<%BANNER%>

A Matter of Survival

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021131/00001

Material Information

Title: A Matter of Survival Women, Subsistence Farming, and Environmental Degradation in Rural Guatemala
Physical Description: 1 online resource (79 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Hallum, Rachel M
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: deforestation, ecofeminism, environment, gender, guatemala, sociology
Sociology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sociology thesis, M.A.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: This thesis uses a socialist ecofeminist framework to explore the historical and material links between environmental degradation and women's roles as subsistence farmers in rural Guatemala. Data was gathered from interviews with 20 women farmers, as well as observational research, to explore how women's work is specifically affected by processes and policies of development in rural Guatemala. Results reveal that development processes have led to greater deforestation and soil erosion in the areas where poor women farm for themselves and their families. Despite the difficulties that the women face, they are more than victims of their situation; rather they have begun mobilizing both locally and transnationally to combat the environmental problems confronting their families and communities. The thesis calls for conservationists and policy makers to take into account the roles that women farmers play in preserving the environment in places like rural Guatemala, and concludes by suggesting ideas for future research.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Rachel M Hallum.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Pena, Milagros.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021131:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021131/00001

Material Information

Title: A Matter of Survival Women, Subsistence Farming, and Environmental Degradation in Rural Guatemala
Physical Description: 1 online resource (79 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Hallum, Rachel M
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: deforestation, ecofeminism, environment, gender, guatemala, sociology
Sociology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sociology thesis, M.A.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: This thesis uses a socialist ecofeminist framework to explore the historical and material links between environmental degradation and women's roles as subsistence farmers in rural Guatemala. Data was gathered from interviews with 20 women farmers, as well as observational research, to explore how women's work is specifically affected by processes and policies of development in rural Guatemala. Results reveal that development processes have led to greater deforestation and soil erosion in the areas where poor women farm for themselves and their families. Despite the difficulties that the women face, they are more than victims of their situation; rather they have begun mobilizing both locally and transnationally to combat the environmental problems confronting their families and communities. The thesis calls for conservationists and policy makers to take into account the roles that women farmers play in preserving the environment in places like rural Guatemala, and concludes by suggesting ideas for future research.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Rachel M Hallum.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Pena, Milagros.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021131:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101113_AAAAIC INGEST_TIME 2010-11-13T10:11:23Z PACKAGE UFE0021131_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 25556 DFID F20101113_AABGKF ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH hallum_r_Page_41.QC.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
f7e9b4e5013e5452851d931f5beb5b50
SHA-1
02e1a09c32cdb47443a602e3ed362c54227e9aba
1053954 F20101113_AABFTN hallum_r_Page_16.tif
fbe6c9ef7e22222cf3a2f9ad56d55255
2e39ad4332dd66afa6c27d3b7f8befabac99bee4
1474 F20101113_AABGFH hallum_r_Page_06.txt
8db267f65c5ff43146805e71e461631e
1c8c9770ebe8cc3b3fc1531ebcb9a432da538fd8
112002 F20101113_AABFYK hallum_r_Page_11.jp2
838f547036a5087a13beba7d548386bc
123bb8ef188aa1ef20a287be5625286a7dea57a2
25271604 F20101113_AABGAK hallum_r_Page_05.tif
680f22ac454fdf8e5fa9a08a4829291b
b0bbe7c09249b13e41b3d7ba20321ac30b938b42
6758 F20101113_AABGKG hallum_r_Page_41thm.jpg
a1ebb97c6c0b84379c3b79b6f49f9276
f7e5c89f8e869b2cdffec3b6f33673987a0313eb
2420 F20101113_AABFTO hallum_r_Page_60.txt
1f4658e69a49668d74bd7119cd5f41d4
e750e3bd5403f5b021a3d45450919baccaa876bd
1607 F20101113_AABGFI hallum_r_Page_08.txt
5e27518daeb7cdd6c7e058eabe633f02
8aa2e2f45b9308e42b82347fa733d0fc234a97fa
117555 F20101113_AABFYL hallum_r_Page_14.jp2
8529ab82b48b945fc36e0cd2f211ca35
e1fbcceaed9bb9d7bd439ec2695286b8ee17cecf
F20101113_AABGAL hallum_r_Page_06.tif
5b0919675cdc0ea4b595ca8ee77a19fc
f0e700832ace03b4bbcb6b03d17c7c37aa0c6b0f
24859 F20101113_AABGKH hallum_r_Page_42.QC.jpg
dbea8bba79c8086e176f73e4b866d5c2
3eeec564b8ea0fee0ba58a87cc49eb1cf706bfca
120069 F20101113_AABFTP hallum_r_Page_39.jp2
06fc36985e6bc56e9e53ec0354c824c1
41ae6f8c89794ceccb8cf9da5157d719a096c964
2167 F20101113_AABGFJ hallum_r_Page_09.txt
10a31c067c57cc74f8176a1c85ab8bb0
a400a1eec0a6fc23fe83785a3c23d016a72a36bb
106469 F20101113_AABFYM hallum_r_Page_15.jp2
01cb4878776efa5309f3a14a8c6449f5
521373c468ae9801472c01c71f848ce17881d3d5
F20101113_AABGAM hallum_r_Page_07.tif
59801196c9a02839a2e5340e22f8208c
e957f1cedfd56e18a41967a69438e49c3cad920d
6837 F20101113_AABGKI hallum_r_Page_42thm.jpg
7108c7097868befadb7be95c0f3b5126
e6e2bbea394fe75949b8cfcf47329c5cf24cbbd1
24770 F20101113_AABFTQ hallum_r_Page_33.QC.jpg
f262c19adac145cfa655a4ac323d1545
b35cf76be07771219734edac730e86053e76df7a
2233 F20101113_AABGFK hallum_r_Page_10.txt
f7c4ff6efde20153dab2a963d008422e
6e945ab6ad7d80d3402f577c6be6464b0b6b7313
123492 F20101113_AABFYN hallum_r_Page_16.jp2
9c399689ec0cedbdf6a1ace99dcc1917
d97a7e8f49006d5dccefe7651a5aeed66a76e098
8423998 F20101113_AABGAN hallum_r_Page_08.tif
cceb3f48050c99a26a226c1904f1e496
5a89342c3372293632b06e673394bd82318fda07
14642 F20101113_AABGKJ hallum_r_Page_43.QC.jpg
f7c3c011bfb943bb1ac97407ae64070c
f080d946035f1398e5f1804543208ebf078b3fef
F20101113_AABFTR hallum_r_Page_33.tif
0ee70eb5ddff6bebc2e67cfbf82acde9
12724c5752d33b39963cb53a01a64c9d06082c14
2151 F20101113_AABGFL hallum_r_Page_11.txt
babaac838102a348a8c7ce26adcb0718
64dd0eb7bdcc8db7c0f3a939fda6beec494bc38e
114791 F20101113_AABFYO hallum_r_Page_17.jp2
b523e60de7e274d03f67f4bdffcbc850
7738afc2107240b843ea205bd6941bfa1abce403
F20101113_AABGAO hallum_r_Page_09.tif
613f10cab2efa6c2dbcc9677d988fd59
b4b319d088a8c9303586a9751d8448f264899b2d
4333 F20101113_AABGKK hallum_r_Page_43thm.jpg
e2e4d4193f90abc8ae1e1ba58ee8ec74
2acdbd752649fbd59ce5e68ce519e5a6d78d852b
54602 F20101113_AABFTS hallum_r_Page_22.pro
025f0979ff95e5bd416433dc9f646a95
c9ccd4b2c6a40379cf3e26656a004a50cb5f9fc7
2032 F20101113_AABGFM hallum_r_Page_12.txt
7bb2f7d31eeba988476680502ce0295f
244b9451238b6d307efea4effa4e4e45761580ab
121937 F20101113_AABFYP hallum_r_Page_18.jp2
a3c20fccd469de678f97f7cc9dc80d0d
85064c63f854fc379a939fff4b1ff57e9e74425b
F20101113_AABGAP hallum_r_Page_10.tif
46bd0e2cd4e5f05365f9f26e886e2b09
adb24e62b4f9bf2464179b9f91aece7d36786eb3
54415 F20101113_AABFTT hallum_r_Page_23.pro
ad41c4f237eefbfe8c6149fa94d43a55
e90250b402c24c75c3f08a1a14ed4dc98130574e
2118 F20101113_AABGFN hallum_r_Page_13.txt
ac945a1bcb2960d4d7537149db8fb94e
0bbb4792abf5a486b3506e76782c1214eaa1450d
118917 F20101113_AABFYQ hallum_r_Page_19.jp2
1c22e78097bfe70c0c7cf0f1818678b9
e14a16b357ec91aadac9658271b85dffed45d1a4
F20101113_AABGAQ hallum_r_Page_11.tif
d7c608561ed118351832e94311e1d183
09b540ffba402af59c617b810a28957394e3cfc2
26267 F20101113_AABGKL hallum_r_Page_44.QC.jpg
9c513aa4511687abe7fe542c26751e3b
25e6531023c5f768ebbf1f78044d45c9d0504ef4
397 F20101113_AABFTU hallum_r_Page_79.txt
090dccad8fbae4db85117feceba94915
53c9ac1a526176f98e5b19196dae71af55e392dd
1931 F20101113_AABGFO hallum_r_Page_15.txt
207abd23dd57d2d9b9b0faa0de4a19c8
f51f52ad8d81df1680f096440125ad45029d715e
117406 F20101113_AABFYR hallum_r_Page_21.jp2
0ce3b368362b3f2e0be1919b22d84882
782a0326fce7c6c77d14ac98332a586b04ba81cd
F20101113_AABGAR hallum_r_Page_13.tif
63ef7b9a34081db47afd3bcb0b1ca975
2818096a0f25ebed6dd710475be9b81027b8e511
7002 F20101113_AABGKM hallum_r_Page_44thm.jpg
57a08b2c9c4a8832461240c93ec0f51a
74868b8a64b2736c23866e313be83ac2c3491d76
2263 F20101113_AABGFP hallum_r_Page_16.txt
3531dc56ceb39f1677190dd7b61e6e29
2e442a8deee40ec5e8ceca3fd68ad3085163cacd
117390 F20101113_AABFYS hallum_r_Page_22.jp2
41ac62727d5179f278c3a0c251893ebe
44c8101c99a8ad87cd19a83506c58a27ad4c29c9
F20101113_AABGAS hallum_r_Page_14.tif
829ff257470469320e28bbc84dc01552
af2eb9a5f762cf69136070cae148b6e9c022882d
24103 F20101113_AABGKN hallum_r_Page_45.QC.jpg
6abce265eb258597d41344388c55a200
4609871904c08004d06abf2365fc1b5462bb411e
81709 F20101113_AABFTV hallum_r_Page_76.jpg
ec85204bb1642707d5801fb7eea00766
98d02864670bd3e2580032fee1f69670f3f9a897
2124 F20101113_AABGFQ hallum_r_Page_17.txt
dd7cd600186241ed2eb16cc10e659e24
c41a94676524d181b41d159c84497fef2c426c24
117147 F20101113_AABFYT hallum_r_Page_23.jp2
394893c43cfa1e64fc8d912a516b9473
7a2958b8ddfda7d79d55b6897c53adbcb780ca6b
F20101113_AABGAT hallum_r_Page_15.tif
d0dbde3fd56d7dcbca62d21d518aa293
3696f1dd7d8713ea5b1f78ffec5d294f42fac321
6521 F20101113_AABGKO hallum_r_Page_45thm.jpg
8acf731f51bdfa7307670daab3fd7f7c
7d064df119696189181e876d039983b7e3b3b094
115227 F20101113_AABFTW hallum_r_Page_55.jp2
f25c99c215a4ebb525873a043132e358
c19c8e80f19b074e77e514323e1120b321748cfd
2240 F20101113_AABGFR hallum_r_Page_18.txt
bc741a5b008b4a9795173d72d4984018
ba1b72aa93ed00d7824daae62e32873c2aaa4a6a
123583 F20101113_AABFYU hallum_r_Page_25.jp2
9383e34e09d1aeee79fccbe5f489fd02
f1682db13748b16f71fc0374932a622246692faf
F20101113_AABGAU hallum_r_Page_17.tif
38d03d58f8ff57319036d04660cbf51a
69562aef0f29bbfa461dafba49040bc777a990b2
26053 F20101113_AABGKP hallum_r_Page_46.QC.jpg
640115e246284f2d670ecc0c178c03e0
3541152a431307053aa6a2476ec725b51ee737ab
6964 F20101113_AABFTX hallum_r_Page_31thm.jpg
2e78e360140c1045d6d43d937ca1c7d4
2439c46b1fc76375868e4e077f6bbb86f6191318
2194 F20101113_AABGFS hallum_r_Page_20.txt
a701cb5de4d00bbb8d8c7a8436cb9579
83bb222a132fd1fcb846434decf1b83702e92a1c
45408 F20101113_AABFYV hallum_r_Page_26.jp2
2bdf09545b63fa847a708d9a7cf6294f
a338b91b9caf4d66b0e8c8abd8edd8f60aa976a7
F20101113_AABGAV hallum_r_Page_18.tif
741f8ec5a51a2da38be4f7d3a717772b
362899f2bcf827d42340eef73b3bbd54d254d542
7011 F20101113_AABGKQ hallum_r_Page_46thm.jpg
80a96814baa0462f306457272a549492
79c97d2a115e99c73f50b5bb1a80372d11820ffb
2155 F20101113_AABGFT hallum_r_Page_21.txt
83491dbc39bfacd58e780485e49b3fac
eb1ffb0be08a4f3dc1fc47341af9ad549a16c6a2
114368 F20101113_AABFYW hallum_r_Page_27.jp2
2c5b24a119cdabef9519c2a7565a056b
2c6e606149e4bad9e32e54b0fe66e67363e0a62f
F20101113_AABGAW hallum_r_Page_19.tif
8ebe7c9d4287fa11918801bf65ada79b
d164ccb62fbc82963fba20bf3e1d2d8e0c7bc341
54856 F20101113_AABFTY hallum_r_Page_21.pro
721ca92bca723f44698abc0145d515a6
1ea3490d578c215dafe8c2b10b073cecbb5fa0b7
24055 F20101113_AABGKR hallum_r_Page_47.QC.jpg
72748106a5fde3ad2e9366f29c518bea
6c33effb95bf08212fdc88d5328d8e5cbf2e0cca
2146 F20101113_AABGFU hallum_r_Page_22.txt
74997cc41505aef9000a5d5121cd8f4b
000d7b1cab5a80e7dfe756e7e613979e6a9e5b65
116747 F20101113_AABFYX hallum_r_Page_30.jp2
e24e272a394a29cc515ff26736ab3de0
d6aa6ed3048de9027dbe142a770bf63f38699772
F20101113_AABGAX hallum_r_Page_20.tif
9408e66fd6bfba777ac622d3de5d062a
121af219c8a7aa4e9b5b38899f34b6e605b5f8eb
7216 F20101113_AABFTZ hallum_r_Page_18thm.jpg
c90fce1734b4e7227260347303a89731
dd4797aaf1d4eb0371fa4e01e83ddc904c9720a1
6489 F20101113_AABGKS hallum_r_Page_47thm.jpg
5dcf13d33f7901de0659790a969f09b1
da574e8faeaed67e3554e8eb26e528f05eab14e8
2180 F20101113_AABGFV hallum_r_Page_23.txt
062873a8759b87c516c5981307784982
390e81873c58a20d472f6f3c2a070f47efc209b7
118951 F20101113_AABFYY hallum_r_Page_32.jp2
6312411a4d6929f07c9a7de8b10d0367
4a8098f6ce9589c50ef9e737ebfdaf4e3d6d7861
F20101113_AABGAY hallum_r_Page_21.tif
76762f35bf6a7c4848007da9b8769902
45d43fb87cab9c37a62e9694980b27963ca86ef8
24703 F20101113_AABGKT hallum_r_Page_48.QC.jpg
5cc0132bd4d2d6dec4bc496d472d4160
38c5a2d5cb028e5a74a019341c31f17e3d8e00cc
2205 F20101113_AABGFW hallum_r_Page_24.txt
48a80345824e12da0439838ca8ecf3bc
cf669cf7104562e6ca9869683dd8145d5ab87611
82369 F20101113_AABFWA hallum_r_Page_16.jpg
32d749d718899a9c4950c7a31ee4e09b
98cc644d7c2a0db61977a33d583d3eed91558e94
114821 F20101113_AABFYZ hallum_r_Page_33.jp2
653921fcfdd67e19a447bbf539e375d6
948824dd4d43e349de9f4682e94f708d0556c8ba
F20101113_AABGAZ hallum_r_Page_22.tif
e9a7bc599be34ab418eaf6895d2283e1
c22972f6976394350604f5aae08906a8f6856f78
6575 F20101113_AABGKU hallum_r_Page_48thm.jpg
d57927d5cb14fcbd790dc99433f8599d
dacbedec0d2c447fba31f05356f278fc02d21f35
2338 F20101113_AABGFX hallum_r_Page_25.txt
198408afff20d6adeab9912751b8d7ea
3993b9d761acd8a990d60480da1b4c266fe7c3d5
76872 F20101113_AABFWB hallum_r_Page_17.jpg
9f11032d1f984e7cdea9a3f1df4caf8a
f3dccaedf454ac47b06029df6eea24b884af7a21
26463 F20101113_AABGKV hallum_r_Page_49.QC.jpg
22d621ed545cf2489c59c190ed642324
b625ce4be0f695e5390e3d16d85655a51561a4ea
783 F20101113_AABGFY hallum_r_Page_26.txt
b5fe189f14194a06fd2fdaee2de9176b
eb3b571bcccbecdce76dda652d71c0537243a8e7
81292 F20101113_AABFWC hallum_r_Page_18.jpg
6079e989149b98a07924114513b00081
e7b725330edb019fb18caa858ed1b049987323e6
115822 F20101113_AABFRF hallum_r_Page_24.jp2
8d782475ec94364d99872d3de0a0ea72
8569e136fee305019ad097a527e7ce4d5b89a004
56255 F20101113_AABGDA hallum_r_Page_10.pro
b687bcc3a8f8210b73d7937fcd2f0280
319534c4861f0516ecf9d409241557080bc94a63
7110 F20101113_AABGKW hallum_r_Page_49thm.jpg
b505f2fa635b8ce4ece539894622e186
254d0baea9de976fb1f18bd7a4acd492d14571ce
2085 F20101113_AABGFZ hallum_r_Page_28.txt
a3fa420ea891aa8417b18d473d9fc69a
e54bdda6204ebb4e2e3de670cf061bb9832097e1
77660 F20101113_AABFWD hallum_r_Page_19.jpg
77c6d27eea4666c3610a53c9a8dde359
190c362f772431aa301d8a25a272349609a733ab
6952 F20101113_AABFRG hallum_r_Page_75thm.jpg
73bccf64ecf49267d1c8473ad12a321a
335883a5d2cfb3ce92a53e90af2feec84e8fd5c8
52787 F20101113_AABGDB hallum_r_Page_11.pro
96c8a5eda2daa4ee58f8c966f490f899
fcb96fc1d87748466d99c4e9d0e434e8e72c4e43
26315 F20101113_AABGKX hallum_r_Page_50.QC.jpg
c54087f4817e27480744f6012c70b733
4b28b480a998badffc1d1f0583f0efb8dcdc8e84
79752 F20101113_AABFWE hallum_r_Page_20.jpg
a7b5eb15234eca6d0c3991debf18e196
b7aa4e6d3b41ff215a2980454ccc908251999f1b
118782 F20101113_AABFRH hallum_r_Page_49.jp2
88ad08ea0888d4b9d3e04ac42943a1fe
e537689b8fe24540efea38579165834065fdd5b7
49811 F20101113_AABGDC hallum_r_Page_12.pro
87090d9e3a3ac1209d70f1ff13d37ac6
0cf98b181eeaa951e3507c265ce8cee714eb501c
7088 F20101113_AABGKY hallum_r_Page_50thm.jpg
9f94489c0925a7aea847bd9e056ea1ca
021f12969fe39d8250cf68b9928fa3970296ed4f
2580 F20101113_AABGIA hallum_r_Page_07thm.jpg
d54ce319a8648e6e4a35d49bfaa1601c
acd40d321e83eab411634da0f00f212681a4340c
76856 F20101113_AABFWF hallum_r_Page_21.jpg
78ea2717a30256f0fa255db226a3575a
03499243a34fc90d3de3a1a86f3f71cf5dc5b933
26479 F20101113_AABFRI hallum_r_Page_62.QC.jpg
cc5102807443ddbbf86610a8622a106e
d6e3df8132b8362cda4dcf8c4b4bd1f6d4d4e787
52786 F20101113_AABGDD hallum_r_Page_13.pro
f8eaeb2dc25ab133123d5aadd2c6ba46
2f5a61489dc06d34be33af0f5f5093ef6086ce93
26189 F20101113_AABGKZ hallum_r_Page_51.QC.jpg
2b9dc6ef79492daf722c14384755c76c
d682a077da900447d085daa07904e26d3a506e4d
16495 F20101113_AABGIB hallum_r_Page_08.QC.jpg
af35bb69e536a29ee87c2ee77cc1f2d1
86baef1bb0e2d58a39d37ce803f305f71e65100a
77045 F20101113_AABFWG hallum_r_Page_22.jpg
b1fc7a2c79e90e0107c876784e96f8cc
dbb421e6f0e1f7212b4330bd55e50082e50345d5
25485 F20101113_AABFRJ hallum_r_Page_19.QC.jpg
511fd7373523c87186485754031b3095
7aba8206d481cded15b696e117ddfdb7f4b23fa0
4684 F20101113_AABGIC hallum_r_Page_08thm.jpg
9285b7d08ac6f5fa53a46793dec7716c
5428a255ae30c858d022d5d6da0e293820f4ae36
77474 F20101113_AABFWH hallum_r_Page_23.jpg
b72c07df14919ab74da5769f901f2ff7
e6db8fc76bf830ec67accde4bb70fd9fa19197c9
2120 F20101113_AABFRK hallum_r_Page_33.txt
261e501bd52e884f5a4ded0d26004762
591c859764dbbee03cc1acf28d92d13da2b834f3
54890 F20101113_AABGDE hallum_r_Page_14.pro
32a309b418b4c3515e84149527179f97
e2066c07c91f777d1f082fd70480ad6e474b8cdc
24210 F20101113_AABGID hallum_r_Page_09.QC.jpg
95339d19c0377db62e6ddb9c2debbacb
70dae31e2ecd24804c3e769fd4a2b173d7777ce6
77198 F20101113_AABFWI hallum_r_Page_24.jpg
71d71b19907c35d606a751620374eeb2
bf55688f1e9e26a7bfbf03eae76ce801a4b13ca1
94 F20101113_AABFRL hallum_r_Page_03.txt
19e638beedcb89ad70f4440474690d73
99af97725067a71acd92a603739d6ce6ea0adad8
48726 F20101113_AABGDF hallum_r_Page_15.pro
1d1bddd6f8282b8399750628fab29f0e
93a080bc7619836ade32e92ca1c0c434f09bfe35
6577 F20101113_AABGIE hallum_r_Page_09thm.jpg
6a1854ca0d91f930fe11a1c7e71a97b5
08798855bcad277b9f27fa1787b7e17ae3509bfc
81960 F20101113_AABFWJ hallum_r_Page_25.jpg
e3c07a9cdc9960ab5f6667cef63c5349
7e0573f5ae21f120a3e284d71b9bd79b3c3ce6d3
80034 F20101113_AABFRM hallum_r_Page_63.jpg
60d1083936889c1a0d91a650bbb498b3
d19179099049bc69fa505e0e4d8bc3a03cc841e8
