala 1:250 000. Memoria Nacional 2001-2002. México.
Semarnat-UACh. 2003. Evaluación de la pérdida de suelos por erosión hídrica y eólica en la República
Mexicana, escala 1: 1 000 000. Memoria 2001-2002. México.
United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP. 2010. Integrating tradeoffs between supply of ecosystemservices and land use options into poverty alleviation efforts and development planning in Mixteca.
Annex 1: Project document.

Ⓒ ISERD136