pea emerged as the main crop promoted and marketed by the cooperative, which also started promoting the cultivation of broccoli, cauliflower, and parsley by 1985 (von Braun et al., 1989a).

Contrary to previous agro-export booms in Guatemala<sup>4</sup> , NTX cultivation spread among all types of farmers but the very smallest, potentially surfacing as an effective, nearly all-inclusive poverty alleviation mechanism. The cooperative membership increased from 177 in 1979 to 1,600 by 1989<sup>5</sup> , and between 1980 and 1985, the area under export vegetable production quadrupled (von Braun and Immink, 1994).<sup>6</sup> _Cuatro Pinos_ attempted to counteract production risks with the management of a price band system and provided insurance through limited liability on loans (Carletto et al., 1999). The 48-member cooperative board was renewed every 2 years, allowing a sizeable number of members to have management and leadership experience (Saenz de Tejada, 2002). In 1985, _Cuatro Pinos_ also began channeling 10 percent of its annual profits for the provision of basic education and health services for its members. As part of its _sector social_ activities, the cooperative set up night schools for its members to complete elementary education, awarded scholarships to its members’ children for the completion of secondary education, and kept a team of four physicians giving consultations in villages where the cooperative was active. The provision of educational incentives for the members’ children was in part for the purpose of counteracting reliance on child labor in NTX production (Saenz de Tejada, 2002).

The multifaceted support provided by _Cuatro Pinos_ was instrumental in reducing transaction costs of coordination, and enabling smallholders to escape information asymmetries about marketing opportunities and overcome financial and human capital constraints that would have otherwise hampered NTX adoption. The competitiveness of smallholders of Santiago Sacatepéquez was also due to their familiarity with horticultural production (von Braun et. al., 1989a) and the highly fragmented pre-boom land distribution that has insulated them from direct competition from larger farms (Carter and Barham, 1996). They were also able to utilize available family labor at below market remuneration in NTX production, which required close to 600 person-days per hectare over a four month period (von Braun et al., 1989a).

> 4 Williams (1986) documents cotton and cattle booms that proved to be devastating to the rural poor.

> 5 Following the establishment and expansion of Cuatro Pinos, a number of intermediaries, locally known as _coyotes_ , emerged to take advantage of the booming industry. _Coyotes_ , who were known to follow lower quality standards, hosted auctions in Santiago Sacatepéquez and other surrounding communities where the payments were immediate and in cash. Despite their commitments to the cooperative, it was common for _Cuatro Pinos_ farmers, even board members, to sell to _coyotes_ , especially when prices offered by _coyotes_ were higher than the upper limit of the price band guaranteed by the cooperative (Carter and Barham, 1996). This presented an on-going problem for the _Cuatro Pinos_ management who were at times forced to buy produce from _coyotes_ at higher prices to comply with its agreements with export companies.

6 Although adoption was widespread, nearly all NTX producers preferred to maintain diversified crop portfolio by combining NTX production with _milpa_ , i.e. the traditional intercropping of maize and beans. This practice remained unchanged over time. The survey data indicates that among those that have not stopped growing snow peas since the introduction of the crop in the region, the average area allocated to NTX crops increased from 0.24 to 0.43 hectares between 1985 and 2005. Within the same group of farmers, the average area under staple crop cultivation was 0.37 and 0.39 hectares in 1985 and 2005, respectively. Von Braun, Hotckiss, and Immink (1989) hypothesize that this production behavior provides a level of insurance against the high risks of NTX production, and indicates the desire of farmers for food security. Likewise, Barham, Carter and Sigelko (1995) demonstrate that there is a ceiling to small farm NTX adoption and that expected land under NTX cultivation levels off at 0.35 hectares as farm size approaches 2 hectares and does not increase until farm size exceeds 4 hectares. “By default, the size-related NTX adoption pattern of a ceiling followed by an upturn seems best explained by wealth and farm size related differences in risk bearing capacity and in access to other factor and product markets.” (pp. 98) 5