57650 F20101113_AABGDG hallum_r_Page_16.pro
a9b7a4a22cfe028226f553200e0f9e16
e829fd10facb78b90f895acd1e2c428bfd9c5526
25943 F20101113_AABGIF hallum_r_Page_10.QC.jpg
58708cbae5e335bcb44ab164a02ecef8
ac25c1fa09401648b550c2df821150ee05e073dd
76762 F20101113_AABFWK hallum_r_Page_27.jpg
7003be01645aaa4d4364411e07d5e5a5
9ebdb5bbb93f4648cbb4b51553e8fa80b2f8ecbc
1315 F20101113_AABFRN hallum_r_Page_58.txt
09e80f7e8dca0182d0194aa932e5c1a1
defc26741237853799670ef006e2bf0b91a8d41f
57222 F20101113_AABGDH hallum_r_Page_18.pro
f0bc7eafd7aed01c9a63658f2df65c9c
70fe8f487dccc6be24bc572df6c24d36f65d75c4
7187 F20101113_AABGIG hallum_r_Page_10thm.jpg
bdb3ad01d4ff772e138480612a2ca7f5
4c74e543171dd21111bc7cdb1efd4dd24ccf2777
75079 F20101113_AABFWL hallum_r_Page_28.jpg
992057803325aa6586b0f2dbaadde787
6ade66bb762c6fd1e6bf7c661906beebfb6a6fbc
469 F20101113_AABFRO hallum_r_Page_01.txt
acd8cb4c60d03b21f693718f1116459d
4b4d8572960325af093fbb24f00736192e09ee2a
54355 F20101113_AABGDI hallum_r_Page_19.pro
82ea730911d9c79b6087b6a9424dde6b
a9ce4f5ce8188d9774e9e593005fd8d63e06765d
22663 F20101113_AABGIH hallum_r_Page_11.QC.jpg
3c1d768be94801dd42b5f0d7fef5afe4
5cb447e4bbf3813421a063252ba2a1f69c3cb621
71779 F20101113_AABFWM hallum_r_Page_29.jpg
90505ce81257447c7f3f2756667a3e7f
2f19d5c91d99ff0ba46b4a9b32d809a67a3d34a2
1384 F20101113_AABFRP hallum_r_Page_02thm.jpg
02d2184386767452044d95b9625b5065
ab12cef5b4a6dc4f3bbfdca548f2bb3212b1c74a
55964 F20101113_AABGDJ hallum_r_Page_20.pro
d569c2a3c6b4dee75d188934607c89c6
80cda433b82124552afab7730df1e4690e1d958d
6110 F20101113_AABGII hallum_r_Page_11thm.jpg
555ffe19714f5916363a893c510b7e1f
59d777963a813ec68429992c2d6f6e55f2de75a2
76555 F20101113_AABFWN hallum_r_Page_30.jpg
0a5caae1bbd25abc815f26bec9dceab9
afd962ee4b4362893a9bd77e9a9c966532c191bf
83581 F20101113_AABFRQ hallum_r_Page_46.jpg
25cc227fca1d0428cee6f7f1df23f7a4
740605c5a616146f0e1cdba4addd6dcebe3467dd
58492 F20101113_AABGDK hallum_r_Page_25.pro
84bb2f4bdeeb5fb82b3e9fb03b095344
6b4a5a42a567d01d0cac6eebbc8fd5a6fc3d1c1c
78493 F20101113_AABFWO hallum_r_Page_31.jpg
0fe09e52c74ce55b3e5a745a6a62efe8
a11ab0f23ba5e0241ae3205f8023ac32c7a5aa54
114293 F20101113_AABFRR hallum_r_Page_13.jp2
d3a17ea83d9415f8b20ae7a166169a3e
bc5f251baa0819a478555125125d4cab35748207
19697 F20101113_AABGDL hallum_r_Page_26.pro
764d3ce69982e095ec2a7f2c1e313a07
f44829cb3466aca462fcaa5b425b1e12c625a933
23599 F20101113_AABGIJ hallum_r_Page_12.QC.jpg
bc8cb0ea5d697684fac5bdaca85569d0
438b3199d4e2586d548a481f72848e760bdee946
78748 F20101113_AABFWP hallum_r_Page_32.jpg
af89cb333e8cdf1a0cce2b2f76ac59e2
3b0a79348e5d84c8144721a467a80aafeb02dec9
F20101113_AABFRS hallum_r_Page_02.tif
4e117293a696e4721ace9475a123c9b2
f1851448e4857ac3c92a0033a36cbac1e12b9bec
53442 F20101113_AABGDM hallum_r_Page_27.pro
5681fefb75fb087b69825c33047035d5
18358e89737b9634d3cbc3cc19a0da026f0ae72f
6602 F20101113_AABGIK hallum_r_Page_12thm.jpg
d52327c901b19771b04be32c2216e47b
9f7c1f76dd9870d9ee3fb629340d6845e809b7b4
75828 F20101113_AABFWQ hallum_r_Page_33.jpg
4ff59149168c8a05b8c13f1af4871ce9
4f7e4ef76a1c1cb05b631dfd550aee00c072be6c
49616 F20101113_AABGDN hallum_r_Page_29.pro
51ddf40a29e41e0fd13876a62c1706a6
3cdfdc3c2f543c14535c7bba9f68cc8e32ca5e7c
24344 F20101113_AABGIL hallum_r_Page_13.QC.jpg
b591e27df7e7b943bf4ef40930d22a56
1a5fe1c8004fc19b03ec1a65a1d792bcd6eea2e7
74257 F20101113_AABFWR hallum_r_Page_34.jpg
b8b56dc457bb5a5e746e618e75e8355f
4862f0ef852fbf0d49a53e6c4c15c968f31713f3
2513 F20101113_AABFRT hallum_r_Page_61.txt
35bf6448cc0783e7379ab642f2a3bfc8
df52d4403077bbd6d1260ad557f5aa1c733bb24b
54393 F20101113_AABGDO hallum_r_Page_30.pro
7550f0345857acf815c2605b30580298
fa4c8110ceeea767ddc315ae897c43247856a595
25883 F20101113_AABGIM hallum_r_Page_14.QC.jpg
1f9e76c591f09776075ecc2d4f8a8f2e
83d2cf6aec27c8784a02979d6871bad621fb7ba2
78547 F20101113_AABFWS hallum_r_Page_35.jpg
a268093ccccc47aaf13bc5fc8ce4b47f
6ac056c494c23cc6101efd35092b462b04f523b0
56616 F20101113_AABFRU hallum_r_Page_08.jpg
8c5d3c7bf4e2d215c7bcbebacf22214b
9cd1819ec6b34fab39a8b2163c5d519bcc578bdd
56017 F20101113_AABGDP hallum_r_Page_31.pro
0538d24a7de6e32ac2f2cc4794902340
0f3abc1a5c1c9a900f25740808b00a64b56e35d6
6950 F20101113_AABGIN hallum_r_Page_14thm.jpg
2f6c7154cbd5750ce333b8674a10b683
ff97a5423eb592d95fa1a69c6da2a057a1724e65
85349 F20101113_AABFWT hallum_r_Page_36.jpg
fbb581bd7097b451d5e7dca44ace96db
0d0f55eedb80a1c049a3544cce93f060c4f8324c
2323 F20101113_AABFRV hallum_r_Page_42.txt
f749a74a859f52311ad69780871e88de
33f66ca4c832017acdac2d674a42c2dabcc44ac0
55513 F20101113_AABGDQ hallum_r_Page_32.pro
f2e0b2e8bccf40bc2bea1db8150153ab
c03840844c8410a8e47eb9f3cb7adeb19030aabc
23321 F20101113_AABGIO hallum_r_Page_15.QC.jpg
1519eaf436830ab274e18eca54badeb3
b4de68b961a62c635c382df40aa77a1cfc658a0a
76914 F20101113_AABFWU hallum_r_Page_37.jpg
89679162ea9a4a973cc3d4fb10ea4d9e
8aacf58e4924e72430fd51980024ca92061caeec
116469 F20101113_AABFRW hallum_r_Page_37.jp2
0c71787d1d57dd05142776ffe55a9687
36da5d7250592c2d0b917a1ecca7da55292de68d
53724 F20101113_AABGDR hallum_r_Page_33.pro
3f25b96c672b715d735dd3f9f3be9323
e4735358c8d0a82d406d6d5b6f7f6d03cb236854
6329 F20101113_AABGIP hallum_r_Page_15thm.jpg
93993d7a60b5e0db92bc76f487b9c039
b3f77e156639c889bd5200ce95b39fd9894351d6
55599 F20101113_AABFRX hallum_r_Page_39.pro
a8013623fce017c63716a9b2b6f0e47b
94fa9dfa5943b0568424eca5cf30b25bf0d8c35b
51864 F20101113_AABGDS hallum_r_Page_34.pro
9519fa0f808717b5dd483e1921346a44
a5819ae93b85010b2e7dd7dad6c41c2e9a03dff1
78118 F20101113_AABFWV hallum_r_Page_38.jpg
ec8c6ed0e907c693dc0b4424c8f6678a
5adc48beb492b2b88ba8a2868af35c2e97774dec
27468 F20101113_AABGIQ hallum_r_Page_16.QC.jpg
b87e8ee56bccf73c63477be99921cfe8
3ff142ad83cc733b28eeae0dd8a296b4f6b937d7
8733 F20101113_AABFRY hallum_r_Page_67.QC.jpg
6faac679f9cad5dd3163c46bfa33cb67
b237ecae126e87b5d89a7df66fddd2bd759e68a4
53854 F20101113_AABGDT hallum_r_Page_35.pro
f24fd269cef4eab100b1995c381cbbdc
fa1aac929154684cf99da7196390bf0cbcc6886b
78400 F20101113_AABFWW hallum_r_Page_39.jpg
e2b26d49c4af271f4eaea96d33b56a8e
d3244b29a19d01b3f466071a84b90038091a8372
7395 F20101113_AABGIR hallum_r_Page_16thm.jpg
448db9b0854f851de224cc2e282bc7cb
2e5e6e7bbb4b488c751946bf261028f2eb96e126
25922 F20101113_AABFRZ hallum_r_Page_64.QC.jpg
c1b8d3a5d165174dbf7ca6c781337ab6
4726969e7032dcdbb50049ee0979d77182653575
34084 F20101113_AABGDU hallum_r_Page_36.pro
f35364575d7862af96b153e63c0b74cf
5759438cb611824988271fb6b749b7e2f1d17782
73977 F20101113_AABFWX hallum_r_Page_40.jpg
f55dbc6dc1996a12c5755309ed37cb22
70954ee9196274f536f13689fb26bc456882d945
25037 F20101113_AABGIS hallum_r_Page_17.QC.jpg
f849bcde272733f02faa73710b1687b0
a4a4c75d23b2af820571f0c89c45a83fe2a20fc5
54490 F20101113_AABGDV hallum_r_Page_37.pro
7d3c43313b5562281dcae4bc52c22d35
a119280c426ea90caf97bc1ba64bfc94ab51cc3a
6900 F20101113_AABGIT hallum_r_Page_17thm.jpg
9ab1aa8c898cc26bbe61cd5b62fd1fb8
c90cfcb3858da81bfd2f9529a7e3bf178d798049
56554 F20101113_AABGDW hallum_r_Page_38.pro
e2740a3c848c4405bead119601e9d9e7
0b19ee94684d82a095176e86db84e96013f657ea
24983 F20101113_AABFUA hallum_r_Page_55.QC.jpg
d6828447c35995ea80408eb815d7272c
713b13c3fd203caa1fe35a4c715f7546bb44b42e
79975 F20101113_AABFWY hallum_r_Page_42.jpg
7b2e235b906a01e178cda8568767d3ce
98d039f7926c074bbdab082ebadca9942f4aeedc
26797 F20101113_AABGIU hallum_r_Page_18.QC.jpg
6a4bc055c73b667412ce46dd820a77dc
ace7a27d7b1c45f66dad2109e7a12853289e65be
51570 F20101113_AABGDX hallum_r_Page_40.pro
f9e9daca4cdced2f08e5a721e65cc72c
2fd2052bc2bbe8164e634e79acf3a9ff3d123616
F20101113_AABFUB hallum_r_Page_75.tif
76ec4d2f0e8ade7718cdcf50f39c5ed1
85595246800e396140ea5f82f5f33a8954d30559
48638 F20101113_AABFWZ hallum_r_Page_43.jpg
a5e0db48281534506b3d66435d82c947
0fd63d79183f0cc6fe18a7bed40272f80259787a
6824 F20101113_AABGIV hallum_r_Page_19thm.jpg
5ce478ab7704805a5ec183e10e9ed5f8
983410345b79734316546959f13ccbeb4a2b7853
F20101113_AABGBA hallum_r_Page_23.tif
8d6f4815c89db5e13a0f348719e60dc2
e0ad1d2311a8704de23ed5be267d454de15ba121
57977 F20101113_AABGDY hallum_r_Page_41.pro
ae9977beb30ed0001346ed81c7708540
e86883d91b532c4eac073f482fb7bd6f17b0a30b
F20101113_AABFUC hallum_r_Page_12.tif
968b6c8a0738664449602a158e6cd6be
a79bad9b477f4e46b3477619ca8375489be0559c
25757 F20101113_AABGIW hallum_r_Page_20.QC.jpg
2ea4de6062ae9daf73888c2c4e3cf4f6
903278b089a157455ab4c2f12cedf0852ee06904
111163 F20101113_AABFZA hallum_r_Page_34.jp2
86ce46e5ce569388d6113c1f51d06bbe
78dcc4e19d7cd76b33dd21ebff7c6ee4adf57152
F20101113_AABGBB hallum_r_Page_25.tif
d10bc81e62522b8bcf2bf81530c22bcc
6f2736158436e7a603b013032ac5ebeb71b79fbd
57468 F20101113_AABGDZ hallum_r_Page_42.pro
97bbcf8dc5a67e99806d5bd9cb4b045d
a749e4be71309e9f2d9b3db9be39781a049a128b
25532 F20101113_AABFUD hallum_r_Page_74.QC.jpg
d7560aef07f8dae37e17f65ed8292ae6
81239f401777e659817d9262f82b23102f1aaea4
6963 F20101113_AABGIX hallum_r_Page_20thm.jpg
dee6195a716d9155ecea7ccf8a4f9b8f
af016b2e1bb0e0600dffd43218aec2a1173dc743
116401 F20101113_AABFZB hallum_r_Page_35.jp2
c208904a32773fe31986083271366727
2231bbefd2c950546ebd82b553fa02008ae82b01
24581 F20101113_AABFUE hallum_r_Page_53.QC.jpg
3f493903cb47b0cfb2fb8d88e4542f9b
0392de2038e5bbc8a63699c3150fbc834f82c315
25175 F20101113_AABGIY hallum_r_Page_21.QC.jpg
98d5905752ecc274131647d715972a98
2ec55de797c90c53e086140f0dd2b0fed6756bcc
1051920 F20101113_AABFZC hallum_r_Page_36.jp2
4df307387ee2856318a71f89e29e1bea
a5e557f164ac44f0b94f31cf9fc265843c3bfd94
F20101113_AABGBC hallum_r_Page_26.tif
beb4fbe22cc7745723132bc30f9b060a
f7120b35ec1248ee2d802f96a59ab7799457e677
25042 F20101113_AABFUF hallum_r_Page_40.QC.jpg
13c73137d4bf0c136025e37d4ee27f2f
a8bb481fb8a06350a6015f310103ca9afe893a3b
1958 F20101113_AABGGA hallum_r_Page_29.txt
e2b0dd334a5672caee391477d275ebdb
bbbde012082b8feecf454438aeb3a91f987af662
6680 F20101113_AABGIZ hallum_r_Page_21thm.jpg
2a965271ff47dfabae96fbd95083e5fa
815fb618d2bf4fb3d55e179e2d50566f4dc997b1
119941 F20101113_AABFZD hallum_r_Page_38.jp2
e2e8d40814f5f1a3feb75e9df4079237
e293234242cd92ffc178ed8ff0197fe051ec7f18
F20101113_AABGBD hallum_r_Page_27.tif
62f11ebdcd66b888db7d372ada478454
36e86227e2fd405fe434095b1895c23d1766c8cf
25860 F20101113_AABFUG hallum_r_Page_31.QC.jpg
21aaa0fd5ce6817f9dd5ef9c9fc2c929
f94d50e5026d96e7dc604a57c309b2bb5ba9170d
2135 F20101113_AABGGB hallum_r_Page_30.txt
ce1e4f1dc3031bbeb77afb2a92b5b503
4cdf4c90da3b89cdd8513e13b11b2d084dc41e69
112014 F20101113_AABFZE hallum_r_Page_40.jp2
3cc0818e00a3ee7753a8e3839e4ffcca
fbd0e5b8283cd5fcd54d231fb1ca9e1c7674c263
F20101113_AABGBE hallum_r_Page_28.tif
9cfeeafb833affd01de0812979e203b2
ee6c1494a84604d0890c0bcc17e7c13d20ce6180
35218 F20101113_AABFUH hallum_r_Page_08.pro
ea176c9dab8c117bfb0c39aa66cb585d
4acd463e780d33dd07b8f2c65f8f592030872faa
2195 F20101113_AABGGC hallum_r_Page_31.txt
7dd68d9259e8cd1481213007af52246c
556b1ed9cfb8fdab8713a257c7a2eae77d026198
10227 F20101113_AABGLA hallum_r_Page_52.QC.jpg
56067ea8c9f35a2b34f7a840497f9885
2b27babdc6d49d37a3ec20eb4fc481c556543af1
121932 F20101113_AABFZF hallum_r_Page_41.jp2
e340f3d28f3187fa582c2c1b0bc48c67
fe6558771645704e80b8813cb0f2e9fdd22cf7e6
F20101113_AABGBF hallum_r_Page_29.tif
ff5c03f3dec9d6139efe10143ac52c8e
0c570f759fed8c87cc7aefa5b48ccdfc6d14565d
2179 F20101113_AABFUI hallum_r_Page_39.txt
c84e88c0c87ba2608e16569c3c2b34a5
89cfc3655221cea99395a8cd8e7635db2f96a3dc
2189 F20101113_AABGGD hallum_r_Page_32.txt
7b8ab0c03559e3fff12bbe4dd4104469
e00be288f0ab7f5a077bde8b2788b4dfcaa2ee00
3155 F20101113_AABGLB hallum_r_Page_52thm.jpg
747fe326497c04f6ca99814792dc3573
04796f47f6861fac99bf7ae655e0c10f1359da96
119339 F20101113_AABFZG hallum_r_Page_42.jp2
470e3b4b17c252a3f1f76162a963fdc9
e9d8a11ff2346f953b9387c257151b6652f27e91
F20101113_AABGBG hallum_r_Page_30.tif
4066db119cba82ccd34fedc3e67c8b64
c1af278a149d1c1242ad78a76606595fc955cdd2
2133 F20101113_AABFUJ hallum_r_Page_19.txt
734cb4da3420e6b88bb68cf7dd963dc9
c43cc20e9465f67399115fa9f08bc60b2c9c30f5
2045 F20101113_AABGGE hallum_r_Page_34.txt
a7942be89c5acf88582dd25ef982f9cc
f8b5ef886f7369520cc73ebe6d0a1306e43e272b
6749 F20101113_AABGLC hallum_r_Page_53thm.jpg
9b6a29313e0d85d08ac5a3d1af670a1c
be62c9131212d257f0094c1a578ac353cac1eb87
106341 F20101113_AABFZH hallum_r_Page_45.jp2
97c7d792e73f78e7d648caa81f28988f
45049adf989ecb106047dc4822ff3e9ea1ae81bf
F20101113_AABGBH hallum_r_Page_34.tif
ca367e8d2cddb548c8bc4eea97593f9d
acfb908ea5cab9c338a4968e3b884e7456e72745
80284 F20101113_AABFUK hallum_r_Page_41.jpg
b260509756d739b8284a5148ee81499b
4c10f4544fac65b390e1f8d395aad41ccc486219
2191 F20101113_AABGGF hallum_r_Page_35.txt
6a235ddedbe2c3bbb42086203e3c1dd7
b4b66374cf1f4082b875b50c35748c2cbe561dce
25547 F20101113_AABGLD hallum_r_Page_54.QC.jpg
ec6f95a19b5f0c73b93d4e082df7a31b
890d692f2ded3f9fd75fe05e126c4f345cd41d82
124727 F20101113_AABFZI hallum_r_Page_46.jp2
37c2d2a292dabc5eab5864be9a1710a2
3822646d53173542280cd6c5ff83f0b1715f43ab
F20101113_AABGBI hallum_r_Page_35.tif
353a19397e9edfc3577676f0ba43a56c
3a4a3b9f8b032a510a5012a262f299d28305137a
3247 F20101113_AABFUL hallum_r_Page_78thm.jpg
f1afeb235675ec9d535ac0223504aa24
62952ae2c9c8865efddddea99e92d315689b6f55
1365 F20101113_AABGGG hallum_r_Page_36.txt
b97d19ba16da09f4dc691ae87f2b139f
49316f560ee72f3726d1c9db4b0f86e140a2f493
6743 F20101113_AABGLE hallum_r_Page_55thm.jpg
bbcf4c0005350c23d7509e70c5007a7f
cf7345558228150566656f0cb2016023bcd9b692
F20101113_AABFZJ hallum_r_Page_47.jp2
b48038b0598a43b06d6e3cdae2164efb
b5d405ccaaf3817d7b9c708e85d2cd66fc71c314
F20101113_AABGBJ hallum_r_Page_36.tif
1be6d5702efd094e224e52592e38fa16
0fe630564dfa665f57d45fa65e9f4e36e29c1f26
26709 F20101113_AABFUM hallum_r_Page_07.jpg
4a6576f3d03abffb9c6bb4b173bea797
77e79853fc318bef29997a4052c3ac940840a879
25071 F20101113_AABGLF hallum_r_Page_56.QC.jpg
0f10b09432973b65809ffbe573feb3a0
d830ecaa4bae3ae8f8df7719eae01109be632967
1051854 F20101113_AABFZK hallum_r_Page_48.jp2
6d238290abf80bf81b5687124b84b79d
02161db8b48e042b6c5cb944d9c799c79a3db215
F20101113_AABGBK hallum_r_Page_37.tif
eab3de0f26dbdfc945d87496a8eca890
a26f3335c17c1c30712420a141258d0df54c3b79
76999 F20101113_AABFUN hallum_r_Page_54.jpg
0584cd8404675c129f818b3ac40e0d51
353008da8c0eb2293762c5ee149946a50bccb032
2216 F20101113_AABGGH hallum_r_Page_38.txt
6ba5180e3cfe30b0c8e1cb5a2b33a018
3a1d5853285a39fde0b196da167a1c8de5154926
7049 F20101113_AABGLG hallum_r_Page_56thm.jpg
6958914374da205d08088d21a70894c2
bb01571848aa12a63db0d6acad8a2aeb19161dc0
1051923 F20101113_AABFZL hallum_r_Page_50.jp2
d13c39a7d45dd5075c393952332f854b
1efe71fb3818c4cfcc17c916f57a33482116115e
F20101113_AABGBL hallum_r_Page_38.tif
782cc680580c1e58c2ea114e29b4adcf
16399fe08f414410dd2ea706ddc9bb7bb4011200
119898 F20101113_AABFUO hallum_r_Page_64.jp2
947430db793a228ae73c257f40d984c9
c895726bd8f003efcddefece212f770c54f19eaf
2066 F20101113_AABGGI hallum_r_Page_40.txt
db0bbb56c0a0d3c7b2c0e7f47fdc7d02
e0bb34c25caf1914a4cdb9599034e507346634df
25277 F20101113_AABGLH hallum_r_Page_57.QC.jpg
7e5a7664134ceccb123dea5362233c8e
2e08066ca5f926a1212a823423d1886940bd6f9c
42434 F20101113_AABFZM hallum_r_Page_52.jp2
dbe95d3b2381f14243975b790912c887
1cd6189180a05b0e2c750735a923830506b252b1
F20101113_AABGBM hallum_r_Page_40.tif
bbc0bd92a938bee2378847c6418845af
f0056a453507a3d9a2cd615ac8cc3ba48c711c91
2364 F20101113_AABFUP hallum_r_Page_41.txt
d5f1119aca0bf690b2fb76703250c319
cdf21d5dbbb3fbc5ed4cc2bddaefbb3360d3fc1d
1253 F20101113_AABGGJ hallum_r_Page_43.txt
4dd45c15f56781db0e312bf376c5d800
8e65882748bb88f08d5c91dd66d632763d672c7e
22033 F20101113_AABGLI hallum_r_Page_58.QC.jpg
c4bb489747b619b6472a81eb2e9294a4
8558a2825137ed8fca4c96dc26fb1d520525fb57
113148 F20101113_AABFZN hallum_r_Page_53.jp2
371150188f69d9607172420bae36ddcd
aa2ae2fbb15b937e01c87896d372ac3610f74fca
F20101113_AABGBN hallum_r_Page_41.tif
5a30627f8df258bc6faa014548be65de
39088cf14e153b982e373d8cffbb5f2887990e46
F20101113_AABFUQ hallum_r_Page_39.tif
b1fbccd3beeb407baf5a50bd82e942ed
b7f07373d75a812438b99808c605ec79ab7714bc
2534 F20101113_AABGGK hallum_r_Page_44.txt
7493442f0fa65f61e4e6af3a7e8baecd
49d23faf59a55ea67a687931a3c2ae5f0f9749f4
6227 F20101113_AABGLJ hallum_r_Page_58thm.jpg
f9a80c55c6f0c467b9abf2ef3412c09f
d58e401a12109ddcadf839bda337fa48b140d403
116611 F20101113_AABFZO hallum_r_Page_54.jp2
f14a06485f304fcbb7816b16b830f967
c8bfc25141068d200a8f16b9dfe0be9baba098d9
F20101113_AABGBO hallum_r_Page_42.tif
7c0c41c753f25cb0240c2023ac1a0eba
9103ea2a6d8acbcbf8a2b223320ca321c1c6ce69
5630 F20101113_AABFUR hallum_r_Page_05thm.jpg
bb5a6a0289680560a97053159a804d42
4b1a005c2f41189b7764cb323bc08e8f80711506
1961 F20101113_AABGGL hallum_r_Page_45.txt
1c80db9c2eaa3ac8ccf3e1576703b125
b02cacbe304ae59e240267ac57d80fc022763676
24463 F20101113_AABGLK hallum_r_Page_59.QC.jpg
dfe28f01d9c85f03bdb48b42fdade2cb
3c88bf879031de12565e17f2b5cd500bc9518032
115828 F20101113_AABFZP hallum_r_Page_56.jp2
3ca15981cf721f1d5bb07fda0284ac3c
2b8952d1300bc18b1724876a85dc7f1bbbad416b
F20101113_AABGBP hallum_r_Page_43.tif
44c6e4af9a1378a5ecf88871acba58b0
f79bdb6191dac578250bf4e8d218704604b42129
76649 F20101113_AABFUS hallum_r_Page_53.jpg
4089166e8470f6735364d414e90c049c
3de1c56b5cd61ed8c43492c55712de222784f75d
2421 F20101113_AABGGM hallum_r_Page_46.txt
117a4ce73c8af57bee8f52c6290b4e22
16efa0d25977010270c41f4a8be5119a05a1e305
26360 F20101113_AABGLL hallum_r_Page_60.QC.jpg
c63730e990c0abe940e82d399b696d47
a7096b8789ea6b71f8b838dd8dc9c0d383636a75
116922 F20101113_AABFZQ hallum_r_Page_57.jp2
5b765e27bb950118ea1046c2421dc244
ee2ce2c0ccd8fcf8b950a5ce884dd53cfaf6a368
F20101113_AABGBQ hallum_r_Page_44.tif
314f6f47eddbdcdbc7b91ed92efd9ab0
23cfcec6696bf6a6b176eef90b62c8469a14aac5
81521 F20101113_AABFUT hallum_r_Page_62.jpg
98dec6674f5d38b22ef937b31e0f7e52
0d60b1f7bee1b0d03a690584aa3cc1e493ee0ec6
2144 F20101113_AABGGN hallum_r_Page_47.txt
43ee62ca36b0e1a1b642d39b89e78a9f
2379b9d1a14db1e8375a22dba54dd3b8231dbead
F20101113_AABGBR hallum_r_Page_47.tif
f07b217d11ee7f19a8c18324f32bd423
7489743e4cc1a0a02a9474f1e472e9b93f016ae2
63116 F20101113_AABFUU hallum_r_Page_44.pro
2e12844a7b59ebcc72be3acc4b59904c
56b2566f852e62b42b9a0ed8b5abd393dbf07a1c
1700 F20101113_AABGGO hallum_r_Page_48.txt
42812c5680baa0e550465a29217e61f8
55364c482ef70ac3ede7e15d6798e814d6b9d19a
1051726 F20101113_AABFZR hallum_r_Page_58.jp2
ed5a559b298480c2008ed159d2217467
88ba241e84fcd998d3d3cb960824692de48ae9bf
7062 F20101113_AABGLM hallum_r_Page_60thm.jpg
7961095176dc501e70d479210da3f8c9
a646255c5fd5693efe7e5dd08a90a0c719d31fb3
F20101113_AABGBS hallum_r_Page_48.tif
35866cf7b8daac3b233774c9ad5c7017
0ae6eb7a3ef6e63f9afd9be99ea14b977c5e061d
672 F20101113_AABFUV hallum_r_Page_07.txt
32e3fb8e19bbfb17c9140950fb1e952f
97f41a3cc924d59a82bd3e2f6f383aa223daef78
2228 F20101113_AABGGP hallum_r_Page_49.txt
947a2ddfadb40d8c46d612e9223646eb
ee89e963220fd748a2a4f11d5bac5a8f56b974e8
113385 F20101113_AABFZS hallum_r_Page_59.jp2
5a58fb5fcf68be27f9349d527961b37f
0a00c0ad7fa04e6c8af42db6af0a7fec0af54db1
26289 F20101113_AABGLN hallum_r_Page_61.QC.jpg
99ff20bf29c5ed46d392280004f28dd0
2b8a141f9358a25f23c8f6bab57efa429163d01f
F20101113_AABGBT hallum_r_Page_49.tif
6bc3630c461312ffc3ccb52fc6a5144d
9bc75aedb47c1a0ff4a9465368b4046a166e23d4
1800 F20101113_AABGGQ hallum_r_Page_50.txt
a19e870ce8d6492f78854b5e42975b04
b92b834fcdeab3dec6a86159b4583ee1a6713a2a
127644 F20101113_AABFZT hallum_r_Page_61.jp2
c5dc877691fd9bdc078514ccae9ab8f2
21b3b088ce781520eff3f965bc2cd93a1e5c6255
6764 F20101113_AABGLO hallum_r_Page_61thm.jpg
586be8e73b21f7040bfd10553e464d1f
7f5679c57de9dbd1bd0be76041b3538c043df433
2270 F20101113_AABGGR hallum_r_Page_51.txt
0e658d2f94a8e9fcc9c93b7b5222aa54
1a298a94863a4897ede4c273919e0d0c96d8d62e
F20101113_AABGBU hallum_r_Page_50.tif
ee93ef11532752e984e3fe0ecef734e5
bc15d17be89ffc76930f4daa4030bbff7aae7476
6583 F20101113_AABFUW hallum_r_Page_28thm.jpg
3ffa71107b73c62d35106ca7e1d69b0c
b90a0d8de676ad22302c40674d1158912271867b
118342 F20101113_AABFZU hallum_r_Page_63.jp2
90729b8482322d033b7037c9ec97659c
5d93e18626fb2f100a494a39f47d0b5fb26374dc
26046 F20101113_AABGLP hallum_r_Page_63.QC.jpg
3fae1bf3b36e92e810a13e49a2fca8d0
39a4437fb2febafd3ffc84b13d20758a0fedbb03
715 F20101113_AABGGS hallum_r_Page_52.txt
26d7f9e7376a78496603c39a542659da
3d7aef441afcd3b7e28846312a7fb92691cee1cc
F20101113_AABGBV hallum_r_Page_51.tif
0aab0e9eee22270d01818312e77501e7
6812c77cd8e58630a28edcecc68ef96ea00085b5
45822 F20101113_AABFUX hallum_r_Page_72.jpg
45d5ee7533b10069d5b46761e176b914
ca3cb267f17d1a064032d8e234bf8b6f710b6095
1013548 F20101113_AABFZV hallum_r_Page_66.jp2
f0b7b3b7198679946646dcbd475386c5
52bf4c5f9fc3850476e2a23037b3a19125de449b
7039 F20101113_AABGLQ hallum_r_Page_63thm.jpg
119e3b6dfc906a2b14ef312d9ad0749b
8c540a8e4842974f05a84f1b789a9d362c32d370
F20101113_AABGGT hallum_r_Page_53.txt
d6370d43f642239715d0e201be4cd4e9
86223f602a722a5af276aa33347681cb47645aaa
F20101113_AABGBW hallum_r_Page_52.tif
6d480053536acb71fd4ad96f5b574183
980ae51b5aec268bc30c89fe05f31a76355ba298
F20101113_AABFSA hallum_r_Page_32.QC.jpg
fe8ddc29ef793e4c9fed537d2d21dfdc
3658d7e0c9169e62bfe1abcd6bd4e9b513dfda9d
52525 F20101113_AABFUY hallum_r_Page_53.pro
e468d5930ea642ac728aedb0f8b736cd
decc8bdb1ae49a8dfe52b0eefd6638f6e3368ed5
114130 F20101113_AABFZW hallum_r_Page_68.jp2
a63c172a1dfc0921acaaf58e2e8e10e1
7d149ea7ce7f7724468451a97dfe4450c1da583f
7119 F20101113_AABGLR hallum_r_Page_64thm.jpg
5f495f30ac921264f423d108a22dcf8a
073469d8f0bc9782e7f51e0091c840e91f83c7cd
2131 F20101113_AABGGU hallum_r_Page_54.txt
c55460efaa79d46e0463d51c64793904
501b5636f52750e5f22dafc92f208334aa1eec05
F20101113_AABGBX hallum_r_Page_53.tif
5d22981c87dfeaaa7d12b9e70766c376
6167739ff000b3a4068356c18e3a86433a62105a
32562 F20101113_AABFSB hallum_r_Page_58.pro
8123df2998e6dd2182eaf6bba3165cdc
874102eaf2b09a5e4908deb533c27e9230f39701
6886 F20101113_AABFUZ hallum_r_Page_13thm.jpg
ebf9c2b2ceebde96ec44a95290a178b2
264ee67321b04dec2c6ccdf86c5fd07babaa039f
115505 F20101113_AABFZX hallum_r_Page_69.jp2
e688a31e36d9dafa881ab95dd5286f6e
f2e84d728a5373357bcda789b9c0bff0cdc8884e
7098 F20101113_AABGLS hallum_r_Page_65thm.jpg
0ee618af24afb24c5bd9aa5ea364d0de
1e1ed1650b50cca723dc386f50ba4c67e8b05921
2103 F20101113_AABGGV hallum_r_Page_55.txt
cec05f969143c82483e05ae7c17b1608
680c23652177caa5bddb7a64b620083fb6730407
53499 F20101113_AABFSC hallum_r_Page_55.pro
73a63b7dd3a8e922b4068049b13fd815
96ed7254d7971c33e6284d2b4c3d1012b50eb7ea
113503 F20101113_AABFZY hallum_r_Page_70.jp2
db425788a5a1c401ca1c34615a0ab0a7
6121c4113c7f7fce3d43e550fbbb19952501acc2
F20101113_AABGBY hallum_r_Page_56.tif
e43ab0e423c4e6a5e92a48af1bbb2680
46eb4d31d3a705b442130b25fb90638ffedf4384
20868 F20101113_AABGLT hallum_r_Page_66.QC.jpg
7daad3c5f6dcbc03a5010410819a4c36
cee05deeac5b41b6c2261c2475ca4730fa3cf091
2116 F20101113_AABGGW hallum_r_Page_56.txt
d57542cc9d6b4ed6d024e0985b5e7415
c8389b6a49287711479f7b0cbc921d9c84e05b43
54676 F20101113_AABFSD hallum_r_Page_24.pro
c99c21adc025128e5c98a5b306dff574
c758e0fec3103ad8277b2da56047284927cd58e3
85451 F20101113_AABFXA hallum_r_Page_44.jpg
054cf3eebd5c0a69ce6a218579223c8d
33e635bdd5e82edfb647c1f44c6cc318953d074b
54751 F20101113_AABFZZ hallum_r_Page_71.jp2
52eed470f5fab68193b37426a3b17adb
e3a1b24519e1fdcc5cc7a1c963054602faaa99c7
F20101113_AABGBZ hallum_r_Page_57.tif
691662b0d49132f886b8fc366820845e
ced6f2b641d6a934bd1dcea4e6c766274e7320f9
6057 F20101113_AABGLU hallum_r_Page_66thm.jpg
f4fc7a73fd8b2cc84663db03cc8d3eeb
5b1b1fe97e96057005125adb749518f7c3cbf2f7
2157 F20101113_AABGGX hallum_r_Page_57.txt
142489757a22dfe582ae811153da23ee
47d5bade29bd216b93643bb3cc99dee2178d1e7a
72405 F20101113_AABFXB hallum_r_Page_45.jpg
85e97eb08b75924cf4b78bcb064ecd85
571368dc53b0a96d40f8a6c76a842c8c0091ce7b
2181 F20101113_AABFSE hallum_r_Page_27.txt
0705269fdd6da5fc9934a7454f8ab067
bec3053f111b2ffd989a577e7a9f8c1e48548ca6
2630 F20101113_AABGLV hallum_r_Page_67thm.jpg
c6ad014e1ef6ddd13d267eacf70dbd13
034dbf7230937492adbbec5ec100cb9ab784edae
2130 F20101113_AABGGY hallum_r_Page_59.txt
9866d57973b2afcf16d98665e571ed7b
4cdaaaea468e217532e3dd79dfacf85fbb89973b
31980 F20101113_AABGEA hallum_r_Page_43.pro
e98569b6e538762bcbee8ddd6fcbae14
030a7045d113d6c098471a5c5e522a4256f96ad6
86165 F20101113_AABFXC hallum_r_Page_48.jpg
764888363ec018eee127b23c5b8fc065
52d03c75c1470327692e0429c2f6701c497f5af7
F20101113_AABFSF hallum_r_Page_31.tif
0d61a4070c9f48f58fffeda285fce5f6
185aa5fb472ef09fdb233e6d3e9549841593b852
24949 F20101113_AABGLW hallum_r_Page_68.QC.jpg
1506615b02f65d6cdbe4a0e0dcdd06fe
5ba0b4ef8aba03f5807e6049b09bef935ba1abbe
2334 F20101113_AABGGZ hallum_r_Page_62.txt
7576495b3bc20598b815fb38bb3e141b
9a029a2c9e82b62d6193554fe102d5a32c2b1aa6
60798 F20101113_AABGEB hallum_r_Page_46.pro
175cf734f9c9125bcbbc94ddd2d18f04
39b38df00dce4fb508e74f0cd68a590190801ee2
79863 F20101113_AABFXD hallum_r_Page_49.jpg
b4cbeda81675e3e9fadc9e26f72e99ee
5d57fd9d8c5f0b051b9b32e02a7cc6b167c53518
121908 F20101113_AABFSG hallum_r_Page_51.jp2
cfabbeb8bf3583e5e0b7b7b0f4217607
9d495283b778bcc2c06eca63b3baa495f93690e8
6738 F20101113_AABGLX hallum_r_Page_68thm.jpg
16547d6d70e9b10a248f658537b51a2f
9598e1c5b799246fe0b5d68db3f88953d44a3924
52989 F20101113_AABGEC hallum_r_Page_47.pro
6d087505af0804a184594cbeba0f19ff
261039c2ce23cf6b22c1f1b5c9153336a64050b8
88598 F20101113_AABFXE hallum_r_Page_50.jpg
dc2160fb105e6b7f81193bd460993840
e6bc72a17b4e2ca965f84a6b3888532ca31dfd37
F20101113_AABFSH hallum_r_Page_45.tif
6d5b0345815398973ca9a3971ea06d6c
dca83cf8f99fb0c88137f8c7b90279c14f41e274
24857 F20101113_AABGLY hallum_r_Page_69.QC.jpg
17de94a9380c830b739c9ec97d6e5497
f72065d212e93072dd20f297f96b17010c5dd34b
25256 F20101113_AABGJA hallum_r_Page_22.QC.jpg
2bf2f41a81aae2b6e3cd67d248bcd055
e4e4c72821d465714433be723c0addb2fe391c8c
41987 F20101113_AABGED hallum_r_Page_48.pro
10ed53419e8f5130f0ba00904f9de565
f18e106ed363d8964a0b9b26c22aa1a32b70aa25
78956 F20101113_AABFXF hallum_r_Page_51.jpg
070ce788a8dca1e5e7230eadf4e88993
ad8da4f75abb3ca3c5942f02061ad9dbf3f3c5d0
108732 F20101113_AABFSI hallum_r_Page_12.jp2
6302ee138c565f7e2aac778de2543ad6
77617cfe144fb7c7018707b48071f67fae7d0433
6874 F20101113_AABGLZ hallum_r_Page_69thm.jpg
799bdb0af5056dc811ad94206eec8032
83ce4e1ff6d8cdea530b900defaa2587a0582000
6863 F20101113_AABGJB hallum_r_Page_22thm.jpg
fb410c33ad3aaaf015ac5dba622364a3
9e4bb1524eb04d80aea87c4e1ab18b474a663ac4
56617 F20101113_AABGEE hallum_r_Page_49.pro
fa7ff25962821dc874f819750597c96a
f7865dad699857364fb4d45437f05eefe2a7ef66
30889 F20101113_AABFXG hallum_r_Page_52.jpg
8b36b93524c22ad509b713c8c356ff38
ae03ddab13722b369f9c029557389f68a54fdcaf
74437 F20101113_AABFSJ hallum_r_Page_47.jpg
ac03b3700c498adc1121ea0f13a54df0
6d8688b9ad43af295632bf4521ffcf6edd376598
24283 F20101113_AABGJC hallum_r_Page_23.QC.jpg
4dc6ff3d2b3284884d9f738e59d8a6e0
bd723b3130ea38ddd22178bdd22260b9dc9a6448
75164 F20101113_AABFXH hallum_r_Page_56.jpg
56d3b148b0a999a28ad8a2850e0677dd
63dd146327033c61d9098318b11b0600497d4ab7
F20101113_AABFSK hallum_r_Page_57thm.jpg
8afe7638131e9d47b182af1dfed44184
81adbafe41ef8ab29352f939e54a77a01b1b808e
6711 F20101113_AABGJD hallum_r_Page_23thm.jpg
f7266baef81802ca3fd076f8884eeb18
f5a90796d59d321713f8ab2716b3d0c51ee74fe9
43617 F20101113_AABGEF hallum_r_Page_50.pro
b4f433141b60ad5d958667d7a1dd5d3a
69686b32479c267c5c45bd9b9969c95c2cf4d57f
77101 F20101113_AABFXI hallum_r_Page_57.jpg
24bd9369fd6984f4b5d05e91fa8c06b2
15cd3151eeb43259abf5f02cacd71cdd730e83ee
130396 F20101113_AABFSL hallum_r_Page_77.jp2
9302b6e6b933036d1a907b7db8fa71ce
d71e57a174b111614f23c4c7f6cd119c9951174b
23635 F20101113_AABGJE hallum_r_Page_24.QC.jpg
5ab356b5f326f97e3949e95537e690a2
4c52031078b28ae249625e41df67fda03e302085
57128 F20101113_AABGEG hallum_r_Page_51.pro
722b4e7d0ddd9ff47349abeafbfdb06b
913ac6f4004e8d75e60b199869121d60b634a61b
73701 F20101113_AABFXJ hallum_r_Page_58.jpg
09ddc537b63fb80a0ddcd1625b358e27
0488563074f827c77e9250fcc2e2eb8e2e6ed7c1
F20101113_AABFSM hallum_r_Page_54.tif
c168c8c9d852e6be1e022e25bd3611c9
e9f7d26b14b237fc8aa2d47e5ede7362b84f51a2
6557 F20101113_AABGJF hallum_r_Page_24thm.jpg
eca06216fb8a1f96d509f7fa818f1ea8
2ba4aa83aa7668c3fe8eedd4bd37dfbafffed810
17992 F20101113_AABGEH hallum_r_Page_52.pro
a5b89677c0b4d2868024479ea6fc4bee
5a558344ce114bb192d68d854eb29f858939bfb5
76392 F20101113_AABFXK hallum_r_Page_59.jpg
099b4a3f1eaa2876fff4025071b3e6bd
f9f69e69815b9ab23733875739a955d7b5c3a922
F20101113_AABFSN hallum_r_Page_70.tif
a5457a59b71e2e445aeaa481a1d8ba73
40f7a1f5b18e76e2387d6ac341e5e5814a02c894
25628 F20101113_AABGJG hallum_r_Page_25.QC.jpg
5c4f42cf9c69a2c5efe71d56b4797678
559da4c4040d15ee0c6a3f8873e46ac2f3e19076
53788 F20101113_AABGEI hallum_r_Page_54.pro
a98e1b52933628753a04058c3084337d
214d1dc625705cf13b84e931b90ee91e0308dab8
82803 F20101113_AABFXL hallum_r_Page_60.jpg
b97cf02b82303c6df1bab38c182908de
33092164d27b20caa554439d8b6ad933def2d5c6
120381 F20101113_AABFSO hallum_r_Page_31.jp2
38ec59dbdf1fc4f88fc08238c7175923
44ac3622437729d24fdc859af16633448f56889c
6880 F20101113_AABGJH hallum_r_Page_25thm.jpg
bbefc9aa6dbba33768cd560135f5a80a
afc0fa188f20ff912fd1d85ebb29a73f49d1b2de
55002 F20101113_AABGEJ hallum_r_Page_57.pro
832b36d32643a116495395253d08eaea
f59a9ea6387d41cc6fc2372ac280f816335758c9
83423 F20101113_AABFXM hallum_r_Page_61.jpg
bef47e9cf1aff68a6a9cb3dc510b8d6b
d4f82748aa877510577cd8165e8822e813fa4424
F20101113_AABFSP hallum_r_Page_54thm.jpg
b9bc68259309173d8ab650f3ffe1cecb
563a2b53c910b69bbffe6c1d7dd3876d1b197883
10773 F20101113_AABGJI hallum_r_Page_26.QC.jpg
3f52f209ef836db48651dae2fb78ea93
80556556760119c0ff6ab52bb46e9552438b176e
53229 F20101113_AABGEK hallum_r_Page_59.pro
d0e6c324a6f55ba71045126099be552d
9ef2798e9b91fe00afa9611a391ae10ab3533dd5
79360 F20101113_AABFXN hallum_r_Page_64.jpg
13d103ce4f00b971511ff802b9cd7a90
5abfed9075b2558b6d807b0d13f2464cb8842e14
112872 F20101113_AABFSQ hallum_r_Page_28.jp2
548071be57833d2de0023a5ee0ab68e6
c27d2d209ac7681f76b253bf5864707b5f24db7f
3309 F20101113_AABGJJ hallum_r_Page_26thm.jpg
0a137537662c43af09173b4e5a15485c
7365ac3f295837976748b507ef0fdc757e930045
59842 F20101113_AABGEL hallum_r_Page_60.pro
5d1e926106dcc7877a16dbea93e481ce
14e3765e991c8291bca0fcc42238d4d9c35a02ed
77563 F20101113_AABFXO hallum_r_Page_65.jpg
2bd5e8334f6f4c3425b21f48adcba03a
7f7766c3a590ae40db4a139e198555c9f60ad29d
75113 F20101113_AABFSR hallum_r_Page_55.jpg
3fcb155eed7569cc69a62ce5c57b6d75
1beacb1f960d4a201ad5715265ef105e707ca37e
61979 F20101113_AABGEM hallum_r_Page_61.pro
cfd47cfdeec5c6e089c0000fb5ebd33d
87649229019f6a87824524607a3498dbb737de47
64954 F20101113_AABFXP hallum_r_Page_66.jpg
15d36f1f3c28c6a65db4981bd52c0e5c
73b131b6c4fd0e3af00a4fd180268778e8369398
53866 F20101113_AABFSS hallum_r_Page_56.pro
e80378832908072c4866607153909326
720730ddfd112d6793423aa37b15e9e7308b6bc8
25174 F20101113_AABGJK hallum_r_Page_27.QC.jpg
fd94c424670b919c6056485ca18cbcef
163abaf8c08acc21ba4a0abad279a33252a370ec
58478 F20101113_AABGEN hallum_r_Page_62.pro
3ad0def56d2237b224691bff07d0e296
b1a50d425f7cc6f7b89b9badb23543180724b9da
25789 F20101113_AABFXQ hallum_r_Page_67.jpg
bbdd0d8e193f2bf15507c03fb3369f26
da59a21e5d139b88534cf3b5bc5e3619aa77e734
13089 F20101113_AABFST hallum_r_Page_04.pro
316db7766809e7c9c67c36f231ab5ddf
92f64c6a591a6157f71b6a3075739bc6c8dd9f98
6972 F20101113_AABGJL hallum_r_Page_27thm.jpg
4ba3ecb2fbe5a1024bc56a5fe9e864b1
b88f2d0c53fde1643df6440d62af99241de34acb
56372 F20101113_AABGEO hallum_r_Page_63.pro
6119c7aaf4c6447eb7b08a55343114aa
21a512c07a79866bba0c6a282dea61809c25b6db
76589 F20101113_AABFXR hallum_r_Page_68.jpg
815fea79acfc8414ed8a0fe898f8078f
497d819f9f2a73a6c50a4f53fd83c6a50556fe12
24452 F20101113_AABGJM hallum_r_Page_28.QC.jpg
7580dc13cc11837c1c1c0b0b669c301e
ff6b06309fb14b3eb6e63d898bc35459e4e1a370
57392 F20101113_AABGEP hallum_r_Page_64.pro
d92e9b448c759c93949a5b98de5a8dc7
b0ca4291cff56d5ecd31e10acd14dcb24c9e49ab
76446 F20101113_AABFXS hallum_r_Page_69.jpg
d686e35a2eb5461f6b00d72f632dc15d
4f2ecd7f567947ea0c691d851e6bac1e159f2559
117321 F20101113_AABFSU hallum_r_Page_65.jp2
e62be974011418f68c2913044c148ea8
672326544f5846c36d24c0f96a0b2c9ef69c7390
23696 F20101113_AABGJN hallum_r_Page_29.QC.jpg
590aa217a74260ec5de89e85193e48e5
cb1761f88632bd46c3b76b1a03ea01920093558d
55695 F20101113_AABGEQ hallum_r_Page_65.pro
d785e4f97ce3025e91d2920532a16987
355aeb2bbaa30b4c87bf497b79e8dcf2fe735577
75572 F20101113_AABFXT hallum_r_Page_70.jpg
4f702fa2e4af49c32c5e81b38690faf5
5569b6c1f7e4fdadc943f4469760f4ab93e1abe5
2136 F20101113_AABFSV hallum_r_Page_37.txt
af69956ef2534ad60d3b8fde174f65a3
9d45b0c4cb826eade5dc500d359fe2f02fc731e4
6661 F20101113_AABGJO hallum_r_Page_29thm.jpg
23baf93e6ae7404f46d97d5d178c7ed5
b5f09ab60742b36c568dce082c679cf0943d0461
33963 F20101113_AABGER hallum_r_Page_66.pro
43c5bd6976bb2eaa71e7ef8f0b5f115f
5ce27ff85c5c2eb638c0806946f1a1af5591aaa5
39424 F20101113_AABFXU hallum_r_Page_71.jpg
47f03018759f0a42dacc58745c22bbf4
fe062b96e9d981e78327549db2fd0e729117c2de
F20101113_AABFSW hallum_r_Page_46.tif
99290be6a6f5dd5826f81ffc5712db69
e8037b823c1704ead9c92b18656801f059b20a4a
25067 F20101113_AABGJP hallum_r_Page_30.QC.jpg
5b8729ca4ae6adf73b6aa43ff83b15d4
c3fdf053c2a96a0d4cb9642a987cf6829523634a
13802 F20101113_AABGES hallum_r_Page_67.pro
ad2c21ebc1f8c4a3cad05164240d531b
969856709ba581bcc0dff6a8aab5c137e02c5598
41431 F20101113_AABFXV hallum_r_Page_73.jpg
58c25ba5b7083e0a7aee6c8a1c4f539a
263bf696f0c381b1b31d4852d57e969e9f9afa5f
31953 F20101113_AABFSX hallum_r_Page_04.jp2
b3a1fbf6216a348f11c9beedbbb32823
0e11324d9881466c83a6006652991c2876fdb68d
6912 F20101113_AABGJQ hallum_r_Page_30thm.jpg
a7fa4a2c5cdd3dfedc5eb86b9af69d06
6f01599cde7e5ce2eea4e4b72a3e1c1d31b02678
53144 F20101113_AABGET hallum_r_Page_68.pro
55a09488769d364b7ca140321b88297a
0f8038ed6f86443147edd87affe2fcef08aecf4f
83304 F20101113_AABFXW hallum_r_Page_74.jpg
6fa0285a22a5d1eaa14ff572379a5b92
0c409216d56dca942e18579eddab5ed1a94b758d
F20101113_AABFSY hallum_r_Page_67.tif
1a4229d533062a31a5af9f4f0646cca3
6e9d9377119fd0a67fbfce99bae6c1b83a99ad5f
6955 F20101113_AABGJR hallum_r_Page_32thm.jpg
7ba62f73bdd33b6bce69d7c4208fcd2b
8ac7c5d982770147890be0adfbed71eb05b3c790
83352 F20101113_AABFXX hallum_r_Page_75.jpg
d270937870e6af7430da2c2f3aefce9d
2323b146738aa38cba0b540403e13210ba159558
49835 F20101113_AABFSZ hallum_r_Page_45.pro
5b1f6c5944199dac7c0a1b8e64bff536
d44b0a4b7abb076e0685e6bf27b46ffa4c143e21
53783 F20101113_AABGEU hallum_r_Page_69.pro
64663ca3e9953063559b638e028fa329
e1b0ef4ef394b8606856ff5af30e03960456e203
6933 F20101113_AABGJS hallum_r_Page_33thm.jpg
59dec8a2455c37dedc264ead872e1e3b
21eb839865b85e926a0323ca11a7d45992fcd8cc
84179 F20101113_AABFXY hallum_r_Page_77.jpg
1d4e7a12129db58675fdd4cafc1901d3
fdf4598ac688695aaabe2c885cc4e50944fd6d54
52263 F20101113_AABGEV hallum_r_Page_70.pro
c96a49c85424d85625921c93ad2d39b7
c6dcf66028a0cd0c6eba0b2fadcb721aef9e38c0
24411 F20101113_AABGJT hallum_r_Page_34.QC.jpg
46d49cb2104c8fda143bf5c2f789a0b7
ff810b1ba168a2ec21c430fb04a4b9e91026efd0
24653 F20101113_AABGEW hallum_r_Page_71.pro
ba2bed3109c58c7e3eb41cba04b869dd
08302d4b4d8e5b1f4cca85a18ab19d7a666ddb70
71558 F20101113_AABFVA hallum_r_Page_43.jp2
cd3d54c99d91a86c0f1aaaeb6d5ce924
3726b13422ddfef7351759b0ad5f8161dba7c197
6776 F20101113_AABGJU hallum_r_Page_34thm.jpg
7fdd9e43559d01f9eda8e181cf537b61
eb571f945da9a22ce4bdad204f001bda24598ce2
32556 F20101113_AABFXZ hallum_r_Page_78.jpg
32b51e4a72ed720e6fbb3ef377f1e065
ca66d632336875e601de096fc5cfbc4b12597ab0
27871 F20101113_AABGEX hallum_r_Page_72.pro
f75acd7fefa4e6a519bf2efbee982caf
9275a3c6feae77ad6ae185d2b3aac72300aa7d09
7193 F20101113_AABFVB hallum_r_Page_51thm.jpg
fb9af2b6abdcbd43b665b0b971000b13
dc81e4e2e7d3238173cd5ea04fc896aff66c9a0c
25581 F20101113_AABGJV hallum_r_Page_35.QC.jpg
bad93cdb095666f487698cfa02558070
1097e5e526ddb1392eb8dba5913f9e3a845193da
F20101113_AABGCA hallum_r_Page_58.tif
bfd9decd7781d6c5ea45e9b67d61f135
5853290a3f0da82fdb1eb367561aebcc303c7007
57832 F20101113_AABGEY hallum_r_Page_74.pro
fbcedc983a649c597f9e00a474b663ad
a4f20d58272123939f5eacc32e71bfa1fe26a99d
32910 F20101113_AABFVC hallum_r_Page_67.jp2
aa2c0b733f56393ccca189db54cc543a
93cebe7dc358a88eca44718c63c2f28da2151eb6
25344 F20101113_AABGJW hallum_r_Page_36.QC.jpg
629684260e5ae22608b4a326f8e7e71c
d5e072adb742892765b8765595b565ecb273d308
F20101113_AABGCB hallum_r_Page_59.tif
308822eb7412918c3df0828e7e5434ec
92157d0905e3eada44a74b712ff8e16331f8026c
57350 F20101113_AABGEZ hallum_r_Page_75.pro
d056c74b2e9a92b92b82af425277e27e
d3c5e38df1414e13fd417bff18d958456078deed
F20101113_AABFVD hallum_r_Page_32.tif
bc24a1b220374eb02a64c396a58ccaf8
a0e6c78e4a3f87fe8ebbea03d4584466ea3d2151
7058 F20101113_AABGJX hallum_r_Page_36thm.jpg
3c91c9e66244038ad80e6e7a98787a81
6da7eb6ba3c496e5d79ed34ddc940922b591af39
F20101113_AABGCC hallum_r_Page_60.tif
622098cd20dc170d6b4691c077af600e
4c257b2a5e16a081a38ec006978e777ad1d34124
25631 F20101113_AABFVE hallum_r_Page_73.pro
3a0737e746d6594782bd8b49d60cb253
9fc3e773d15d3ad7c41c92a7e4cdd7f5de246c95
25122 F20101113_AABGJY hallum_r_Page_37.QC.jpg
7aa746660458ece357dadfffa45e1ba4
d7f0fdb0465b6cd8b567693966a3229afb21c626
2283 F20101113_AABGHA hallum_r_Page_63.txt
e5917d9349a4a185623740b76f2ef182
5eafd8f0f35f9aca33a4e9cd74e0056bdb8778c9
25815 F20101113_AABFVF hallum_r_Page_65.QC.jpg
01349b6a82f7b7fd3bbc81b34ebf5165
e53418195db936c52344dc02359a3fe69582b0a1
7006 F20101113_AABGJZ hallum_r_Page_37thm.jpg
b93206d281f2aed34240ec36ac726873
b4309c073a59f68f6018a36974f29b9a022f54ed
2227 F20101113_AABGHB hallum_r_Page_65.txt
5106ed6e166d21ac6f7af79b06af5383
dd96cf8695cb27406ff9495be648b84f84ac82bc
F20101113_AABGCD hallum_r_Page_61.tif
de79dc37f3829ef3ca4b08e418f4d5b8
578495c24be1f4d8814d9c75799f9922cc314d4e
7184 F20101113_AABFVG hallum_r_Page_62thm.jpg
a1ec43f56944474f2ada994ddf501d9a
c6bc07ae713b1eaf02b1da693ac201244c380014
1347 F20101113_AABGHC hallum_r_Page_66.txt
29d155172df76958b0b865e0e6711aff
c565161231ed51eca75d5a6aee5a16a8d66c0250
F20101113_AABGCE hallum_r_Page_62.tif
a3e93cc8647168b83f9e9c280af67d1e
aac176abf343e68b481f0bb5189abeafe78c8bca
54097 F20101113_AABFVH hallum_r_Page_17.pro
f17d026a32f6384e0f8824a941728392
50768f0aa81cd2b0e54d43860d4d5180bd374b7f
24427 F20101113_AABGMA hallum_r_Page_70.QC.jpg
d6e221e05023f68378462541677ad430
4898f1d8348b414b60d6e2da0b2ef77cacbd705b
554 F20101113_AABGHD hallum_r_Page_67.txt
c57f2970c23095191ad5cf6c9516de34
e34c3821b23990ec391decae9f2c26faab80708b
F20101113_AABGCF hallum_r_Page_63.tif
99961370ecfd0b2b6daf7facac0a280e
45c54844ad9ae09dc24d873d35295bc1352d7709
F20101113_AABFVI hallum_r_Page_55.tif
c569ca93984ea1f4184dfd77ba1550c7
d0b2dde04542aae7bee009cf223a48eb4aeea578
6727 F20101113_AABGMB hallum_r_Page_70thm.jpg
f23172670cef98bf473d60c0704c6acd
1c7ba9b7b6dffc70bed8c262d73efec42c4306ba
2171 F20101113_AABGHE hallum_r_Page_68.txt
e0efe214fcee5bd05db95c02a5024a98
ff820a26fdaf45c0883c20c4fa8bdded14ad53ef
F20101113_AABGCG hallum_r_Page_64.tif
46d75684c16f254a314fb858fdf5e737
15381d08d72f81b9bdb931f1d4fc4613d1fdff12
51923 F20101113_AABFVJ hallum_r_Page_28.pro
e20c2b458cea6bfc7c6e28b44f47d443
c856fbdbf6d24159e5310fdb1b35a7025235e82a
13026 F20101113_AABGMC hallum_r_Page_71.QC.jpg
61eaefe04d0c8e40f095acdbd8ac4cfa
7dbe1afd2a0c8a55d80887e86237b04251bca7b3
2111 F20101113_AABGHF hallum_r_Page_69.txt
2878e585d55bc1787673f880dde3bb00
cb3ba02d9e67d288ea4adddfa7c1fe5bec415f4c
F20101113_AABGCH hallum_r_Page_65.tif
1149ed4b9c8942c9728e7298adea1278
9a1929f5770f3ea77f5262eb0b5541a0817ca3fc
7212 F20101113_AABFVK hallum_r_Page_35thm.jpg
dc305e498bf77ad7103498f91531e299
160e5316b9c1de83e62880ed5aea6d31bfbb51db
3884 F20101113_AABGMD hallum_r_Page_71thm.jpg
18952527b92809d40026c95023b35c65
aab35c3d3da13436f45c7b6a86ef65533b92ee0e
2056 F20101113_AABGHG hallum_r_Page_70.txt
a509ffd098923256435c235621e498b0
2928e636cbfbed1bdc175f76d74437aaa1848bdb
F20101113_AABGCI hallum_r_Page_66.tif
5fcc21fcea831cb31d85abee090fb0f7
ad606a389d4b14063e1784ee6ecf33e74d7b9226
119676 F20101113_AABFVL UFE0021131_00001.xml FULL
f4ac9dd46c1d1de4d099f5e7eb8ad74d
def8dd3dd8f469f08e58fe75ae394fc73c93c25a
12952 F20101113_AABGME hallum_r_Page_72.QC.jpg
e3402760162b5076792eb8284fe23113
e86f2b826b98c938d152afc1d71ec7259937c065
982 F20101113_AABGHH hallum_r_Page_71.txt
b06ae15d50cc3ef5e7a1666917b760cc
428e4406add5559e901de6a837c3bf09012fbf14
F20101113_AABGCJ hallum_r_Page_68.tif
be6cea636691a0925659cd4a1fca5697
2dedf5793a7efe49626879eb2c7010495e8d7869
3345 F20101113_AABGMF hallum_r_Page_72thm.jpg
f0eb131ce0fe8893a4157749169f7fa0
1afd058a0942f907599a97327f2043696054121e
F20101113_AABGCK hallum_r_Page_69.tif
1f2333c4af34d7dab5cb23c4fab54a39
df88c9c70833db6f05dd46d5c9d30842c6ed2b7e
11074 F20101113_AABGMG hallum_r_Page_73.QC.jpg
a33d4408a4fbfd76fe2499d686469b38
2b97c2a49d9942a42ec514c18ac35cc7ff4fcb12
1158 F20101113_AABGHI hallum_r_Page_72.txt
a7b38735de0d64e961acd9920d8dd5f2
df03c3e0a93ad46a06d68abb9c049fba586fa6b1
F20101113_AABGCL hallum_r_Page_71.tif
ca2c281564a3fda686cc161a7f261b54
420b8e88fff4c4e738ee18434b7c768b98444cfa
9780 F20101113_AABFVO hallum_r_Page_02.jpg
3087f75457a01758f931d52370adf35c
ae22da1b277027d52e2159d6a322ff6b0aa23169
2920 F20101113_AABGMH hallum_r_Page_73thm.jpg
dc1c4e09389d594fe7eba214be989730
586e743f20c377a876f892bd41611e31a701620e
1071 F20101113_AABGHJ hallum_r_Page_73.txt
f5adffb43e5eaf0f9d18e90829ae2a81
a5f232c2d81933862362402946b9ea0b77f87023
F20101113_AABGCM hallum_r_Page_72.tif
68fea63f180f6ab494b445b439adf1ef
47c309815cef428484fc891f49a80b9a01e1a339
10077 F20101113_AABFVP hallum_r_Page_03.jpg
affe959e07d193c500bfdb59d1a4d0c1
9e8b40ff9943594fa896e368ec30b8dad83046da
7097 F20101113_AABGMI hallum_r_Page_74thm.jpg
d85502a9304a9f5c7a244ea2fc0a4e26
ac2c85c43fa48815636028efa276a3eace11ac06
2342 F20101113_AABGHK hallum_r_Page_74.txt
6da862f9d1ee3f91fc9c73231a9bea49
6b687bc03b3b7f1d0c14bc834e1c4bbaef35d510
F20101113_AABGCN hallum_r_Page_73.tif
7b840eb8c202c7d7ecc12efee266674a
4517995692181ff545082b7b94c7d6e95e2c40cf
26500 F20101113_AABFVQ hallum_r_Page_04.jpg
55bceab1f769a2d3ac107c563973e2ab
913a884c7cd9f8f8e3144863b40a711866e5e7cb
24598 F20101113_AABGMJ hallum_r_Page_75.QC.jpg
88e3aabefcf093eabd92635fd83390a8
157258615960ac8406d2446e902ac55818514d04
F20101113_AABGHL hallum_r_Page_75.txt
ec31e01e5f8d3ed27d6d5f99fb1cd055
3f9dd6588ec7d94edccf7f5dabd2b4e2e0e2e133
F20101113_AABGCO hallum_r_Page_74.tif
8668f6c05a907b9ade13aaeb4936d726
f63ce996fe6880f4ae61945c227948a23d6d3707
82752 F20101113_AABFVR hallum_r_Page_05.jpg
8226de085f34ec64e59307c0dd2f87fc
07d5a79d47473d007604ef86bd30603118a6774f
23887 F20101113_AABGMK hallum_r_Page_76.QC.jpg
8f7731181aa919ec300aff01d9da59c2
be4a0b8984abfc5828ddc0924d94b481785fc1a2
2276 F20101113_AABGHM hallum_r_Page_76.txt
af7663c0d656ae2a941f2d7a02692971
8a2356a0336b5a49edad63f15110a7e886914f23
F20101113_AABGCP hallum_r_Page_76.tif
efa864785a87649b46d154c5b33cd003
a1e7a786f1faad0038ce95c927bbdfdf222595b3
36919 F20101113_AABFVS hallum_r_Page_06.jpg
6e764bf381f3a45b917462a92b0ce3e4
625754f20d96d8e61656c9e26704788d9040b34a
6741 F20101113_AABGML hallum_r_Page_76thm.jpg
17e02aef6a457ad60736529fa966f342
0683c7822674eac51b72a89d7a6f27684d72745d
2358 F20101113_AABGHN hallum_r_Page_77.txt
aabe14236622b50c9ce040068ce3b3e3
39fbf022fd09c2321d383fb2cfaaeccb7cc8c122
F20101113_AABGCQ hallum_r_Page_77.tif
ed8273cb800f2368113ab9eab39a5f30
7c9efab8c51ca7412bc02102d7c50fbca7089c3b
75351 F20101113_AABFVT hallum_r_Page_09.jpg
93d6f4d3bdedbb4643dbf0f1e4231dcd
b07a8e914b17a0ba06121f5a0f8dbfc26937bdfc
24795 F20101113_AABGMM hallum_r_Page_77.QC.jpg
fddba18e7a6ec5e6c9d936a97768075c
1d5b6ac9c8af81977a2e0f0e3ed7fb75cce25806
760 F20101113_AABGHO hallum_r_Page_78.txt
f3bcef44aad5f3e5d49aa961fe77a842
4385d124d4c84675f504d31ec1c85499519f37d2
F20101113_AABGCR hallum_r_Page_78.tif
7f9f8d78e72ed58d6ba88918612b8220
92e702815199b58521cd4361720cea589bb4f31b
79840 F20101113_AABFVU hallum_r_Page_10.jpg
7bba11d384c1f3b47c8ccfe93e632425
9dcfd44c4a3f738fb551365ea2522ed0c2e9bb49
1130576 F20101113_AABGHP hallum_r.pdf
9611a5b772ad6bc558ccd6656f1d96da
6bd78df0fd7c79c7d34a448aad370d773f3c443d
F20101113_AABGCS hallum_r_Page_79.tif
c04ef72ba7245eee8feaf987dd9fc430
38b744c3ef85272d6b69e3399bc13377fd168acc
74487 F20101113_AABFVV hallum_r_Page_11.jpg
a8377efec757316c257133e9c3f31777
7084fea911aa59a7dcd501e829e7f7b61233fe72
6701 F20101113_AABGMN hallum_r_Page_77thm.jpg
c38247330795b57836ad6bf23319677e
5aaf6958c35552cfff09ecfac15828d399440bb0
7306 F20101113_AABGHQ hallum_r_Page_01.QC.jpg
8a71184fab7e0ee934aac66922dd38cd
6bc63bc85d0a3c319353c346f5124e004811bde3
8313 F20101113_AABGCT hallum_r_Page_01.pro
79007425891d5cb473d74cd8260747f3
34f87bb3707fd3fcd77a3b960af490d3f3182759
73414 F20101113_AABFVW hallum_r_Page_12.jpg
61ac8719d6916d8f04b1e5513360ef37
9cdf49d5dbde19055787fa1c9546be3a05e02b9a
10261 F20101113_AABGMO hallum_r_Page_78.QC.jpg
7ba70e15c6b7cb5ce905f3beacb22f00
10688aa360440fc6ea0bef0d2ac3abff67ee1ee1
2226 F20101113_AABGHR hallum_r_Page_01thm.jpg
a5c8c9dac754f4615aa6b3355be6a1d1
4bc35e31239559b820d6fc821e59f32da28de0f6
807 F20101113_AABGCU hallum_r_Page_02.pro
6f4c477704545c964b50af5457b27432
bcfe3edcd864c5391bb115217dc90825721049e9
6617 F20101113_AABGMP hallum_r_Page_79.QC.jpg
f284fb08a017e5aed310652cfe8dfcb6
5dededd4c83dd7011418394d7e59b820bfaef144
3055 F20101113_AABGHS hallum_r_Page_02.QC.jpg
3981fec9a0aa9317986bb7f4c385a34c
6965b2f0c19c84b7d19889998ae3af03926b52db
1039 F20101113_AABGCV hallum_r_Page_03.pro
15019ae9c84f1019fb7372c5ee7885d6
03c6d35d577ac29dee711deb4285729ff4bb35ab
74639 F20101113_AABFVX hallum_r_Page_13.jpg
f4e4cf60dcb98b72015247ef6e9c3137
2921c8478b0eeb473f56f8eac6b4629e11b4c0c5
92518 F20101113_AABGMQ UFE0021131_00001.mets
a181fdcede97396074dc0ff17c760637
78c6c56d8a54e6adcf10a95ae5468a8b2c6b8e8b
3104 F20101113_AABGHT hallum_r_Page_03.QC.jpg
83365405392f982453d8bf2a5394c1b0
a4dffc21f280b2ea0bb41b4b51c113ab4d459a04
89387 F20101113_AABGCW hallum_r_Page_05.pro
73663594bfb3b79e036fe529eb1a5bf9
a488988e985034dbb584283ecf33b9d52e64b2e0
2163 F20101113_AABFTA hallum_r_Page_79thm.jpg
416d1d0c06603c8407585976efda3dde
9c7325f74d6de118b9d9c3e59cf656ee79df957c
78491 F20101113_AABFVY hallum_r_Page_14.jpg
228d81ff1e11edeca13345e510214061
5dec47256ca1f85e6ea8390ed9bf0932b910fc1a
1348 F20101113_AABGHU hallum_r_Page_03thm.jpg
9b9280ce882890a0b3522b2010aea382
da5ae33c2b347574f66fbbc3fc99f68b24d3ecc2
34417 F20101113_AABGCX hallum_r_Page_06.pro
393b046581885c4bb9ba500abef4f904
53221348e39444dfef5c630a3b538c7ae1dc2b5b
2288 F20101113_AABFTB hallum_r_Page_64.txt
f7935b52accac06c0e10b82cfcd9efaa
b86ac9f8d9b6b906cd060aee799a4a31405a349d
70537 F20101113_AABFVZ hallum_r_Page_15.jpg
f57c0acdd364305cff4c11215cf58824
7665055dc51afca0d6d5c9ede48861c3784080c8
8648 F20101113_AABGHV hallum_r_Page_04.QC.jpg
815f7f25cc8ee46c5f9975e74d043060
cbe81e0e1352cfaf86c177408fcf18b828dfa9de
625706 F20101113_AABGAA hallum_r_Page_72.jp2
e1e1a8c15e7d0cc1f07538dc8f3920fb
b5a2a98c8c724fc83f7cda95834dc2b5b185ae52
15964 F20101113_AABGCY hallum_r_Page_07.pro
0f326462efcf50f3b158a60f6f683686
3d30bfd44a8964342a91a138c60d4edefbb67047
3156 F20101113_AABFTC hallum_r_Page_06thm.jpg
899aea74b35870199378f7147a0b70f1
ec75a76bbb27bcbdd30377acdab11fda26b2655c
2639 F20101113_AABGHW hallum_r_Page_04thm.jpg
8bea10a5607eaa89bd92f28022236ecc
e7635f84ea8d16873b53020b3a160b0477ae1db9
52160 F20101113_AABGCZ hallum_r_Page_09.pro
5d367c74ce5a5a6d2526e8d68d8246db
edf3c1b6d56001210312e26e53cbe15d83518b9a
F20101113_AABFTD hallum_r_Page_24.tif
a577072e444059537dcae366d73c00f3
18a076166e9e2a183aa3ee45341b1f02bce2a19c
21155 F20101113_AABFYA hallum_r_Page_79.jpg
fa1281c3cfdcd00d916a6acf14f0a3b2
cced66104a5b89a5cfd14101f5476ae35119adcd
21762 F20101113_AABGHX hallum_r_Page_05.QC.jpg
f098800144cd8c46a0ad7795f5152c83
4da2c4f5ffed858bb1606612f3a046a1de5425df
548707 F20101113_AABGAB hallum_r_Page_73.jp2
83a4f67c45ce0b50405b01f5750d1877
bff15becf9b1b44f50b789d612420ddb72a45bd1
2159 F20101113_AABFTE hallum_r_Page_14.txt
f5222709d919fe8693c273ede26b281e
124ce1284ebe00842415c22c187f8aab290c96c4
25131 F20101113_AABFYB hallum_r_Page_01.jp2
e9a5f1f5235182e80590f0ca97a7a575
cd50f088adf789540698ae6c373d3688761d86ba
10858 F20101113_AABGHY hallum_r_Page_06.QC.jpg
a5ceffe695436f43d9baeafca4340030
27bb8233a5b660dfbe3bc02ff24035ee77e5ab11
129175 F20101113_AABGAC hallum_r_Page_74.jp2
e62cefe4d920d825bdc61bb9a6fe49f3
26742c9e9b23d235a55a974ed916c167d73c8233
123382 F20101113_AABFTF hallum_r_Page_60.jp2
f8793f0407a330338006c3fc8fe3e6c6
ee5f5db591361e944bcb3506ff25c04a68ad1fa6
55652 F20101113_AABGFA hallum_r_Page_76.pro
7864dac48bbb678b6d3ae868fa90f45d
9c3d2db819b0d02b58b59756d57ab11a2b39d5fe
4926 F20101113_AABFYC hallum_r_Page_02.jp2
12041805a831dd6e838c5db29c392258
f4585bc1de9ce87be3325ae72e8fe6ee396a190e
8088 F20101113_AABGHZ hallum_r_Page_07.QC.jpg
8a7ddc5cdf81dd34bec16910a1381160
4fb284730fc2d9734edf01a4b14913186e57e4a5
129368 F20101113_AABFTG hallum_r_Page_44.jp2
706b5b83938b09becc6199787e5a0fd1
88744383fde90ea9ec30a59f39fdfc1609486191
58039 F20101113_AABGFB hallum_r_Page_77.pro
84877e8b62e15011fd5d2cb45e08e073
824c7b085f82c2066f9e22b886f6352df99e81cb
5598 F20101113_AABFYD hallum_r_Page_03.jp2
817090a7b455fa58e5c4ab612f577e95
1e0dcca54f95672707c5563b5093447e79adaa6a
128442 F20101113_AABGAD hallum_r_Page_75.jp2
1b9092a7a6e87d1be7f9aabc7388708c
fcba731dc6364b7a3da61fb96224625a62e25e27
6715 F20101113_AABFTH hallum_r_Page_59thm.jpg
d3d414732fceae49958152a000acd354
1be2f92ed42eb608b4211cb618730576f3c99fce
18454 F20101113_AABGFC hallum_r_Page_78.pro
dcaa3294d12d7aec9df21e264a7daffb
38e51ba3e86716324f925737399b21518adc6510
1051984 F20101113_AABFYE hallum_r_Page_05.jp2
c6e338d94bc8a9f0229de9ae6a0bcb83
d58bf84501367c7ce42a4cc6d96001da7e762a89
126074 F20101113_AABGAE hallum_r_Page_76.jp2
ff66c0c594cea7faad1d6f14b4861ee9
f88ce5e172695c04d38e1014bd17153ce85f7b8c
26187 F20101113_AABGKA hallum_r_Page_38.QC.jpg
87092f4449d7530db41f28eff1d005dc
42e8b51d0b96c70ffcc7786af74467278fe7b01b
33139 F20101113_AABFTI hallum_r_Page_26.jpg
83d8f190c1dd7acf09f5992d149c7aba
71a0862e8e2c141338c4736eea00415e30a9c901
9003 F20101113_AABGFD hallum_r_Page_79.pro
ca2af95abab9c061e6a26e3a66edbdd7
859377db274f70660175899c0b07662f05d770d9
878405 F20101113_AABFYF hallum_r_Page_06.jp2
385101fedf8eff078fd81c8c477c4c3c
166d03fbc1da88776c17cc4fb94aa482cf8e5ca5
46229 F20101113_AABGAF hallum_r_Page_78.jp2
1d5d30b408523387070ba9f6e7199300
510c22c9ee14b27c7117cc1055cec2a96b91778a
7036 F20101113_AABGKB hallum_r_Page_38thm.jpg
332f94e8d5846b2fb904851f42e3bfe0
ddbbe18be197c10939ada0fff37c4b40ee87c177
122704 F20101113_AABFTJ hallum_r_Page_62.jp2
70befeac3ae7f121b87fdb4017882e01
30cb92a953de1a4b1316aecb40b3f7eeabbc0c00
89 F20101113_AABGFE hallum_r_Page_02.txt
2e9e1b7dbd2ee96ad9d7be676d2b0c58
e53f9378380e04ab43023ac45fb76c33b3573c2b
549334 F20101113_AABFYG hallum_r_Page_07.jp2
8d204f3c54d45d8d58c97feda76cbf0c
b675a26bbac3000ad781f45743d9667110db50f2
23426 F20101113_AABGAG hallum_r_Page_79.jp2
331ec03543a4148f253ff74b01553a2b
266dcc220be1234eb68b9f26e9fbc9ec58022382
26266 F20101113_AABGKC hallum_r_Page_39.QC.jpg
ed795df4b2308f95db83dbdc31bc0765
956554ab6cb1142e39c53c2fc6802177052d8e7c
118694 F20101113_AABFTK hallum_r_Page_20.jp2
0d516a229665060c6268a392e23e648e
eeddc40dfefdd7dec2da53e77b2f434b61e8d2da
563 F20101113_AABGFF hallum_r_Page_04.txt
c14c778593f5d6ebd26c2961bc49ff91
dffa1a3fbe7c60bbe7ae27ae630a9cec08774b9b
790950 F20101113_AABFYH hallum_r_Page_08.jp2
a9070318157313de0da3d59bbf63f137
afe053ad543f617865765afd9785b9a98c8e090c
F20101113_AABGAH hallum_r_Page_01.tif
8479f53fd3303f0e04116c7116bdfa8c
0764f932dda6295816c06b79cf256242dc9add03
7255 F20101113_AABGKD hallum_r_Page_39thm.jpg
0da35e3644e6244dde62ac5fc05b18bd
b799050a159cdc438f36354e3e9dcb4b2614347e
23338 F20101113_AABFTL hallum_r_Page_01.jpg
93f8f86c74ff028bd6b3d17d2819cba2
85965d7f464f1e78ab2bfbdac7159da2899d2e6d
112374 F20101113_AABFYI hallum_r_Page_09.jp2
0c1a6d649c97a4c7b77dd4c434e4d3a1
2039a244b3c4320d3efa7d69ba6857f5a0a0578b
F20101113_AABGAI hallum_r_Page_03.tif
662bfa19143f2aded7828dd7566b2d1c
b936b8ae9e3169212b24b60595500fd055e706b2
6704 F20101113_AABGKE hallum_r_Page_40thm.jpg
02e398a886aebe3b797b30b97cab83ea
ba646fc8405a7913678460d7909ba5802f9167eb
108676 F20101113_AABFTM hallum_r_Page_29.jp2
5e56513315976a9127c3d88cf6d76ad9
5cfe0d4f47d615996e7b8f5d8914e514e8070d79
3688 F20101113_AABGFG hallum_r_Page_05.txt
9ebe2972a17c67d6be704006afaff12e
d040ade9e8b5b645ecf0364a48ca7e0fca2dbf99
119901 F20101113_AABFYJ hallum_r_Page_10.jp2
2ba91e24dbce6c88a8ea8007f4048225
451754eb65adc5864c6f48d301fd72b96f456961
F20101113_AABGAJ hallum_r_Page_04.tif
2995af47450198812d7b46c95562bf6d
404672d598246bd25b60e17ce2812f8a63d05abb







A MATTER OF SURVIVAL: WOMEN, SUBSISTENCE FARMING, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION IN RURAL GUATEMALA




















By

RACHEL HALLUM


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007


































2007 Rachel Hallum

































For my family and loved ones.









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am indebted to everyone who has made this project possible, from my family and loved

ones, to the staff and volunteers of the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR). My

professors, Dr. Milagros Pefia and Dr. Constance Shehan, have provided me with invaluable

patience, support, and guidance. Most of all, I am grateful to the women in Guatemala who have

allowed me the opportunity to tell their stories. May their courage and strength be an inspiration

to us all.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ..............................................................................................................4

LIST OF FIGURES .................................. .. ..... ..... ................. .7

A B S T R A C T ......... ....................... .................. .......................... ................ .. 8

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ............... ................. ........... ................................ .9

The Current E cological C risis ........................................................................................ 9
Globalization, Environmental Degradation, and Women...........................................10

2 THEORETICAL AND LITERATURE REVIEW....................................... ..................12

Socialist Ecofem inism .............. ..... .. .. ...... ... .. ................... ................ 13
Capitalist-Patriarchy in Guatemala: From Colonization to Globalization ...........................14
The Rise of Big Agriculture and Big Industry and the Exploitation of the Global
South ......................... ..... .... ........... ..... ................ ..... .. ........ ........... 16
The Continued Destruction of Land and People: The Violence of Capitalist
Patriarchy ......................... ...... ....... ...................... ...... ............ 18
Effects of Policies of Globalization and Neoliberalism ............ ...............................20
Rural Women and the Environment in Modern Guatemala..............................23

3 M A TER IA L S A N D M ETH O D S ........................................ .............................................27

Western (Eco)feminism and Scholarship on the "Third World".......... ........................27
A Fem insist Proj ect ................... .............................................................. ... 28
The Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR) ................ .............................. 28
C on cern s .............................................................................................. 3 1

4 ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND WOMEN IN THE COMMUNITIES ..........35

H ighlan d C om m u nities ..... ..... ............................ ......................... ...... ................. .. 3 5
A c a te n a n g o ............... ........................................................................ 3 7
C om alapa ............................................................. ......................... 38
Itz a p a .............. .... ............................................................... 3 9
W om en Farm ers ................................................. 40
D e fo re station n ..................................................................................................................... 4 1
E m otional C onsequences......................................................................... .................. 42
M material C on sequ ences.......................................................................... ....................4 5
Storms and Mudslides........... ........ ......... ... .. ... .... ..................47
C o n c lu sio n ................... .......... ............................................... ................ 5 1









5 ORGANIZING FOR FAMILY AND COMMUNITY .................................. ...............53

Local and Transnational Organizing and Social Capital ................................................54
T he E nvironm ent and the F am ily ........................................ ............................................58
Gender Differences ...................... ........................ ... ... ................. 60
The Environment and the Community .............................................................................63
C on clu sion .................................................................... .................................... 6 5

6 CON CLU SION .......... ................................................................. ............. ... 68

APPENDIX

A GUIDING QUESTIONS (SPANISH)........................................................ ............. 72

B GUIDING QUESTION S (ENGLISH) .............................................................................73

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ......... .......... ................................................. ....................................74

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H .............................................................................. .....................79



































6









LIST OF FIGURES


Figure pe

4-1 Deforested hillside in the Department of Chimaltenango...............................................36

4-2 Aftermath of mudslides near Acatenango...................................... ........................ 48

4-3 River on the outskirts of Acatenango that was covered over by a mudslide ...................50

5-1 Eroded areas and forested areas of a hillside, post-Hurricane Stan. ...............................58

5-2 Label of manzanilla shampoo made by group of women in Itzapa................................66









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts

A MATTER OF SURVIVAL: WOMEN, SUBSISTENCE FARMING, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION IN RURAL GUATEMALA

By

Rachel M. Hallum

August 2007

Chair: Milagros Pefia
Major: Sociology

This study uses a socialist ecofeminist framework to explore the historical and material

links between environmental degradation and women's roles as subsistence farmers in rural

Guatemala. Data was gathered from interviews with 20 women farmers, as well as observational

research, to explore how women's work is specifically affected by processes and policies of

development in Guatemala. Results reveal that development processes have led to greater

deforestation and soil erosion in the areas where poor women farm for themselves and their

families. Despite the difficulties that the women face, they are more than victims of their

situation; rather they have begun mobilizing both locally and transnationally to combat the

environmental problems confronting their families and communities. The study concludes by

calling for policy makers to take into account the roles that women farmers play in preserving the

environment in places like rural Guatemala. Ideas for future research are also discussed.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, scholars have coined the term "globalization" to refer to processes of

global economic restructuring, with a specific "economic and technological agenda that alters

basic modes of cultural organization and international exchange in many parts of the world"

(Eaton and Lorentzen 2003: 4). While proponents of globalization declare "endless benefits

from the exchange of capital on a global scale," others critique the notion that globalization is

beneficial for everyone. These critics argue that policies of globalization are reordering the flow

of capital and wealth within a "global and hegemonic economic regime" that serves only the

interests of the elite and rich (5). In a globalized economy, economic and political power is

being increasingly granted to institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the

World Bank, as well as many trans- and multi-national corporations, often at the expense of the

self-governance of many "Third World" nations. Policies of free trade are designed to serve the

interests of these institutions and corporations rather than the nations' citizens. Thus, as scholar

Heather Eaton notes, "as a result of some globalization initiatives, there is a deterioration in

educational and health systems, a rise in infant mortality, and a decline in democratic pluralism."

Additionally, more and more countries are being "coerced" into export dependant economies

(2003: 25). Finally, policies of globalization and industrial development have been linked with

the increasing degradation of the environment. These consequences of globalization have led

some to characterize the phenomenon as one of "vast human misery" and environmental

devastation (Ruether 2003: vii).

The Current Ecological Crisis

The connection between the alarming rate of environmental destruction and the rise of

globalization is not coincidental. Over the past few decades, the world has witnessed a rise in









global industry and a corresponding decline in environmental quality so severe that the present

period has been called one of "ecological crisis" (Eaton 2005: 8). Increasing industrialization

has led to rampant deforestation and pollution, both of which contribute to global warming. In

2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that the rise in

temperature over the past decade has been "unprecedented" in the last 10,000 years (IPCC 2007).

Industrial pollution also affects water resources, contaminating fresh water sources

through run-off and the leaking of harmful chemicals. Currently, the United Nations estimates

that 20% of the global population is without access to safe drinking water, and that water

pollution affects the health of 1.2 billion people worldwide (UNEP 2006).

Globalization, Environmental Degradation, and Women

It is important to note, however, that like globalization, environmental degradation does

not affect everyone equally. Much of the present-day depletion and contamination of natural

resources disproportionately affects the poorer nations of the world. It is also a generally agreed

upon fact in the academic community that in these poor nations, the poorest citizens are "the

hardest hit by the degradation of environmental conditions." The majority of these poor

citizens-nearly 70%-are women and girls (Mohanty 2003: 234). This association between the

degradation of the environment and the decline in well-being for women was also acknowledged

by the United Nations when it reported in 1989 that, "It is now a universally established fact that

it is the woman who is the worst victim of environmental destruction. The poorer she is, the

greater her burden" (quoted in Philiopose 1989: 67).

What is it that links the well-being of women in poor nations with the well-being of the

environment? Why is it that, in these parts of the world, "environmental problems

disproportionately affect women" (Eaton 2003: 24)? This thesis seeks to explore the links

between historical processes of globalization, environmental degradation, and the status of









women using a socioeconomic ecofeminist lens. As one type of ecofeminist theory,

socioeconomic ecofeminism explores both empirical and conceptual links between the

degradation of the environment and the subordination of women. However, this and other

theories of ecofeminism have been criticized for their failure to address issues of globalization.

Scholars Heather Eaton and Lois Ann Lorentzen suggest a few reasons for this:

First, the largely theoretical discourses linking women and nature, as developed
thus far, do not sufficiently address material exclusions resulting from economic
forces... [this theory] doesn't help us adequately analyze globalization as an
extension of patriarchal capitalism. Second, while there are many grassroots
activist women's organizations resisting the negative effects of globalization,
these activities do not provide the primary data for ecofeminist discourse. Third,
an adequate discussion of globalization must include not only an analysis of the
economic agenda, its hegemonic impact, and implicit value system, but also the
consequences of the erosion of nation-states and the rise of international civic
movements (2003: 5).

In this thesis, I hope to address these gaps in ecofeminist research, and thereby contribute

to the growing body of anti-capitalist, anti-globalization scholarship. I will focus the analysis on

indigenous and ladina women in rural Guatemala, where the increasing deforestation and

pollution of the environment affect their day-to-day lives. Thus, this is an ecofeminist project

that seeks to situate the local within the global, as advocated by Chandra Talpade Mohanty,

being attentive to "the micropolitics of context...as well as to the macropolitics of global

economic and political systems and processes." Only by providing such an analysis will we be

able to "read up the ladder of privilege" and make visible-and responsible-the global powers

that are affecting the lives of countless men and women around the world (2003: 223).









CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL AND LITERATURE REVIEW

One of the most important developments in theory that links women to the environment

has been the advent of ecofeminism. According to scholar Heather Eaton, ecofeminism can be

broadly defined as "a convergence of the ecological and feminist analyses and movements," and

represents "varieties of theoretical, practical, and critical efforts to understand and resist the

interrelated dominations of women and nature" (2005: 11). Activism is also considered to be a

key part of ecofeminism (Sturgeon 1997).

However, it is important to note that under the broad umbrella of ecofeminism, there

exists a wide array of theoretical frameworks. In her book Ecofeminist Philosophy, scholar

Karren Warren identifies as many as ten ecofeminist theories: historical, conceptual, empirical,

socialist, linguistic, symbolic and literary, spiritual and religious, epistemological, political, and

ethical (2000: 21). Not all of these theories have been highly regarded by the academic

community. Spiritual and religious ecofeminism in particular has been subject to critiques of

essentialism, homogenization of women as a group, romanticism, and political naivety (Agarwal

1992; Sydee and Beder 2001).

The tendency of some types of ecofeminism-particularly those that developed in more

affluent nations in the West and North-to essentialize and homogenize women is highly

problematic, for several reasons. First, the homogenization of women as a group ignores

important differences of class, culture, and race between women, and also ignores "the plight of

impoverished women from less affluent nations" (Eaton and Lorentzen 2003: 5). To consider all

women as being equally subordinated under patriarchy, and as experiencing the consequences of

environmental degradation equally is misleading and uncritical, and socially unliberatory. It also









does not take into account how forces of globalization impact women and the environment in

different ways in different regions of the globe.

Second, the essentializing of the women-Nature connection does not take into account

important empirical evidence of the interconnections between the domination of women and

nature around the globe. In ignoring such evidence, these essentialist views do not sufficiently

address the "material exclusions resulting from economic forces" that result from capitalist

patriarchy's devaluation of both women and the environment. Ecofeminist Heather Eaton notes

that "the insistence upon the primacy of a women-nature connection, while illuminating

symbolic and cultural constructs, doesn't help us adequately analyze globalization as an

extension of capitalist patriarchy" (5).

Socialist Ecofeminism

One ecofeminist typology that does address issues of globalization and capitalist

patriarchy is socialist ecofeminism. Relying on empirical evidence of the domination of both

women and nature, socialist ecofeminists critique capitalism as "the latest development" in the

system of patriarchy (Mies 1986: 38). Indeed, some have argued that capitalism and patriarchy,

rather than being separate systems of exploitation and domination, are in fact "one intrinsically

interconnected system." Socialist ecofeminist Maria Mies contends that "capitalism cannot

function without patriarchy," and that "the goal of this system, namely the never-ending process

of capital accumulation, cannot be achieved unless patriarchal man-woman relations are

maintained or newly created." For Mies, women are thus considered as "exploited resources" in

the capitalist-patriarchal system (38).

However, the socialist ecofeminist critique also recognizes that not only women, but

other historically subordinated groups have been grossly exploited by capitalist-patriarchy.

Socialist ecofeminists argue that this exploitation is rooted in an "oppressive conceptual









framework" that "functions to explain, maintain, and 'justify' relationships of unjustified

domination and subordination" (Warren 2000: 46). Common to these frameworks is the use of

value-hierarchical thinking that serves to legitimate inequality; the concept of privilege as

belonging to dominant groups; and the sanctioning of a "logic of domination" that assumes that

"superiority justifies subordination" (46-47). In her book Ecofeminist Philosophy, Karen Warren

identifies several hierarchical relationships that are characteristic of the global capitalist society.

She notes that in an era of globalization, capitalist-patriarchal systems and logic have been

implicated in the domination and subordination of the global South, indigenous groups, nature,

as well as women. The following section will examine the ways in which all these groups have

historically been used as "exploited resources" at the hands of capitalist-patriarchy, within the

context of Guatemala.

Capitalist-Patriarchy in Guatemala: From Colonization to Globalization

The history of capitalist-patriarchal penetration into Latin America has been a history of

violence, bloodshed, and gross human rights violations. It has also been a history of the

destruction of indigenous livelihoods as well as the environment. The roots of this history can be

traced back to the early 1500s, when Spain colonized much of what is now known as Latin

America. The colonization of Guatemala marked the country's first appearance on the world

market. It was also an extraordinarily violent process of domination and control, one that

involved the brutal conquering and repression of many indigenous groups, including the Maya of

Guatemala. To this day, the meaning of the colonization process is still hotly contested in

Guatemalan nationalist discourse, with much of the ladino population of primarily Spanish

descent emphasizing the positive aspects of colonization as a victory on behalf of "civilization,"

while many Maya choose to emphasize instead the violence of the first "meeting" between the









Spanish and indigenous groups, the rapes that produced the racial mixing of mestizaje, and the

appropriation of Maya land and culture (Nelson 1999: 12).

It was not long after the Spanish arrival that the colonizers began their systematic

appropriation and exploitation of indigenous people and resources. It is well documented that

both Maya men and women were used as slave labor on Spanish haciendas, large plantations that

cultivated and exported various agricultural crops. Even after the slaves were freed in 1550, the

dominant group's subordination of the indigenous population continued, as the former needed

the cheap labor of Mayans to increase their profit. The hacienda system was subsequently

replaced by an equally exploitative and patriarchal system of repartimiento, in which indigenous

populations were allowed to remain on their lands as long as they provided wealthy landowners

orpadrones with free labor. The padrones controlled nearly every aspect of life for the Maya

laborers, from the amount of work they did, to their living arrangements and family life (Lovell

1988; Lutz and Lovell 2000: 17).

However, the free labor that Mayans provided eventually proved to be an insufficient and

"erratic" source of wealth to materially-minded Spanish landowners, who soon turned to the land

as a means of further increasing their profits. Thus, as the export value for Guatemala's major

crop, indigo, increased, so did the Spanish exploitation of indigenous labor and land. As

landowners became increasingly involved in the systematic cultivation of indigo and other export

crops such as coffee, more and more indigenous land was appropriated and used to grow them.

This in turn led to further displacement of indigenous groups, or their gradual incorporation into

the ladino community (Pearce 1986: 15-17, Lovell 1988: 30-31).









The Rise of Big Agriculture and Big Industry and the Exploitation of the Global South

It was not until the late nineteenth century following the Spanish American War in 1898,

however, that Guatemala and the rest of Central America-including El Salvador, Nicaragua,

and Costa Rica-entered definitively into the world market. This was primarily due to the

growth and expansion of the world coffee market, and the identification of Central America as an

ideal region to grow the crop. Here we find the beginnings of North's economic exploitation of

the South, as multi-national coffee businesses began to appropriate land in much of Latin

America in order to produce their highly profitable crop. Oftentimes, Guatemala's political

leaders worked with these multi-national businesses to help them gain the land they needed.

These leaders, called caudillos, or "strongmen," were often former generals who wielded both

political and military power in their country, and used this power to force poor farmers off their

land. This land was then handed over to the agribusinesses, often in return for economic or other

forms of compensation (Lovell 1988; Brunk and Fallaw 2006). Thus, once again, poor

farmers-the majority of whom were Maya-were displaced from the most ideal agricultural

land and forced to resettle elsewhere. Increasingly, Maya populations were becoming more

concentrated in the western highlands of Guatemala, where land was of little economic value to

either the state or large agribusinesses (Hamilton and Chinchilla 2001: 20). However, through

policies of forced labor such as debt peonage, vagrancy laws, and "generalized rural repression,"

many Maya were recruited to provide labor for the coffee plantations. It is estimated that by the

1880s, at least 100,000 Maya highland workers, or one out of every eight Maya, migrated to the

coffee plantations each year (Lutz and Lovell 2000: 32).

Guatemala's incorporation into the world market-and concomitant exploitation by the

North-continued into the twentieth century when greater numbers of multi-national

agribusinesses (many of which were based in the United States) entered into the country and









took control of land, particularly along the Caribbean coastal region, where land was sparsely

settled. The largest of these companies was United Fruit, which worked closely with the

Guatemalan government to fund improvements in infrastructure for the country. In return, the

Guatemalan government allocated more land for agricultural production to United Fruit. This

land was given at the expense of rural small-scale farmers, both ladino and Maya (Hamilton and

Chinchilla 2001: 24). The increasing use of land for the cultivation of export crops also led to

higher rates of deforestation and general environmental deterioration in the region.

It is important to note that the capitalist-driven exploitation and subordination of

indigenous groups and their lands did not go uncontested. The first half of the twentieth century

was marked by a series of revolts and uprisings of both Maya and ladino farmers protesting

government and corporate land takeovers. These protests were often met with violent repression

on the part of state police. However, after a series of revolts in the early 1940s, a democratic

administration was established in Guatemala that lasted ten years, from 1945-1954. This period

saw the institution of numerous social reform policies, including the expropriation of the land of

traditional Guatemalan landowners and the United Fruit Company and its subsequent

redistribution to 100,000 peasant families (27). However, this period of socialist reform, which

is referred to in Guatemala as the "Ten Years of Spring," came to a halt in 1954 when a U.S.-led

military coup ousted Guatemalan government leaders. The overthrow of the democratic

administration, and the re-institution of military rule under caudillo leader General Ydigoras

Fuentes led to the migration of several thousands of Guatemalans to neighboring countries such

as Honduras and Mexico (ibid.). Following this overthrow, Fuentes worked with both the

military and ladino elites to institute a "top-down" redistributive land reform, in which rural









farmers were allotted only the smallest of land plots that failed to meet the subsistence

requirements of their families (Hough et al. 1982).

The Continued Destruction of Land and People: The Violence of Capitalist Patriarchy

The 1960s and 1970s represented period of increasing industrialization and militarization

for Guatemala. After the creation of the Central American Common Market, which reduced

tariffs in order to attract foreign investors, European and Japanese investments in manufacturing

increased substantially, as did U.S. investment in agriculture. This modernization resulted in the

further displacement of rural farmers-both indigenous and ladino-as their farmlands were

once again taken over by large multi- and trans-national corporations. Often, the military, which

controlled the government during much of this period, was involved in evicting indigenous

populations from their land, and then re-selling it to corporations at speculative prices (Hamilton

and Chinchilla 2001:28). The land that was made available to the "evicted" populations of poor

indigenous and ladino farmers was often in areas that were poor for agricultural cultivation,

mostly in the mountainous highlands. Additionally, the plots that were made available to these

farmers were quite small, ranging between 0.5 to 2 hectares in size. In 1979, a widely skewed

land distribution pattern was reported, in which 88% of productive farm units were less than

family subsistence size and held only 16% of arable land, while 2% of units held a whopping

65% of arable land (Tanaka and Wittman 2003).

The dismal living conditions and continuing displacement of rural farmers were the major

"push" factors that led to dramatic increases in Guatemalan emigration in the 1960s and 1970s.

It is estimated that the number of Guatemalans entering Mexico increased from 10,000 to 15,000

annually in 1950 to 60,000 annually in the 1970s (Torres Rivas 1985: 58). Central American

immigration to the United States, where many felt there would be greater economic opportunity

for them, also increased substantially during this time, with the number of legally admitted









immigrants more than tripling from 45,000 annually in the 1950s to 143,000 annually in the

1970s (60). The continued tradition of displacement and migration was especially traumatic for

Maya, whose religion and culture emphasize the importance of attachment and cultivation of

one's land; indeed, many scholars have characterized traditional Maya religions as "place based"

religions. Thus, displacement for many of these indigenous groups was more than traumatic; it

was sacrilegious (Stone 2000; Montejo 2000).

Violence against rural populations in Guatemala continued into the next decade, when

brutal military regimes forced hundreds of thousands to flee. During the 1980s, and the

especially vicious regimes of Generals Lucas Garcia and Rios Montt, clashes between guerilla

opposition groups and rural farmers and the military controlled Guatemalan government severely

escalated. Under the command of these two caudillo leaders, the military targeted rural

communities where insurgents were believed to be hiding; often, whole villages were massacred,

as was the case in El Mozote in November 1981, where 750 men, women, and children were

killed (Danner 1994). The fact that all villages targeted for destruction had been indigenous

Maya, and the fact that 83% of those killed were Maya, have led many to conclude that what

may have begun as a civil war turned into a systematic campaign of genocide on the part of the

Guatemalan government and military, which was deemed to be responsible for over 93% of the

casualties (Falla 1993; Churchill 1998; CEH 1999; Sanford 2003).

Not surprisingly, during this time the number of political and economic refugees from

Guatemala increased exponentially, as an estimated 1 million people were forced to flee from

their homes between 1980 and 1983 (Lovell 1988). The high level of violence continued until

the mid 1980s, when Vinico Cerezo Aravelo was elected president and re-instituted democratic

rule. It was more than ten years, however, until a peace treaty was signed in 1996, bringing an









official end to the violence and human rights abuses that had plagued the country for thirty-six

bloody years.

Thus, the story of Guatemala's involvement in the world market is one of the severe

social and economic marginalization and suppression of poor, rural farmers, most of whom were

indigenous Maya. The story is also one of increasing environmental degradation in the region,

due to the combined effects of industrialization and thirty years of civil war. While the political

strife in Guatemala may officially be over, the economic and ecological crisis is not. Policies of

globalization and neoliberalism instituted in the 1980s have contributed to a decrease in both the

quality of life and the environment in rural Guatemala. The following section details how these

policies have impacted rural farmers in Guatemala, particularly women.

Effects of Policies of Globalization and Neoliberalism

The problem of environmental degradation in Guatemala in particular, and Central

America in general, can be traced directly to globalization and the implementation of neoliberal

policies, beginning in the early 1980s. These policies represent a continuation of efforts to

incorporate Guatemala into the world market, and were put into place by a powerful coalition of

international financial institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World

Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and various Latin American governments.

According to officials of these institutions, the goals of the new policies were to reduce

government corruption, provide greater economic stability to the region, reduce inflation, boost

competitiveness and exports, and reduce poverty through "trickle-down" benefits. However, the

tools used to implement these policies seem far-removed from the goals. In order to comply

with demands of both the WTO and the World Bank, many Latin American governments

instituted draconian cuts in spending on social programs; privatized public utilities; eliminated

government regulations in order to attract foreign investments; liberalized trade policies; and









promoted free markets at virtually every level of the economy. The financial institutions and

governments warned the public that the short-term effects would be painful for the sake of long-

term benefits; and indeed, these painful effects were so dire that the 1980s are labeled "the lost

decade" for Latin America. The pain has been felt disproportionately by the poorest citizens,

who have experienced higher rates of unemployment at the very time social support programs

have disappeared (Weyland 2004: 144-46).

In addition to contributing to an increase rather than decrease in poverty, this free,

deregulated trade has also led to an increase in environmental degradation in the region. The

primary reason for this is due to the increase in export value for many types of non-traditional

agricultural export (NTAX) crops. For example, export data shows that traditional exports such

as sugar, coffee, cotton, cacao, tea and spices have lost in export value over the last thirty years,

ranging from a -25.3% loss in the value of sugar to a -50.4% loss for coffee. These losses have

been replaced by huge increases since 1979 in the export value of milk and dairy products

(817%); forest products (435%); and a 387% increase in the export value of NTAX crops such as

fruits, vegetables, and flowers (an industry most advanced in Mexico and Chile and strong in

Guatemala). The size and timing of this shift from traditional exports to dairy, forest products,

and non-traditional crops links it clearly to neoliberal "structural adjustments" and easing of

trade restrictions (Deere 2005: 6, 27).

Over the years, as the value of NTAX crops in Guatemala has increased, so has their

production. More and more fertile valley land is now being used for growing crops for profit.

This, in turn, has pushed the subsistence farming of Guatemala's rural poor to mountainsides,

where trees are slashed and burned to make way for corn and beans. The consequences of this

destruction are also local because it is well-documented that deforestation causes soil erosion,









reduced rainfall, and sediment-clogged waterways. The absence of established forests on

mountainsides also intensifies the devastation of hurricanes and flooding (Carr 2003).

The increased agricultural production also results in increased pesticide and chemical

fertilizer use, both of which have a harmful impact not only on Guatemala's environment, but on

rural populations. Many large scale growers admit to using up to twenty applications per

growing cycle (Hamilton and Fischer 2003: 95). The pesticide use in turn affects local

environmental quality as it destroys various forms of plant and animal life. Agricultural run-off

containing pesticide residue also results in the contamination of water sources, affecting the

health of rural populations. The Guatemalan government sponsored research on pesticide use in

1997 through the Pesticides and Health Project (Plagsalud). The project reported that while

agrochemical poisoning is rarely reported by farmers, nearly 2 million people living in rural

areas come into direct contact with chemical pesticides on a daily basis. The project also

indicated that while some pesticides were used by small-scale landowners and subsistence

farmers, the vast majority were used on crops intended for export to the United States and

Europe (PAHO 1998). Thus, as noted by socialist ecofeminists Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva,

"the economic, social, and ecological costs of constant growth in the industrialized countries

have been and are shifted to the colonized countries of the South, to those countries'

environment and their peoples" (1993: 58).

Clearly, the neoliberal policies of Guatemala have not affected everyone equally or in the

same ways in the years since their implementation. While large-scale landowners and other

capitalists have benefited, others have suffered; namely, the rural poor, the vast majority of

whom are indigenous. As we have seen, indigenous Maya have a history of subordination,

exploitation, and displacement in Guatemala as first the colonizers and now capitalists take









control over their lands and resources. Today, the burdens of Guatemala's long history of the

appropriation of land and resources are disproportionately borne by Guatemala's rural

populations. With regards to land rights, this history has left rural populations with one of the

most uneven land distribution patterns in Latin America; now, less than 1% of landowners hold

75% of the best agricultural land. Additionally, an estimated 90% of rural inhabitants live in

poverty, with over 500,000 campesino farmworkerr) families living below subsistence level.

Most of these inhabitants are indigenous (Tanaka and Wittman 2003).

Rural Women and the Environment in Modern Guatemala

However, even within the indigenous community, not everyone has been affected in the

same ways. An ecofeminist analysis requires that we view environmental degradation through

the lens of gender. When we do so, we note that environmental degradation disproportionately

affects women in many nations, due in large part to a gendered division of labor that considers

family sustenance to be a woman's work. The gendered division of labor, as noted by

ecofeminist Maria Mies, is a key part of the capitalist patriarchal system. She argues that

women's subsistence work is a necessary precondition for the existence and continuation of the

capitalist system. Thus:

This general production of life, or subsistence production-mainly performed
through the non-wage labour of women and other non-wage labourers as slaves,
contract workers, and peasants in the colonies-constitutes the perennial basis
upon which 'capitalist productive labour' can be built up and exploited. Without
the ongoing subsistence production of non-wage labourers (mainly women), wage
labour would not be 'productive' (1986: 48).

Ecofeminist scholar Heather Eaton reaffirms this argument. She notes that as primary care

givers, "women are responsible for the food and health of family members," and that due to

environmental destruction in many poor countries, "it is becoming increasingly difficult to









provide food, fuel, and water for many families" (2005: 24). Ecofeminist and theologian Ivone

Gebara makes a similar connection between women and the environment:

Ecofeminism is born of daily life, of day-to-day sharing among people, of
enduring together garbage in the streets, bad smells, the absence of sewers and
safe drinking water, poor nutrition and inadequate health care. The ecofeminist
issue is born of the lack of municipal garbage collection, of the multiplication of
rats, cockroaches, and mosquitoes, and of the sores on children's skin. This is
true because it is usually women who have to deal with the daily survival issues:
keeping the house clean and feeding and washing the children (1999: 2).

This close connection between women and the environment is a reality in many

developing countries, including Guatemala, where rural women as wives and/or mothers are

primarily responsible for sustenance farming. Thus, in rural Guatemala, it is very often the

women who are primarily responsible for cultivating their families' milpa, or subsistence crops

(Deere and Leon 2001: 102).

However, historically, it has been difficult to measure women's participation in farming

in Guatemala. Some ecofeminist scholars argue that such is due to capitalist patriarchy's

devaluation of women's work as being "non-productive," so that even when women work

outside the home, their work is often seen as merely an extension of their "natural" role as

caretakers (Mies 1986: 45). Thus, in capitalism, the concept of labor is usually used to refer to

men's work outside of the home, "under capitalist conditions, which means work for the

production of surplus value" (46).

This same type of devaluation is a great problem in Guatemala, where women's

subsistence work has traditionally been ignored and/or discounted, even by official surveys. In

Guatemala and other Latin American countries, it is simply the case that all productive work-

including farming-is seen as men's work. Agricultural economists Carmen Diana Deere and

Magdalena Leon write that:









Irrespective of the amount of labor that rural women dedicate to agriculture-
whether as unpaid family workers or as wage workers-agriculture in Latin
America has been socially constructed as a male occupation. As a result, women's
work in agriculture is largely invisible. If considered at all, it is usually seen as
supplementary assistance to the principal male farmer. .. even in the agricultural
censuses, the agriculturalist of the household unit is assumed to be the male
household head (2001: 102).

The devaluation of women's work in farming is clearly evident of a capitalist-patriarchal

ideology, which has led to a gross underestimation of women's work in the agricultural sector.

The extent of such underestimation was recently made evident by the combined research efforts

of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) and the Inter-American

Development Bank (IDB) from 1991 through 1995. The aim of the IICA/IDB research was to

gather employment data for Latin American nations that would be more accurate than official,

national employment data. In this project, researchers undertook time-use studies, and found that

a large majority of rural women work 14 to 8 hours a day in a variety of tasks: cultivating their

own land; tending livestock; caring for children; gardening; and making products for sale. This

study's findings contrasted sharply with those of government surveys, which oftentimes have not

even recognized women as laborers. Of the 18 nations included in the IICA/IDB study,

Guatemala was found to have the most severe undercount; researchers concluded that the

government had underestimated the percentage of economically active rural women by nearly

500% (Kleysen and Campillo 1996: 17).

Both Deere and the IICA/IDB's study conclude that women in rural Guatemala have daily,

close contact with their land and environment. These studies also raise important questions,

however. What is the nature of the relationship between rural women and their land? What is

the nature, if any, of environmental degradation in the communities where these women live?

How are the women affected by such degradation? And what are the women doing about the









situation? This thesis seeks to answer these and other questions using the previously outlined

socialist ecofeminist framework. Using this framework will allow for an analysis of important

connections between the exploitation of women and nature in the global South, in the context of

rural Guatemala. This framework will also allow for an analysis of how decisions made at a

global level impact the day-to-day lives of women in Guatemala. Perhaps most importantly,

however, this framework will allow for an imputation of responsibility to the agents of

globalization whose policies have resulted in mass environmental devastation and

correspondingly, a decline in the quality of life for millions of people like the women of rural

Guatemala.









CHAPTER 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS

Western (Eco)feminism and Scholarship on the "Third World"

In past years, Western feminist scholarship has come under harsh, and, I would argue,

well-deserved criticism in its analyses of situations in the "Third World." In her seminal piece

"Under Western Eyes," feminist scholar Chandra Talpede Mohanty criticizes Western feminist

scholarship for the ways in which it has traditionally portrayed citizens of the Third World-and

women in particular-as "singular, monolithic subjectss" (1986: 17). She argues that this

ethnocentricc universalism" that often pervades much Western feminist scholarship is really a

new form of colonialism in that it is implicated in perpetuating relations of "structural

domination," and a suppression of those it claims to represent (18). Ecofeminist Maria Mies

similarly critiques how traditional feminist scholarship has been used as yet another instrument

of "domination and legitimation of power elites" (1993: 38).

Both Mohanty and Mies call for a radical change in the way that Western feminist

scholarship engages in discussions of the Third World. In a follow-up piece to "Under Western

Eyes," Mohanty argues that feminist scholars must "be attentive to the micropolitics of context

subjectivity, and struggle, as well as to the macropolitics of global economic and political

systems and processes" (2003: 223). Engaging in such scholarship makes homogenizing and

universalizing impossible; rather, we understand people's situations in relation to their

immediate locale and link their "everyday life and local gendered contexts and ideologies to the

larger, transnational political and economic structures and ideologies of capitalism" (225). Key,

too, to this scholarship is the idea of directionality: in situating the local within the global, we are

able to "read up the ladder of privilege," and make visible-and responsible-the global powers

that are affecting the day-to-day lives of countless people throughout the world.









A Feminist Project

This thesis draws from both Mohanty and Mies' call for an "anti-imperialist, anticapitalist,

and contextualized feminist project" that exposes[] and makes] visible the various, overlapping

forms of subjugation of women's lives" (Mohanty 2003: 236). The feminist project of this thesis

is to investigate the effects that policies of globalization and neoliberalism have had on both the

environment and women in rural Guatemala.

The research conducted for this thesis involves a review of fieldnotes and surveys of rural

farmers in Guatemala conducted in May and June of 2006 by staff members of an environmental

non-governmental organization (NGO). During this time, I served as part of a team of volunteer

workers who assisted the NGO, the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR) in gathering

general fieldnotes about communities in the department of Chimaltenango, in the central

highlands of Guatemala. The research was primarily gathered from three different communities

in which AIR is currently working-Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa.

The Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR)

I have been working with the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR), for over

fifteen years, assisting with both fundraising as well as agroforestry projects. The organization is

transnational, having offices in both the United States and Chimaltenango, Guatemala. The

purpose of AIR is to combat the deleterious effects of deforestation by working with local

farmers in Guatemala to establish agroforestry programs in their communities. The farmers

work with AIR on a voluntary basis; the organization simply advertises its services in

community centers, and then farmers contact AIR's staff if they are interested in receiving

assistance. Participation in AIR's agroforestry programs is free for the farmers; the organization

provides the technical knowledge, basic tools, and seeds necessary to implement the programs.









Significantly, most of the farmers who seek out the assistance of AIR-nearly 77%-are

women.

AIR has been working in Guatemala for fifteen years, and in this time, has worked with

over 50 communities throughout the department of Chimaltenango. AIR staff includes six

tecnicos, or field extension agents. Three of the tecnicos are indigenous Maya and fluent in both

Spanish and Kaqchikel. The tecnicos also hold degrees in agroforestry and are trained in

community farming methods. One tecnico will work with farmers in a particular community for

up to five years to ensure the continued success and sustainability of the community's tree

nurseries and agroforestry projects.

Each year, the tecnicos, along with other volunteers, conduct a series of both field

observations and interviews in various communities with which AIR works. The purpose of

these observations and interviews is to obtain detailed information on the general environmental

and economic condition of each community, as well as the number and makeup of the group of

farmers in the community (including how many men and women are involved, and how many of

the farmers are indigenous). This information is recorded and compiled in an annual report and

other reports on the work of farmers.

In the summer of 2006, AIR staff and volunteers conducted both field observations and

interviews with women farmers in three communities in the department of Chimaltenango,

Guatemala. In these communities-Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa-AIR works extensively

with groups of women farmers to help them implement agroforestry projects in their fields.

These groups range in size between 20 and 40 members and are comprised of both ladina and

indigenous Maya women. For this study, seven women farmers were interviewed in

Acatenango, five in Comalapa, and eight in Itzapa. The women all volunteered to be









interviewed, and were able to take time away from their day to meet with the interviewers. While

AIR staff members have experience in conducting similar interviews, they were reminded to

inform the women that their responses would be kept completely confidential, and that their

answers may be used in AIR's reports, as well as an academic research paper on women and the

environment. Each interviewer was provided with a set of guiding questions to ask each woman,

and was instructed to record her answers as accurately as possible (see Appendices A and B for

guiding questions). No recording devices were used due in part to a lack of financial resources,

as well as a general agreement amongst AIR staff and volunteers that many women may be

reluctant to be tape recorded. Throughout this paper, the names of the cities and geographic

landmarks have remained unchanged, while the names of the women are false in order to assure

confidentiality.

In addition to the interviews, a total of fifteen observational studies were conducted, with

five studies ranging from one to six hours conducted in each of the three communities. The

fieldnotes based on these observations contain important information on the nature of the

environment and environmental degradation (if any) in the communities, as well as general

information on the population of the community, what percent of the community is indigenous,

etc. These observations served to supplement the interviews, providing a way of establishing

both the reliability and validity of the data obtained from the interviews.

For this thesis, I reviewed the notes from both the interviews and field observations

conducted by AIR staff and volunteers in Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa, utilizing the

grounded theory method as outlined by Strauss and Corbin (1998) in order to analyze the data.

Upon my initial reviews of the data, during the "open coding" phase of analysis, I identified and

tentatively labeled similarities that became apparent across interviews. At this phase of analysis,









I was able to group similar items according to defined properties, and thereby develop concepts

(121). My familiarity with feminist and ecofeminist literature was helpful in identifying common

themes that emerged from the data during this phase. For example, as many ecofeminists have

pointed out, in many parts of the world women are responsible for subsistence farming, and are

therefore affected as farmers by environmental degradation in their communities. As noted by

Gebara (1999), Shiva (1989), and others, many tasks relating to women's farm work-including

gathering firewood and water, planting and harvesting-have been adversely impacted by

processes of deforestation and soil, air, and water pollution. This theme in ecofeminist literature

served to "enhance [my] sensitivity" to this theme in the data, as I was more readily able to

identify the various, subtle ways in which the women farmers' work in Guatemala has been

affected by deforestation in their communities (Strauss and Corbin 1998: 49).

Following this open coding phase of analysis, I then attempted to link these discrete

concepts at the level of their properties and dimensions to form larger conceptual categories in

the process of axial coding (123). Thus, tasks relating specifically to women's farmwork,

including gathering firewood, cultivating crops, and cooking, were linked and grouped within the

larger, more general category of genderedd division of labor." Finally, I again referred to the

ecofeminist literature to assist me in both checking the validity of the data, as well as refining the

conceptual framework used to explain the data.

Concerns

My main concerns with this project revolve around the ways in which the data were

collected, how that data was interpreted, and how the data is presented. Feminist scholarship

requires that researchers be reflexive of their position of privilege in relation to their participants,

and be attentive to the corresponding power differences (Mohanty 2003: 224). Feminist

scholarship also acknowledges that there is no such thing as objective, value-free research.









In acknowledging that objectivity in any type of research is neither possible nor desirable,

feminist scholars must examine the ways in which their research method and data may be biased.

One source of bias is the way in which the research was conducted. For instance, in this study,

the fieldnotes and surveys were recorded by AIR staff and volunteers. The staff members, as

middle class, college-educated men occupy a distinctly privileged social position in Guatemala

relative to the poor, uneducated female farmers. This differential positioning may have

influenced the women farmers' responses somewhat, although it is also important to consider

that the women have been working with all of AIR's tecnicos for at least two years and have

reported that they not only trust the men but like them on a friendly, personal level as well.

While many of the interviews between the tecnicos and women were conducted in

Spanish, some were conducted in the Maya Kaqchikel language. These were then translated by

the Kaqchikel and Spanish speaking tecnicos into Spanish, and a Peace Corps volunteer from

Spain then assisted me in translating the interviews into English. Unfortunately, some of the

original meanings may have been lost through these layers of translation; we tried our best to

respect the women's messages and retain the integrity of what they told us.

In addition to taking into consideration the issues of data collection, I must also be aware

of the ways in which my social position-as a white, North American, middle-class woman-

may influence my interpretation of the data. Scholars have noted that there has been a tendency

of white North American feminists to essentialize all "Third World" women as a "homogenous,

'powerless' group often located as implicit victims of particular socioeconomic systems"

(Mohanty 1986: 23). I must be careful to avoid this tendency, and to focus my analysis on

"demonstrating the production of women as socioeconomic political groups within particular

local contexts," while paying attention to social class and ethnic identities (31).









Finally, I am concerned with how to best address problems of scholarly language,

particularly with regard to the "politics of naming." In her article "Changing the Terms,"

feminist scholar Nancy Naples notes that "how we explicate and frame our approach to the

intersection of global and local organizing says a great deal about out political orientation,

disciplinary assumptions, and cross-cultural sensibility" (2000: 5). The term "Third World," for

instance, has been used since the early 1980s to refer to "underdeveloped or developing nations

that were economically disadvantaged and therefore dependent on First World nations for

financial, scientific, and technical assistance" ibidd). However, this term has been criticized by

feminists who argue that it discursively justifies the construction of First World countries in

North America and Western Europe as dominant and more advanced. Additionally, the use of

the term "Third World" may contribute to the "othering" of women in these countries. Feminist

scholars have proposed alternative terms, such as the "Two-thirds World," which has been used

to refer to women living in Third World nations, and brings attention to the fact that at least two

thirds of the world's population live in countries with low average per-capita income (Bulbeck

2006: 38).

Third World countries have also been referred to as "developing" in the discourse of

globalization. Such a term is equally problematic, as it places the notion of "development" as a

goal that countries should strive to achieve. Therefore, developing countries like Guatemala are

seen as lagging behind "developed" countries like the United States. Some feminist scholars

have argued that instead of describing various First World countries as developed, we should

instead use the term "overdeveloped" (Minh-ha 1989).

For the purposes of this paper, I will periodically use the term "North" to refer to countries

generally considered to be part of the First World, as well as the term "South" to refer to









countries considered to be Third World. Like transnational feminist scholars Chandra Mohanty,

Trinh T. Minh-ha, and Vandana Shiva, I will use the terms North/First World and South/Third

World interchangeably. These terms reflect the historical ways in which countries in the northern

hemisphere have historically exploited countries in the southern hemisphere, through

imperialism, colonialism, and, most recently, through policies of neoliberalism and globalization

(Minh-ha 1989; Mies and Shiva 1993; Shiva 2000). Of course, it is important to recognize that

the historical exploitation of some countries by others has not always been so neatly

geographically ordered; this has only been a general historical tendency.

Throughout this thesis, I will also use the term "globalization" to refer to the processes of

global economic restructuring, with a specific "economic and technological agenda that alters

basic modes of cultural organization and international exchange in many parts of the world"

(Eaton and Lorentzen 2003: 4). While proponents of globalization declare "endless benefits

from the exchange of capital on a global scale," others critique the notion that globalization is

beneficial for everyone. These critics argue that policies of globalization are reordering the flow

of capital and wealth within a "global and hegemonic economic regime" that serves only the

interests of the elite and rich (4).

Through this thesis, I hope to explore how these global, historical processes and policies

are played out an everyday, microsocial level. Specifically, I want to asses how the policies

affect both women and the environment in the context of rural Guatemala. In doing so, I hope to

contribute to the growing body of anti-capitalist, anti-globalization literature, and to "read up the

ladder of privilege," in the words of Mohanty (1986), making visible and responsible the global

powers that are affecting the lives of countless people.









CHAPTER 4
ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND WOMEN IN THE COMMUNITIES

All three of the communities presented in this study are located in the Department of

Chimaltenango, in the central highlands of Guatemala. This is a particularly mountainous region

of the country, with altitudes typically ranging between 1,500 and 2,500 meters (4,900 to 8,200

feet). The mountains and hills dominate the landscape, and there are only a few valley areas

with flat terrain suitable for farming. These areas, however, are often occupied by large-scale

growers and trans-national agribusinesses such as Del Monte and Chiquita, both of which bought

out the land holdings of the United Fruit Company in the 1970s (La Feber 1993). Companies

like Del Monte specialize in the growth of non-traditional agricultural export (NTAX) crops like

cabbage, snow peas, and broccoli (Fischer and Hendrickson 2003: 1). The value that NTAX

crops have for the large scale growers who cultivate them, the corporations that contract with

these growers, and the Guatemalan economy virtually guarantees that only the best farmland will

be used to grow these crops. In Chimaltenango, one of the most ideal areas for farming is the

valley of Tecpan, a large flatland area in the center of the department that spans an area of

approximately 50 square kilometers. As Fischer and Hendrickson note in their 2003 study of the

area, the valley of Tecpan provides an ideal place for growing crops, and the vast majority of the

land is used to grow export crops. It is also notable that in this area of flat terrain and loose, rich

soil, there are no subsistence plots of corn and beans.

Highland Communities

Instead of being allowed to farm in areas such as Tecpan, most rural subsistence farmers

have been displaced to areas high in the mountains of Chimaltenango. Here, farmers have

slashed and burned many areas in order to make room for their milpa, small plots of land used

for growing subsistence crops of corn and beans (see Figure 4-1). As Fischer and Hendrickson









note, the deforested mountainsides of the central Guatemalan highlands have become "symbols"

of such socio-historical issues as "unequal access to quality agricultural land, the ecological

issues of deforestation, and political favoritism in the use of community resources" (2).

However, for the farmers who grow their subsistence crops in these areas, the deforested

mountains are more than symbols; they are realities that must be faced every day. The women

farmers in this study all confront the problems of cultivating crops for their families' survival in

the difficult, unforgiving terrain of the highlands of Chimaltenango.





















Figure 4-1. Deforested hillside in the Department of Chimaltenango.

As it is so difficult to cultivate crops here for one's family, let alone for one's income,

many of the residents of the highland communities are impoverished. In Guatemala, the more

rural areas tend to have the highest rates of poverty, as most of the wealthy elite of the country

reside in large houses behind high walls in urban centers like Guatemala City or Antigua

(Fischer and Hendrickson 2003: 27). The lives of the elite in Guatemala are a far cry from the

lives of the rural poor, and Guatemala is notorious for high rates of inequality, with the top 20%









of the population earning 63% of all income, while the bottom 20% earn only 2.1% of all

income. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) estimates that nearly 87% of the

population of Guatemala lives in poverty, with 67% living in "extreme poverty," defined as

income below what is needed for minimal subsistence levels and caloric intake (UNDP 2000).

Most of the residents of the communities presented in this study live in extreme poverty, many

earning annual incomes of less than 2,700 Quetzals, or about US $350. For many residents,

farming is their only means of survival, and yet this task can be quite difficult in the mountainous

highland communities. The following section explores the general environmental and farming

conditions of each community.

Acatenango

Acatenango is a relatively small town with a population of about 15,000 located

approximately fifteen miles to the southwest of the city of Chimaltenango and ten miles to the

south of the valley of Tecpan. It is in a region of Guatemala that is renowned for its coffee. This

particular area provides fertile ground for growing many types of crops, due in large part to the

rich volcanic soil found in the region. The volcano Acatenango is one of the largest in

Guatemala at 3,500 meters, and still active. The ash that it spews mixes in with the soil and

provides valuable nutrients that help with plant growth.

However, in the town of Acatenango, the most valuable, easily farmed land is used for

growing export coffee crops. Large corporations like Starbucks and Folgers contract with

growers in this region in order to supply a heavy demand for the rich coffee grown on the fertile

volcanic slopes. The subsistence farming that many of the residents depend on for survival has

in turn been gradually pushed to the steeper mountain slopes around the outskirts of the city. In

Acatenango, a group of twenty ladina farmers have been working with AIR for nearly three

years to implement methods of sustainable agriculture in their fields. While many of the women









live within the city limits of Acatenango, or on the outskirts, their fields can be up to three

kilometers outside of the city. Their fields average about 0.5 hectares (1.24 acres) in size. It is

estimated that in Guatemala, a family of six needs between 0.6 to 1.1 hectares in order to grow

enough corn to feed themselves for a year (Fischer and Hendrickson 2003: 129). The families of

the women in this study range in size between four and eight members. Given the small sizes of

their milpa plots, all of the families in Acatenango, as well as Comalapa and Itzapa, live in what

the United Nations defines as "extreme poverty" (UNDP 2000).

Comalapa

Comalapa is a somewhat large city of nearly 30,000, located approximately fifteen miles

northwest of Chimaltenango, and ten miles southeast of the valley of Tecpan. Like Acatenango,

it is a very mountainous area. Travel to and from Comalapa is difficult, as the mountain roads

can be very steep and difficult for vehicles to traverse, particularly if it is raining. Thus, although

Comalapa is only a short distance away from the large city of Chimaltenango, it can take up to

2.5 hours to travel from one city to the other.

Most of the indigenous Maya residents of Comalapa are farmers, and tend to reside on

the outskirts of the city, closer to their fields, or in small nearby communities such as Palemos.

Located high in the mountains, these areas are quite serene and beautiful, with lush greenery and

pine forests. However, this beauty can be deceptive, as the incredibly hard, rocky soil makes it

difficult to grow crops. Additionally, the combination of loose rocks and steep slopes can make

farming not only difficult but dangerous; many farmers were observed tying ropes around their

waists and anchoring themselves to nearby trees in order to keep from tumbling down a

mountain slope. Because of the considerable struggle involved in farming, many families living

around here farm only for subsistence, as they are not able to grow enough to sell any excess. To

supplement their farming, the families may also raise chickens, goats, and occasionally cows.









Here, a group of twenty Kaqchikel Maya women have been working with AIR for approximately

two years to implement methods of agroforestry in their fields. Their fields are close in size to

those of the farmers of Acatenango, averaging about 0.5 hectares.

Itzapa

Like Comalapa, Itzapa is a fairly large community of about 40,000 that is approximately

ten miles to the southwest of Chimaltenango, and fifteen miles to the southeast of the valley of

Tecpan. It is slightly more industrialized and polluted than Comalapa, and more crowded as

well. Here there is a group of forty Kaqchikel Maya women who have been working with AIR

for over five years. All of them farm for subsistence, and their fields are located between one

and five kilometers outside of the city limits. Their subsistence plots are comparable in size to

the plots of farmers in Acatenango and Comalapa, averaging about 0.4 hectares, or 0.98 acres.

The farming areas around Itzapa are not as steep as the areas around Acatenango and Comalapa,

and thus the women here do not have to contend with the same dangers and difficulties of

farming on rocky mountainsides. However, Itzapa also lies at a somewhat lower elevation than

Acatenango or Comalapa, and some of its low-lying areas are susceptible to flooding when it

rains heavily. During the rainy season, from May until August, it is not uncommon for roads and

bridges to collapse when the ground becomes over-saturated. This, in turn, can make travel to

and from one's milpa a difficult and arduous process.

While the three communities in this study differ according to various geographical

characteristics, they all face similar environmental problems. These problems are rooted in

neoliberal policies and historical processes of land appropriation that have gradually pushed

subsistence farmers to more mountainous areas where more and more forests are being slashed

and burned to make way for corn and beans. The increasing deforestation of these areas has had

profound impacts on the lives and livelihoods of the residents of these communities, particularly









those whose survival depends upon subsistence farming. The following section explores how

this environmental degradation impacts the lives and livelihoods of the women farmers in this

study.

Women Farmers

It has been noted repeatedly by various feminist scholars over the years that the gendered

division of labor that pervades much of the world defines "productive" wage labor work as

men's work, and "non-productive" work inside the home as women's work (Nash and

Fernandez-Kelly 1983; Mies 1986; Mies and Shiva 1993; Mohanty 1997). Ecofeminists note

that in many countries in the global South, this gendered division of labor has traditionally

placed women in rural areas in the role of subsistence farmers for their families (Mies and Shiva

1993; Gebara 1999; Eaton and Lorentzen 2003). The patriarchal logic that informs this division

views women's work as subsistence farmers as a "natural" extension of their roles as primary

care givers. Thus, their labor intensive farm work becomes yet another way for women to

nurture and care for their families, and allows their husbands to engage in "productive" wage

earning labor outside the home (Mies 1986).

The interviews conducted with the Guatemalan women in this study confirm that they do

indeed play a prominent role in the cultivation of their families' subsistence plots, or milpa,

which typically consist of corn and beans. Of the twenty women interviewed, fourteen indicated

that cultivating their families' land was primarily their responsibility. Five indicated that they

shared this responsibility with their husbands, and only one Maya woman in Comalapa indicated

that her husband was the primary farmer. She noted that while she helped him occasionally with

the farming, her primary activity involved weaving and selling huipils, beautiful and elaborate

blouses that are a trademark of traditional Maya dress for women, and that can take up to four

months to make.









The farm work that the women in this study are involved with places them in direct and

immediate contact with their local environment on a regular basis. As farmers, the women are

intimately aware of any amount of environmental degradation occurring in their communities

and in the areas where they farm. When asked about the major environmental problems facing

their communities, the women responded clearly and unequivocally that deforestation and soil

erosion constituted the biggest threats.

Deforestation

In each of the communities, the women are long term residents. Many have grown up in

the same area together and are life-long friends. The fact that they have lived in the areas so long

means that the women are able to see how gradually, more and more trees are being cleared from

surrounding areas to make way for farming. Dofia Fidelia, a Kaqchikel Maya, is the oldest in the

group of women working in Itzapa. At over eighty years old, and a lifelong resident, she has

seen many changes and upheavals in her community over the years. She notes that the problem

of deforestation has gotten worse in recent years:

Now [deforestation] is worse, and it sickens me. I have always planted trees with
my milpa. It is the way my family has always done it. We have always
understood the importance of trees, for the soil, for the water, for our crops, and
for firewood. But now, people come in and cut them down, and they do not
understand what they are doing. And yes, it has gotten worse, especially because
people need trees for firewood, and now there are less and less trees. Last week,
at night, people came and cut two of my casuarinas. I have never had that
problem before, people stealing trees!

The increasing deforestation in her community means that Dofia Fidelia is now having to deal

with problems she has never before had to address in over eighty years of living in Itzapa. In

addition to distressing her emotionally, the problem of increased deforestation is also directly

impacting her livelihood, as people are invading her property to steal her resources. Her

concerns are shared by other women who were interviewed. Dofia Cecilia, a 43 year old ladina









farmer from Acatenango also recognizes that the problem of deforestation in her community has

gotten worse in recent years. She notes that,

We [in the women's group] have all grown up together here, in Acatenango.
Most of us come from families of farmers, so we have been doing this our whole
life. But over the years, more people, more farmers have moved here, and have
bought land here. Of course, they have to farm, too, and this means that they cut
the trees. We here, my compaheras and I realized that something had to be done.

Like Dofia Fidelia, Cecilia and the other women with whom she works are concerned about the

increasing rates of deforestation in their communities. As the women elaborate, many of their

concerns relate to both the emotional and material consequences of deforestation.

Emotional Consequences

The farm work that the women do requires them to be in their fields between one and

four days each week, on average, tending to their crops. This work places them in close,

intimate contact with their environment, as they clear away brush, till the soil, plant the seeds,

and nurture the crops that will be used to feed their families. The direct physical connection with

their crops and the surrounding environment in turn fosters an emotional connection to the

environment that many women expressed. Dofia Patricia, a ladina farmer in Acatenango,

describes the fields where she works as her "home," and explains that for her, farming is relaxing

and enjoyable. She says,

I work so much inside the house, with three young children, and I am very tired
on the days that I spend in the house. On days that I come to farm, I bring my
children with me, of course, and I feel better... I feel like the field, like the trees
are my home, and my home is actually where I work [laughs]. So yes, it is sad for
me to see trees being cut, because when they are cut, I feel like I am losing part of
my home.

When asked about what the environment meant to her, Dofia Santiaga, a ladina farmer from

Acatenango, responded that her feelings were "complicated and profound," and she felt that a

poem best expressed how she felt about "God's creation":









Ambiente Sagrado
Monumento de la Creaci6n
Dios, Dios te ha designado como
Ejemplo y Bendicion
Caminando, caminando
Hoy nopude visitor aquellos
Inmensos arboles donde
Un dia Sali ajugar
Caminando, caminando
El aires fresco me abrazo
Y el agua se calmo
Juntos salvemos
El medio Ambiente

In English, the poem reads,

Sacred environment
Monument of Creation
God, God has designed you as a
Model and a Blessing
Walking, walking,
Today I could not see
Those immense trees where
I once used to play
Walking, walking,
The fresh air embraced me
And the water calmed me
Together, let us save
The Environment.

Clearly, Santiaga feels that the fields are more than a place of work; for her, the connection that

she has with the environment is more than physical but emotional and spiritual as well. Like

Patricia, Santiaga feels that the fields are more than a place of work. For Patricia, the fields are

like a second "home," while for Santiaga, they are a sacred place, a "Monument of Creation."

Santiaga goes on to say that to do harm to the environment is to commit a sin, and that the

deforestation that she sees around her causes her grief that she feels "in [her] heart and in [her]

spirit."









The sacred quality of the environment was also expressed by many Maya women

farmers, and is perhaps not surprising, given the great importance that Maya culture has

traditionally placed on farming and on people's connection to the land. In her memoir, Maya

activist Rigoberta Menchu repeatedly notes how the earth, the seed, and corn are all recognized

as the main sources of sustenance and therefore "sacred" for many Maya (1984). It is also not

uncommon for religious ceremonies to be held in rural Maya households when corn is both

planted and harvested, and it is considered a sin by many Maya to use land in a wasteful manner

(Menchu 1984; Montejo 1999; Fischer and Hendrickson 2003; Fischer 2004). Dofia Lourdes, a

Kaqchikel farmer in her mid-40s in Comalapa, laments the deforestation in the area, a sadness

that she says is shared by the other Kaqchikel women she works with. She notes,

Of course this [deforestation] is a problem, a big problem that concerns us and
saddens us. Everytime I walked down the road, and I would see more trees cut,
more naked land, my heart would cry. It would cry for what we have lost, what
has been wasted, and also for what we will lose, for our future, for our children.

Lourdes' sadness and sense of loss is related to the ways in which the valuable, sacred land

around her community has been mistreated and "wasted." Her sadness is also related to the

value of trees and the land in sustaining the community. When the land is mistreated, as she

notes, the future of the community is placed in jeopardy. Dofia Fidelia, the elderly farmer in

Itzapa, expresses a similar sense of loss and concern for the future when she talks about the

deforestation of her area.

It is especially sad to know that so many Maya are doing this to the land. We are
farmers, and we have always been farmers, and people are supposed to know
better! But people have forgotten that they are Maya, and they have forgotten
how to care properly for the land, and now we have these problems. I try to tell
people, to remind them of the importance of caring for the land. I show them my
field, how strong the crops are, how great the trees are, and I tell them that the
crops are strong because the trees are strong! People must listen, they must
understand, because if they do not... our land will forget us the way that we have
forgotten it.










For Fidelia, deforestation thus represents more than a loss of trees; it also represents a

loss of environmental knowledge and a loss of connection to the land that has

traditionally been of great importance to Maya men and women alike for centuries. For

women like Fidelia, the deforestation is even more painful when it is perpetuated by other

Maya, who are supposed to "know better," but have, over generations of resettlement and

displacement, become disconnected from the land and "forgotten" how to properly care

for it.

Material Consequences

The sadness and sense of loss that many women expressed represent only part of the

story of environmental degradation in the communities. As the women also noted, the

deforestation has very real, immediate consequences for them as well. Primarily, these

consequences relate to concerns of firewood and soil erosion. In areas of rural Guatemala, many

families continue to cook over open fires. This cooking requires a tremendous amount of

firewood; AIR staff members estimate that nearly two tons of firewood are required to feed a

family of four each year. Obtaining firewood does not necessitate felling trees; branches and

limbs may be pruned to obtain fuel. However, the increasing deforestation of the areas means

that it is becoming increasingly difficult to find trees with branches suitable for use as firewood.

This problem has directly impacted many of the women, who indicate that all the tasks relating

to meal preparation-including finding firewood for cooking-are often their responsibility. For

the women who cannot afford to buy firewood on a regular basis, this means that they have to

procure it themselves, usually in the mountains or fields outside of the city. Dofia Ivelisse in

Itzapa notes that prior to working with AIR, her search for firewood could often turn into an all

day, exhausting affair:









Every week, once each week, I would walk nearly two or three hours, out of the
city, past the farms, up into the mountains, up, up, just to find some branches for
cooking. I would have to walk so far, because I had no trees in my field, and no
one else had trees, and I was not going to steal other people's trees or branches!
Then, I would carry all this back down, on my head or my back, and it was very
difficult if it ever started to rain! Finally, I would get home, almost eight hours
after I left. And then I would have to cook for six people!

After working for AIR for more than five years, however, Ivelisse and other women in Itzapa are

able to prune branches from trees in their fields in order to cook. While the trees in their fields

do not yield enough firewood for the amounts required by open fire cooking, they do reduce the

number of times that the women must make long treks to find obtain wood. Ivelisse, for

instance, notes that the number of time she must travel outside of Itzapa for wood has been

reduced from four to two times each month. Dofia Elsa, 38, also from Itzapa, explains that while

she and her family were able to afford to buy firewood at least twice each month, she no longer

has to, as she and her husband own two plots of land that have both been re-forested through

AIR. These two plots now yield enough firewood for the family to cook with, although it should

be noted that Elsa uses a more fuel-efficient stove that only requires one third of the firewood

that the traditional open-fire method requires.

Despite the improvements in the situations of women like Ivelisse and Elsa, the lack of

firewood remains a deep concern for many of the women interviewed. As Dofia Fidelia noted,

the problem has become so severe that people are literally stealing trees from others' property.

Women in Acatenango and Comalapa also noted that firewood is becoming increasingly scarce,

and while some women are able to buy firewood in town, others reported having to walk

between two and six kilometers (one way) at least once each week in order to obtain wood from

outside the city limits. While most of the women state that they prune branches for firewood

instead of cutting entire trees, many residents will cut trees if cutting branches is insufficient.









The high demand for firewood in rural areas, combined with the continued push of subsistence

farming to the mountains, thus perpetuates a cycle of deforestation that directly impacts the

women and the work they do to feed their families. Finding firewood to cook with is but one

concern that the women expressed with regards to deforestation, however. The following section

will explore how deforestation is linked to other forms of environmental degradation in the

communities.

Storms and Mudslides

The deforestation of mountain slopes and steep hillsides aggravates a greater, more

ominous threat of mudslides. While not every woman explicitly mentioned deforestation as an

environmental problem in their communities, it is notable that every woman mentioned

mudslides as a major concern. Many women linked the problem of deforestation with soil

erosion and mudslides, as did Dofia Clementina, 53, from Acatenango:

We have to farm to eat, of course, but the only places to farm are here, on these
mountains that are very steep. This is a problem because people must clear
spaces for their crops, and not everyone knows the importance of trees. But then,
when the rain is strong, there are many crops that are washed away, and then what
do people have to eat?

While mudslides are always a threat during the rainy season, they have been an especially grave

problem in the months following Hurricane Stan. In October 2005, Stan made landfall south of

Veracruz, Mexico, and brought heavy rains and flooding to much of Central America. In

Guatemala, the heavy flooding caused massive landslides, destroying thousands of homes and

partially or completely wiping out the water and sanitation systems of entire villages (see Figure

4-2). Overall, Hurricane Stan is estimated to have caused between 669 and 1,500 deaths, and

may have destroyed as many as 200,000 homes. According to Guatemala's Ministry of

Agriculture, the immediate damage done to agriculture was assessed at approximately $46









million, with subsistence farmers in rural areas particularly affected (American Red Cross 2005;

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee 2005).



















Figure 4-2. Aftermath of mudslides near Acatenango.

Even in June, nearly nine months after Stan passed through, the communities are still

recovering, and mudslides continue to pose a threat. The torrential rains of Hurricane Stan led to

vast amounts of soil erosion here, and saturated the ground. This saturation in turn increases the

probability of future mudslides, as any additional amount of rain causes the soil to move. In

Guatemala, the rainy season runs from May through August, and in these months after Stan, soil

erosion represents a grave problem that threatens the safety of many families in highland

communities. In Acatenango, Dofia Emelia, 38, identifies mudslides as the biggest

environmental problem facing the community. She notes that,

This was only a small problem before Stan, but after Stan, a big problem. A
family in town completely lost their house because of a mudslide, and another
friend of mine has much fear because now, during this time of year, there is much
rain, and her house is at the bottom of a hill. She has a husband and three small
children, and she has fear because there is no place she can go, and every day, it
rains more, and more mud slides down. We are trying to find a house for her if
she loses hers, but it is difficult, because our houses are so small, and our families
are big, so there is not enough room. I don't know what will happen to her.










The immediacy of the threat is evident in Dofia Emelia's concern for her friend. While she

is anxious about her friend, Emelia is also concerned for herself as well. She goes on to say, "Of

course, I am worried about my own family, too. Really, when it rains so hard, no one is

completely safe." Thus, Emelia is aware that the problem of mudslides is one that affects the

entire community, and is not restricted to one or two families.

Other communities have been similarly affected. In Comalapa, for instance, mudslides

have made it even more difficult to farm in an already precarious area. Dofia Mona, 42, notes

that while she is not overly concerned for her safety, she does have to take "extra care" when

farming. She says that "The soil can be loose, and it is easy to slip on the rocks. I do not like to

bring my young children with me, because it can be dangerous, so I ask my older ones to watch

them when I am working [in the field]." She extends this danger beyond her own personal

experiences, however, noting that "I am only one of many farmers here. I know that others have

the same difficulties like I have." Thus, Mona connects her experiences to the experiences of

others in situations similar to hers, concluding that the dangers inherent in farming on steep,

unstable slopes are dangers that many farmers in Comalapa have to contend with. As women are

the primary farmers in these areas, they are also the ones who are placed in the greatest danger.

In addition to affecting farming conditions, the mudslides have affected other aspects of

life in highland communities, including finding water for bathing and washing clothes, as well as

travel. In Acatenango, while some residents have running water, many do not. In order to wash

clothes, many women make weekly trips to a community pila, a set of outdoor sinks constructed

out of stone where people bring their clothes or dishes to wash. One of the main pilas in

Acatenango was not equipped with running water, but was built near a river that ran outside of

town, so that people could easily fetch water as needed. Unfortunately, the river ran alongside









the base of a hillside that had been recently deforested in the summer of 2005. After Hurricane

Stan passed through, a tremendous amount of soil and sediment was washed into the river, so

that the water source was dried up (see Figure 4-3). Now, women who used that pila on a daily

or weekly basis must go to another part of town, which one woman described with distaste as

being "too far away and too crowded."






















Figure 4-3. River on the outskirts of Acatenango that was covered over by a mudslide.

Travel has also been affected by deforestation and the resulting soil erosion in and around

the communities. Shortly after Hurricane Stan passed through, a mudslide covered one main

road in Comalapa. Although few individuals own cars or trucks in this area, it was not

uncommon for as many as ten farmers to crowd into a truck on their way to their fields, which

can be as far as seven kilometers, or four miles away. Now, the mudslide has made this road

inaccessible to vehicles, and farmers must walk to their fields, carrying their tools on their backs.

Dofa Sofia, 33, and Dofa Mona must walk at least five kilometers, or about three miles on steep

roads and paths in order to get to their milpa plots, which border each other. In Itzapa, farmers
Travel~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~. -f... ,.,be fetdbydfrsainadth eutn oilers nadao
the~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ co,: tes Shotl afe urcn tnpse ho, a .,. vre nem
road~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~,. .- Coa.pa ,uhfwidviul w asortuk nti aei a
uncommon ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. 1 f-- -an as ,e amr ocodit rc nterwyt hi ils h
"a be as fa ssvnklmtro:"u ie wy otemusiehsmd hsra









have experienced similar problems with regards to travel, as many paved roads leading outside

of the city have collapsed as the ground underneath has given way due to over-saturation. In

poor areas on the outskirts of both of these communities, the government has done little to repair

damage done to roadways. Lourdes in Comalapa explains that, "This area is very poor, so the

government does not care much about us. This road has been covered for almost eight months,

and only once did people from the government visit, right after the hurricane. They left and

never came back, so you see how much they care about us. We have to take care of ourselves

here." While the mudslides have been especially detrimental to the women and the farmwork

they do, the women clearly view the mudslides as being a problem for the whole community.

Lourdes' skepticism regarding the government is shared by others in the group of women she

works with, and is unsurprising given the government's history of neglecting the needs of the

poor, particularly indigenous populations (Nelson 1999; Brass 2003; Sanford 2003). However,

also implicit in Lourdes' comments is a certain tenacity, and a realization that in order to

improve the present situation, the residents of Comalapa must act to "take care of [themselves]."

Conclusion

Both the Maya and ladina women farmers in this study are painfully aware of and

affected by the increasing environmental degradation occurring in their communities. As

process of globalization and neoliberalism continue to push poor farmers to the highlands, rates

of deforestation in highland communities increase as individuals slash and burn trees to make

space for corn and beans. This deforestation affects the women of these communities personally:

on an emotional level, they lament the loss of trees which many regard as "sacred;" while on a

material level, they must confront the problems of securing firewood when there is a scarcity of

trees, and they must also struggle with the difficulties of planting crops on eroding

mountainsides. Additionally, the women also recognize that the deforestation is a community-









wide problem, particularly with regards to its role in aggravating dangerous mudslides that

threaten the lives of their families and their neighbors. Thus, the connection that the women, as

subsistence farmers, have to the land means that they are both aware of and affected by the

increasing environmental degradation of their communities. This connection has also fostered a

sense of urgency, an awareness of the need to act and address the problems at hand. The

following section explores the ways in which the women of Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa

have mobilized both locally and transnationally to combat the problems of environmental

destruction in their communities.









CHAPTER 5
ORGANIZING FOR FAMILY AND COMMUNITY

As we have seen, the connection that the women farmers in Guatemala have with their

local environment is a close one, rooted in a gendered division of labor and the women's daily,

lived experiences as both mothers and farmers for their families. This connection has in turn

fostered an awareness amongst the women of progressively worsening environmental conditions

in their communities, as well as an awareness of the need to act to improve these conditions. In

Acatenango, Comalapa, Itzapa, and other rural areas in Guatemala women have taken steps to

mobilize on behalf of the environment, their families, and their communities. Ecofeminist

scholars note that such mobilization is not uncommon for women in rural areas throughout the

world, and is often fueled by the "ecological insights" of women as subsistence farmers (Shiva

1989: 67). In Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, andDevelopment, ecofeminist Vandana Shiva

highlights the work of women farmers in the Chipko movement, in which thousands of women

mobilized in India in the 1970s to stop the logging of the forests where they lived and farmed.

As Shiva notes, this movement was motivated to protect the forests as sources of life and

sustenance, and was organized on behalf of the community rather than on behalf of the women

as individuals. Shiva writes that mobilizing around environmental issues is not uncommon in

rural communities throughout the world, and that "movements by rural women to protect forests

or rivers have always been rooted in protecting their food base" (97). As this food base nurtures

not only the women's families but their communities as well, protecting it is a matter of both

family and community survival. Thus, the unique role that women have as farmers for their

families means that they have an awareness of the need to act to preserve the environment as the

source of life and food for themselves, their families, and their communities.









Local and Transnational Organizing and Social Capital

As poor farmers in rural Guatemala, the women in this study occupy a socially

marginalized position in terms of their class and gender. The Maya women must also contend

with the additional problem of racism, as discrimination against indigenous populations in

Guatemala has a long history dating back to the colonial period and the enslavement and

exploitation of the Maya by the Spanish. In order to empower themselves against these various

intersecting oppressions, many women in rural areas of Guatemala have found it necessary to

organize within their communities. All of the women in this study belong to local women's

groups that were organized by the women prior to their involvement with AIR. Each group has a

leadership committee that is elected or informally agreed upon by the other group members. In

Acatenango, Dofias Santiaga and Emelia were elected to be the leaders because of their "strong

characters," as one woman asserted, while in Itzapa, Dofias Marta, Erelena, and Elsa were

elected as president, vice-president, and secretary, respectively, because they are among the few

group members who are literate. Additionally, as Marta states, "The other women also trust us,

because we do not gossip."

While the women do not use the term "social capital" in describing the groups, the

concept is nonetheless helpful in understanding how the groups have proven to be helpful for the

women who belong to them. As defined by Pierre Bourdieu, social capital refers to "the

aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network

of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition...which

provides each of its members with the backing of collectively owned capital, a 'credential' which

entitles them to credit, in the various senses of the word" (1986: 248-9). While social capital

may be conceptualized in the same way as economic capital, it is important to note that the









former increases rather than decreases with use. That is, networks and relationships are

strengthened the more they are used.

For the women in this study, the groups they belong to serve as invaluable sources of

social capital, providing means of both organizing and mobilizing resources. Dofia Marta, a 43

year old Kaqchikel farmer in Itzapa, describes the importance of the women working together for

both social and financial reasons. She says, "We work together because we, as women, have

many problems. We do not have a lot of education, and the majority of us cannot read or write.

We are also very poor, but we do what we are able to help each other with these problems." As

Marta also notes, the group of women serves as a source of emotional support and solidarity as

well. She goes on: "We work together because we understand each other. Psychologically, we

understand the pain inside, and we know that we will listen to each other. We listen to each

other's problems, and we do not share them outside the group. So, yes, the group is important to

us for many reasons."

As a source of both social capital and emotional strength, the maintenance of the group

and group solidarity is, therefore, imperative. It is thus important to note that the groups in this

study are homogenous in terms of ethnic makeup. In Acatenango, the women farmers are all

ladina, while in Comalapa and Itzapa the women are all Kaqchikel Maya. This is perhaps not

surprising given the fact that the history of Guatemala has been marked by racial tensions

between ladina/o and Maya populations since the colonial period. These tensions continue to

exist independent of class structure; thus, although both ladina/o and Maya farmers may be

similarly impoverished, racism against the Maya continues to divide all class levels in Guatemala

(Menchu 1984; Nelson 1999; Fischer and Hendrickson 2003). Additionally, as the different

ethnic groups share distinctly different histories and experiences, it may be easier to maintain









group solidarity and cohesion if everyone shares the same understandings of what it means to be

a poor ladina or Maya woman farmer in contemporary Guatemala. While none of the women

specifically mention the tendency to organize along racial boundaries, several of the women

highlight the importance of sharing similar "understandings" and values within the group. Dofia

Marta notes that the Kaqchikel women in the group in Itzapa "understand each other," while

Dofia Ana in Comalapa also notes that the group works well for similar reasons. She says that

the group has existed for many years, "because we are all organized, we are all friends, and we

all want to work together and help each other. We understand the importance of working

together, and of knowing what each one of us needs. We know this because we all grew up

together, right here. We are like sisters."

In Guatemala, ladina/o and Maya populations have experienced drastically different

histories based on their race. These differential experiences continue today, and continue to be a

source of division within all social classes in Guatemala (Nelson 1999). Overcoming these

divisions may prove difficult, and attempting to do so may neither be practical nor desirable,

particularly for women like Marta, Ana, and others in difficult conditions where one's quality of

life is so dependent upon strong relationships and social networks based on mutual trust and

understanding.

In order to better understand how various social networks and social capital operate in

poor communities like those in rural Guatemala, it is also important to note that simply because

individuals have access to social capital does not mean that they will be able to use it. As Cecilia

Menjivar notes in her book Fragmented Ties, the "social context" in which individuals live, "as

well as their social position dictate the quality and quantity of resources they have available."

Menjivar notes that the kinds of resources that people have access to is of great importance, as









this access determines if and how well they will be able to mobilize their social capital. Thus, if

individuals "do not have access to desirable goods and information (or to people who control

them), their ties, no matter how strong, may not yield any benefits" (2000: 149). Therefore,

while women farmers in Guatemala may have strong social ties, their ability to access the social

and financial resources necessary to combat environmental problems in their area is severely

limited by structural factors like impoverishment and limited opportunities for the upward social

mobility of poor women in Guatemala. As Menjivar states, "when all members of one's network

live in highly constrained conditions, links to multiple social fields that could create social

capital are practically non-existent" (156).

For women farmers in Guatemala, then, mobilizing locally to combat environmental

degradation may be necessary, but it is not sufficient. In order to break the cycle of increasing

deforestation and the myriad other problems associated with it, the women in Acatenango,

Comalapa, and Itzapa, made collective decisions in their various groups to seek outside help

from a transnational organization, the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR). In her

book Latina Activists Across Borders (2007), feminist scholar Milagros Pefia stresses the

importance that both local and transnational networking has for women's organizations, noting

that transnational organizing serves to not only link local struggles to larger movements, but can

also allow disadvantaged populations to have access to resources they may not otherwise have.

As the women in this study explained, they made the decision to work with AIR out of necessity,

as they did not have the financial, social, or technical resources necessary to effectively address

environmental problems in their communities. As their comments illustrate, the decision to work

with AIR was primarily based in their concern for protecting the future of not only their families

but their larger communities as well.









The Environment and the Family

Like the women participating in the Chipko movement in India, the women farmers who

participated in this study were concerned with how environmental degradation in their

communities would affect their abilities to provide food for their families. When asked what

motivated them to work with AIR, many women cited their concern with protecting the future of

their children. This point was strongly emphasized by the women in Acatenango and Comalapa,

the communities that were most heavily impacted by Hurricane Stan and the resulting mudslides.

When observing the hillsides that were washed away by Stan, it is striking to note the differences

between well-forested slopes and those that had been deforested. In the areas where there had

been few or no trees, the ground appears to have opened up completely; there is either only soil

or a deep crevasse where, as many women indicated, families' crops used to be (see Figure 5-1).


gure 5-1. Eroded areas and forested areas of a hillside, post-Hurricane Stan. This is near
Acatenango, where the trees are nearly three years old. Note how the forested areas
of the hillside have held, while other areas of the hillside have collapsed.









A few of the women had crops that were washed away by the mudslides, with devastating

effects. Dofia Santiaga in Acatenango, says that:

After Stan, there were several families who lost everything, everything. We were
all affected, of course, but some of us were not as badly affected as others. I
know for me, it is because I plant trees with my crops, and I thank God that they
saved my field. If they had not, I, too, would have lost everything, and my family
would have nothing to eat.

Santiaga goes on to emphasize how the greatest devastation that the mudslides caused was the

destruction of so many families' milpa plots: "People come here and think 'Oh no, so many

people lost their homes' and they donate clothes, or money, or whatever. But they do not

understand that the biggest problem is that we lost our food! All these hills that are washed

away, those were the crops, the food of many families, many families." Like Santiaga, Dofia

Emelia is concerned for the well-being of her own family and others. Emelia says that she is

"devastated" by the pain that other families are going through, and while some of her crops were

damaged during Hurricane Stan, she is convinced that the trees helped to protect the majority of

them. She says, "I thank God that my fields were saved. Now more than ever my husband and I

understand the importance of planting trees with our crops. It is simple: if there are no trees,

then there are no crops, and no food for ourselves or our families."

Thus, for women in both Acatenango and Comalapa the destruction of Hurricane Stan

continues to serve as a grim, daily reminder of why they work with AIR. In Comalapa, Dofia

Lourdes contends that her crops were "saved" from Stan because of the trees she planted around

them. While AIR has only been working with farmers in Comalapa for two years, Lourdes has

been planting trees with her crops for much longer, and says that it was through her prodding that

other women in the area sought out AIR's help. She says,









Where we live, it is difficult and dangerous to farm. It is very steep here, and
even a little bit of rain can wash the soil away. It is foolish to not use trees to
protect the soil; this is the way my family has always done things. Other families
do the same, but many do not, and it is foolish. I do not understand why people
do not want to take care of their future. Do they not understand that it is not only
themselves they have to worry about, but their children and their grandchildren?

Lourdes goes on to say that she and the other women who work with her try to help the other

families whose crops were destroyed by Hurricane Stan, but that it is difficult to do so, because

they have barely enough to feed their own families. The difficulties of this situation have

motivated Lourdes and others to work even harder to improve their situation. Lourdes says,

"Sometimes, when I think about how difficult life here is for so many people, I get angry,

because no one should have to struggle like this. This anger is what has motivated me to work

with AIR, because I have such a strong desire that our situation can improve, and it must

improve, for ourselves and for our children." Dofia Sofia echoes this sentiment, noting that "We

have many difficulties here [in Comalapa], but of course we cannot lose hope. In our struggles,

we have found strength. We have to be strong, for our families and our communities. It is the

only way to survive." For women like Lourdes and Sofia, the social and environmental

injustices that have caused such difficulties for theirs and others' families have motivated the

women to work that much harder to ameliorate the problems faced by their communities. For

them, the decision to work with AIR was motivated by necessity, by the need to "survive," as

Sofia notes. For these women, transnational organizing through their work with the NGO has

become a crucial part of the struggle for survival in the highlands of Guatemala.

Gender Differences

Another interesting theme to emerge from the interviews was some women's assertions

that their concerns regarding the environment were distinctly different from those of their

husbands or other men in the communities. Dofia Erelena in Itzapa notes how her husband, who









is a construction worker, initially made fun of the group of women when they decided to seek

AIR's help. She says that,

At first, when we first started working with AIR, he would always laugh when I
told him about planting trees. He would say 'Oh, we had to cut down many trees
today, so you and your friends better go plant some more....' But now, after five
years, our crops have doubled. And a neighbor of ours, after Stan, lost nearly 300
pounds of beans because he did not have any trees with his fields. He, too, used
to make fun of us. Now, he does not laugh, and neither does my husband.

Dofia Marta, also from Itzapa, similarly notes how men and women treat the environment

differently. Like Erelena's husband, Dofia Marta's husband was skeptical about the women's

decision to work with AIR. According to Marta, despite considerable improvements in their

crop yields since she began planting with trees, her husband still fails to acknowledge how

important the trees are. She says,

He just sees the trees as firewood, and even now, after our crops have more than
doubled, he still asks me why I bother to plant trees. It makes me furious, and I
reply, 'Why do I bother? I bother to plant trees because I have a family, because I
have children to feed, and because I care about their future. I want them to have
food, and I want them to have clean air, and water, and hope.' But he always
thinks so negatively, and it is so difficult to make him understand that the trees are
more than tools; they are our future.

Thus, for the husbands of some women in Itzapa, trees and the environment have only

utilitarian value as "tools" to construct or cook with. In other communities, women also noted

how men and women approached farming with different attitudes. In Comalapa, many of the

men in the community are employed at large plantations nearby, working to grow export crops

such as snow peas and cabbage. Many of these men are required by the plantation owners to

spray the crops with chemical pesticides on a regular basis, and some men use the same

pesticides on their own milpa crops. One woman in Comalapa tells a story of how she was

angered when her husband brought home pesticides to use on their own crops. She says, "I

looked at him, and I told him, 'I have watched you, ever since you began working there [on the









plantation], ten years ago, and you have become more and more sick each year. And now you

want me to use the same poisons that are making you sick to grow food for your whole family?'

I refused." However, it was only when her husband spoke with a health care worker in the city

that he became convinced that spraying his milpa might be detrimental not only to his own health

but the health of his family as well. While their family does not use pesticides on their milpa, the

husband continues to use them in his daily work at the plantation.

Other women whose husbands worked on plantations, farming for wages, also noted

similar differences in attitudes towards farming and the environment. When asked about these

differences, some women noted that for the men saw the land as having only economic value, as

a source of income. As Dofia Clementina in Acatenango notes,

Yes, we have to make a living from the land. But we also live with the land, with
the environment. When we farm for our families, we recognize this, that we must
protect the environment for our future. I do not think my husband is able to see
this, because where he works, they are taught to farm in ways that are bad for
themselves and the environment, with no consideration for the future, only for
money.

Thus, while women subsistence farmers recognize that farmwork is the only way for many rural

families to secure an income, many also recognize that the land has more than mere utilitarian

value, and must be protected and preserved as a resource for the health and well-being of present

and future generations alike. Many women expressed the recognition that the health of the

environment is inextricably linked to the health and nourishment of their families, and that if it is

neglected, the future of their children and community is similarly jeopardized.

The women who shared farming responsibilities with their husbands, however, noted that

their husbands not only supported but encouraged them to work with AIR. Dofia Lourdes, in

Comalapa, notes that when she told her husband of the group's decision to work with AIR, he

was "very interested" and wanted to learn more about the organization. He accompanied some









of the women on their first trip to Chimaltenango to contact AIR. Lourdes says that, "Everyone

in my family knows the difficulties we face, and how life here can be a struggle. My husband

and I both want the best for our family, and we want a future for our children. The work we do

with AIR helps us to realize this future."

Dofia Ana, also from Comalapa, also indicates that her husband, Don Eduardo, was

supportive of the women's decision to work with AIR. She says that,

On many days that [my husband and I] worked in the fields, we would talk about
the problems of our community, about the deforestation and the mudslides, about
how it was becoming more and more difficult every year to grow crops here. We
were concerned, for ourselves and for our children. We had heard about AIR
through friends of ours, and when I told him that we [the women] wanted to go to
Chimaltenango, he was very joyful.

Ana goes on to say that since the group has been working with AIR, Eduardo has been

"very active" in assisting the women with growing and nurturing the trees in the community

nursery, which is near Ana's house. She says that "Now he helps take care of the trees in the

nursery. He treats them like his own children. He is very tender with them, because he says that

to care for them is to care for his own children." Lourdes and Ana's comments suggest that for

the husbands who share farmwork with their wives, the protection and preservation of the

environment is of utmost importance, as it is linked to the protection of their own families.

The Environment and the Community

Many women emphasized that their motivation to work with AIR stemmed not only from

concern with their family but with the wider community. Many of the families in these areas

depend upon farming for their daily nourishment. Thus, for many women, the well-being and

survival of not only their own families but their communities is linked to the health of the

surrounding environment. As women in Acatenango constructed many of the environmental

problems in their area as community-wide problems, many of the same women noted that their









decision to seek out AIR's help was a decision that would benefit the entire community. Dofia

Emelia, whose friend lost many of her crops because of Stan and is now in danger of losing her

house, says that "No one should have to experience the problems that so many in Acatenango are

experiencing. We realized this, and we realized that if we wanted to improve our situation, we

had to ask for help." Dofia Clementina, also from Acatenango, agrees. She says that, "The work

that we do here today with AIR gives all of us hope for a better future, with clean air, clean

water, and strong crops." Thus, the motivation behind the women's decision to work with AIR

is rooted in a concern for preserving the health and safety of not one or two families but all the

members of the community.

Similar sentiments were expressed by women in Comalapa and Itzapa. As nearly all the

women in this study are lifelong residents of their communities, they have close ties with many

other individuals and families in the area. Many women spoke of their close relationships with

others in the community, and as one women in Comalapa stated, "We may not all be friends

here, but we do care for each other. There are no strangers here." The concern with protecting

the community is therefore a heartfelt, sincere, and emotional one. Another woman in Comalapa

says that,

This work that we do [with AIR], we recognize that it is not only for us, for our
families, it is for all of us, for everyone who lives here. I hope that more and
more people here see the importance of the work we do, that it is not selfish work,
but that we work for everyone. We all live here, many of us were children here
together, and we have helped each other in the past. We must continue to help
each other now, today.

Dofia Marta in Itzapa expresses a similar sentiment when talking about working on behalf

of the community: "Because we are all close here, because we all know the troubles and joys and

weaknesses and strengths of our town, we are concerned for its future. We all live here together,

and we share the same troubles. Therefore, in order to overcome these troubles, we must work









together." Another woman in Comalapa emphasizes that the work she does with AIR is out of a

sense of spiritual responsibility to both the earth and the people of the community. She says that,

"It is difficult to live here, yes, but it is still our home, and it is sacred to us. Not only the trees,

but the people, too. To care for the earth and for each other is to care for God." Thus, as these

women explain, their sense of responsibility to their communities has emotional, social, and

spiritual components. As they act as mothers and nurturers for the members of their families, the

women also act as providers for various members of the community through the environmental

work they do. Many women describe how connected all members of the community are, and see

how the work of one can benefit many. Dofia Fidelia from Itzapa uses a beautiful analogy to

describe this connectedness. She says, "We are all like branches on a great tree, rooted in all that

we share. When there is a sickness in the soil, then we are all affected. The concerns and

troubles of one are the concerns of many." As the women have also demonstrated, the solutions

and strength of one (or a few) can also be the strength of many.

Conclusion

The action that the women in this study took to mobilize both locally and transnationally

was action they took on behalf of their families and communities. Recognizing that they had

little chance of securing the economic and educational resources necessary to implement

methods of agroforestry in their fields, the women decided to seek the help of a transnational

NGO. As the women attest, this decision was made collectively, out of an interest of protecting

the food base that feeds not only their own families but their entire communities, which many

women described as being like extended families.

Interestingly, it is becoming evident in Itzapa, the community that has been working the

longest with AIR, that the work the women have done on behalf of their families and

communities has also benefited the women personally as well. Women have been working with









AIR in Itzapa for nearly seven years, and have seen marked improvements in both the quality

and quantity of crops that their fields produce. Both Marta and Erelena report that their crop

yields have nearly doubled since they first began planting trees in their fields with AIR's

assistance. Now, the women have enough crops to feed their families, with some left over to sell

for profit. Both women have started advertising their crops within Itzapa, highlighting the fact

that they are grown organically, without chemical fertilizers or pesticides. Erelena notes that the

demand for organically grown crops is increasing, as there have been many reported cases of

people becoming sick from crops sprayed with chemicals.

With the money they have made from selling their crops, both women have started

working with other women in their group to start a business of making and selling herbal

shampoos, conditioners, and soaps. These products are made from plants that the women grow

with their crops, including aloe, sebilla, and manzanilla. Marta reports that the business is doing

"very well" and has helped to supplement the incomes of the families of the women who are

involved with it (see Figure 5-2).


Figure 5-2. Label of manzanilla shampoo made by group of women in Itzapa.









Thus, through the work they have done on behalf of their families and communities, the

women of Itzapa have also empowered themselves as well. Although the women of Acatenango

and Comalapa have not yet seen all the fruits of the labor they do on behalf of their families and

communities, their work has nonetheless proven beneficial in protecting both the environment

and their food sources. The stories of these women are testament to the power of collective

action in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles.









CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION

In his article "Surviving the Conquest," Guatemalan scholar W. George Lovell describes

how Guatemala has been subject to at least three "cycles of conquest" from the colonial period

through modern times. Broadly, these cycles include the conquest by imperial Spain, the

conquest by local and international capitalism, and the conquest by state terror during the civil

war of the latter twentieth century. At the heart of these various cycles has been a struggle over

land rights (1988). In the centuries from colonization to globalization, the conquest of land has

left the rural poor of Guatemala, the vast majority of whom are indigenous, with small plots of

land in Guatemala's highlands. Here, poor indigenous and ladina/o farmers must somehow

carve out a living, farming to feed themselves in difficult, unforgiving terrain. I would like to

suggest that now, poor farmers in rural Guatemala are facing a fourth cycle of conquest of both

land and resources, as the increasing globalization of capitalism has led to unprecedented

environmental degradation in Third World nations such as Guatemala. The spread of

multinational agribusinesses like Chiquita, Starbucks, and others, assisted by neoliberal reforms

instituted by the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank, has continued to force poor farmers off

their land, which is then used by the multinationals and their contractors to grow export crops.

Forced off their lands, small scale farmers often relocate to the highlands, where they slash and

burn trees to make way for their subsistence plots. This process has become so widespread

throughout Guatemala as well as Honduras and Nicaragua that studies have found that Central

America has lost the greatest percentage of forest cover in recent years of any world region (Carr

2003).

Within this broad global and historical picture, I have tried to situate the stories of various

Maya and ladina women in rural Guatemala, using a socialist ecofeminist analysis to show how









their role as subsistence farmers has been impacted by the environmental degradation occurring

within their communities. It is true that a review of history and theory is necessary in

understanding the progression of environmental degradation, and how this degradation affects

individuals differentially according to intersections of nationality, race, gender, and class.

However, it is only through the words and stories of people like Dofias Marta, Santiaga, Lourdes,

and others that we are able to see how these global, historical processes are played out in the

everyday lives of individuals. Through these stories, we are able to see how deforestation, soil

erosion, overuse of pesticides, and other problems have impacted numerous aspects of life for

these women and their families and communities. Deforestation has not only emotional but

material consequences for these women farmers, as many express a sense of sadness and loss as

more and more trees are cut in their communities. Additionally, as more trees are cut to make

way for subsistence plots, these women must walk farther for firewood, and must also contend

with the dangers of soil erosion and mudslides from deforested hillsides.

In the various stories presented here, however, we find not only a message of urgency but a

message of hope and courage as well, as these women have taken it upon themselves to mobilize

to fight the environmental degradation that threatens the well-being of their families and

communities. As their role as farmers has made them more aware of the environmental

problems in their various locales, it has also made them aware of the need to act to address these

problems. Thus, these women have mobilized both locally and transnationally to secure the

social, financial, and technical resources to stop and reverse environmentally destructive

processes. As Vandana Shiva, Ivone Gebara, and other ecofeminist scholars have pointed out,

for women in Third World nations like Guatemala, mobilizing on behalf of the environment is









more than a matter of tepid concern, but a matter of survival, motivated in the need to protect a

food base that nurtures the women, their families, and the larger community.

Future, more large scale studies of this nature that examine women's relationship with

their environment in other regions of the globe could be helpful in developing both theory and

policy that takes into account how historical processes of globalization and environmental

degradation affect individuals differently according to not only their gender, but their race, class,

and nationality as well. Ecofeminist theory in particular can benefit from such studies, as it has

often been criticized for being overly theoretical and lacking in empirical evidence; for

homogenizing women as a group and failing to take into account issues of difference; and for

failing to take into account issues of globalization as an "extension" of capitalist-patriarchy

(Agarwal 1992; Sydee and Beder 2001; Eaton and Lorentzen 2003). With regards to policy,

studies similar to this have already had an impact, as the United Nations has held conferences

and generated policy initiatives that highlight the links between women's roles as farmers and

providers for their families and their roles as environmental protectors. One such report by the

United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW), entitled "Making Risky

Environments Safer," was developed from the 1995 UN Fourth World Conference on Women.

From a review of numerous case studies from around the globe, it concludes that "women and

women's empowerment are indeed central in the development of an integrated global social

movement toward sustainable development..." (UNDAW 2004: 9). Additionally, the United

Nations' major document on sustainable development, Agenda 21, has been adopted by more

than 178 nations and includes a chapter on the importance of linking women's empowerment to

the improvement of local environments (UNEP 1992).









However, scholarly research has only begun to reveal the nature of the complexities and

potentialities that characterize the relationship between the environment and women throughout

the world. This relationship is complex and dynamic, and varies according to nation, race, class,

and a host of other social markers. The more we learn about these connections, however, the

better equipped we can be to challenge the system of capitalist-patriarchy that is implicated in

both the exploitation of women as well as the natural world. As Dofia Marta in Itzapa says,

"People must recognize this: that we are all connected, not only to each other, but to the natural

world. When we learn to care for each other, to not take advantage of each other, for money or

other reasons, only then can there be equality and peace. We women here, in Itzapa, and in many

other places, I think, recognize this. Now we just have to teach everyone else."









APPENDIX A
GUIDING QUESTIONS (SPANISH)

Preguntas

1. ,Cuanto tiempo lleva viviendo en su comunidad?
2. ,Cuanto tiempo lleva trabajando con su grupo de mujeres?
3. Siente usted que es important que las mujeres trabaj en juntas? Por que o por que no?
4. Por que raz6n el grupo decidio trabajar con AIRES?
5. iEn su opinion, cuales son los problems ambientales mas grandes con la que su comunidad se
escuentra?
6. iEn general, que tipo de dificultades han estos problems causado en su comunidad y a usted
en particular?
7. iSe consider usted la agricultora principal de la milpa de la familiar?
8. iEsta Casada?

(Si contest si, prosiga con preguntas 9 y 10. Si contest no, salte a pregunta 11).

9. iSu marido la ayuda con el trabajo que hace con AIRES?
10. ,Que tipo de actitud tiene su marido respect al trabajo que hace con AIRES?
11. iEn general, cual es la actitud de los hombres en la comunidad respect al trabajo que hace
con AIRES?
12. En su trabajo con AIRES, ha usted visto algun benefico? iQue tipo de beneficios?

Muchisimas gracias por todo!









APPENDIX B
GUIDING QUESTIONS (ENGLISH)

Questions

1. How long have you been living in this community?
2. How long have you been working with this group of women?
3. Do you feel it is important for women to work together? Why or why not?
4. Why did they group decide to work with AIR?
5. In your opinion, what are the biggest environmental problems facing your community?
6. What sort of difficulties have these problems caused your community in general, and you in
particular?
7. Do you consider yourself the primary farmer of your family's milpa?
8. Are you married?

If yes, ask questions 9 and 10. If no, go on to question 11.

9. Does your husband help with the work you do with AIR?
10. What sort of attitude does your husband have about your work with AIR?
11. In general, what is the attitude of men in the community about the work you do with AIR?
12. Have you seen any benefits from your work with AIR? What type of benefits?

Thank you for your time and help!









LIST OF REFERENCES


Agarwal, Bina. 1992. "The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India." Feminist Studies 18
(1): 119-158.

American Red Cross. 2005. "Hurricane Stan: Mexico and Central America." American Red
Cross Annual Report. Washington, D.C.: The American National Red Cross. 3-4.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. "The Forms of Capital." Pp. 241-258 in Handbook of Theory and Research of
the Sociology ofEducation, edited by J.C. Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.

Brunk, Samuel and Ben Fallaw, eds. 2006. Heroes andHero Cults in Latin America. Austin, TX:
University of Texas Press.

Bulbeck, Chilla. 2006. "Fracturing Binarisms: First and Third Worlds." Pp. 37-41 in BeyondBorders,
edited by P.S. Rothenberg. New York: Worth.

Carr, David L. 2003. "The Event Ecology of Deforestation on the Agricultural Frontier: The Sierra de
Lacondon National Park, Guatemala." Paper presented at the Association of American
Geographers Annual Conference, Los Angeles.

Comisi6n para el Esclarecimiento Hist6rico (CEH). 1999. Guatemala Memoria del Silencio.
Guatemala City: CEH.

Churchill, Ward. 1998. A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492
to Present. San Francisco: City Lights.

Danner, Mark. 1994. The Massacre atElMozote: A Parable of the Cold War. New York: Vintage.

Deere, Carmen Diana. 2005. The Feminization ofAgriculture? Economic Restructuring in Rural
Latin America. New York: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.

Deere, Carmen Diana and Magdalena Leon. 2001. Empowering Women: Land and Property Rights in
Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Eaton, Heather. 2005. Introducing Ecofeminist Theologies. New York: T and T Clark
International.

------. 2003. "Can Ecofeminism Withstand Corporate Globalization?" Pp. 23-37 in Ecofeminism
and Globalization: Exploring Culture, Context, and Religion, edited by H. Eaton and
L.A. Lorentzen. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

Eaton, Heather and Lois Ann Lorentzen. 2003. "Introduction." Pp. 1-8 in Ecofeminism and
Globalization: Exploring Culture, Context, and Religion, edited by H Eaton and L.A.
Lorentzen. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.









Eaton, Heather and Lois Ann Lorentzen, eds. 2003. Ecofeminism and Globalization: Exploring
Culture, Context, andReligion. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

Falla, Ricardo. 1992. Massacres in the Jungle. Guatemala City: Editorial Universitario.

Gebara, Ivone. 1999. Longing for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press.

Fischer, Edward F. 2004. "The Janus Face of Globalization: Economic Production and Cultural
Reproduction in Highland Guatemala." Pp. 257-290 in Pluralizing Ethnography, edited
by J.M. Watanabe and E.F. Fischer. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Fischer, Edward F. and Carol Hendrickson. 2003. Tecpan Guatemala: A Modern Maya Town
in Global and Local Context. Boulder: Westview.

Hamilton, Nora and Norma Stoltz Chinchilla. 2001. Seeking Community in a Global City:
Guatemalans and Salvadorans in Los Angeles. Philadelphia: Temple.

Hamilton, Sarah and Edward F. Fischer. 2003. "Non-Traditional Agricultural Exports in
Highland Guatemala: Understandings of Risk and Perceptions of Change. Latin
American Research Review 38: 82-110.

Hough, Richard, John Kelly, and Stephen Miller. 1982. Tierray trabajo en Guatemala: Un
evaluaci6n. Guatemala City: Ediciones Papiro.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kleysen, Brenda and Fabiola Campillo. 1996. Productoras de Alimentos en 18 Paises de America
Latinay el Caribe. San Jose, Costa Rica: Instituto Interamericano de Cooperacion para la
Agriculture.

La Feber, Walter. 1993. Inevitable Revolutions: the United States in Central America. New
York: W.W. Norton.

Lovell, W. George. 1988. "Surviving Conquest: The Maya of Guatemala in Historical
Perspective." Latin American Research Review 23: 25-57.

Lutz, Christopher H. and W. George Lovell. 2000. "Survivors on the Move: Maya Migration in
Time and Space." Pp 200-210 in The Maya Diaspora: Guatemalan Roots, New American
Lives, edited by J. Loucky and M.M. Moors. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Menchu, Rigoberta. 1984. I, RigobertaMenchu: An Indian Woman in Guatemala. London:
Verso.









Menjivar, Cecelia. 2000. Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America.
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mies, Maria. 1986. Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale. London: Zed.

Mies, Maria and Vandana Shiva. (1993). Ecofeminism. London: Zed.

Minh-ha, Trinh T. 1989. Woman, Native, Other. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. 1986. "Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial
Discourses." Pp. 17-42 in Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing
Solidarity, edited by C.T. Mohanty. Durham: Duke University Press.

------. 1997. "Women Workers and Capitalist Scripts: Ideologies of Domination, Common
Interests, and the Politics of Solidarity." Pp. 3-29 in Feminist Genealogies, Colonial
Legacies, Democratic Futures, edited by M.J Aexander and C.T. Mohanty. New York:
Routledge.

------. 2003. "Under Western Eyes Revisited: Feminist Solidarity Through Anticapitalist
Struggles." Pp. 221-237 in Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing
Solidarity, edited by C.T. Mohanty. Durham: Duke University Press.

Montej o, Victor. 1999. Voices From Exile: Violence and Survival in Modern Maya History.
Norman, OK: Oklahoma University Press.

Naples, Nancy. 2002. "Changing the Terms." Pp. 1-14 in Women's Activism and
Globalization: Linking Local Struggles and Transnational Politics, edited by N. Naples
and M. Desai. New York: Routledge.

Nash, June and Maria Patricia-Fernandez-Kelley, eds. 1983. Women, Men, and the International
Division ofLabor. New York: State University of New York Press.

Nelson, Diane M. 1999. A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala.
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). 1998. Health in the Americas, Volume II. Washington,
D.C.: World Health Organization.

Pearce, Jenny. 1986. Promised Land: Peasant Rebellion in Chalatenango, El Salvador.
London: Latin American Bureau.

Pefia, Milagros. 2007. Latina Activists Across Borders: Women's Grassroots Organizing in
Mexico and Texas. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.









Philipose, Pamela. 1989. "Women Act: Women and Environmental Protection in India." Pp.
67-75 in Healing the Wounds: The Promise ofEcofeminism, edited by J. Plant. Toronto:
Between the Lines.

Ress, Mary Judith. 2006. Ecofeminism in Latin America. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis.

Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 1996. Women Healing Earth: Third World Women on Ecology,
Feminism, andReligion. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis.

------. 2003. "Foreword: Ecofeminism and the Challenges of Globalization." Pp. vii-xii in
Ecofeminism and Globalization: Exploring Culture, Context, and Religion, edited by H
Eaton and L.A. Lorentzen. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

------. 2005. Integrating Ecofeminism, Globalization, and World Religions. New York: Rowman
and Littlefield.

Sanford, Victoria. Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2003.

Shiva, Vandana. 1989. StayingAlive: Women, Ecology, and Development. London: Zed.

------. 2000. "War Against Nature and the People of the South." Pp. 91-125 in Views
From the S.inih, edited by S. Anderson. Chicago: Food First Books.

Stone, Michael C. 2000. "Becoming Belizean: Maya Identity and the Politics of Nation." Pp.
90-100 in The Maya Diaspora: Guatemalan Roots, New American Lives, edited by J.
Loucky and M. M. Moors. Philadelphia: Temple.

Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sturgeon, Noel. 1997. Ecofeminist Natures: Race, Gender, Feminist Theory, and Political
Action. New York: Routledge.

Sydee, Jasmin and Sharon Beder. 2001. "Ecofeminism and Globalization: A Critical
Appraisal." Democracy andNature 7 (2):281-302.

Tanaka, Laura Saldivar and Hannah Wittman. 2003. Backgrounder Part I: The Agrarian
Question in Guatemala. Oakland, CA: Land Research Action Network.

Torres Rivas, Edelberto. 1985. "Report on the Condition of Central American Refugees and
Migrants." Washington, D.C.: CIPRA.

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee (UUSC). 2005. "Hurricane Stan Strikes: Floods,
mudslides cause death and despair in Guatemala." UUSC Annual Report. Washington,
D.C.: American Red Cross Press.









United Nations Development Program. 2000. Human Development Report 1999. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW). 2004. "Making Risky
Environments Safer." New York: UNDAW/DESA Press.

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1992. Agenda 21: United Nations Program of
Action from Rio. New York: United Nations Press.

------. 2006. Planet in Peril: Atlas of Current Threats to People and the Environment. New York:
Earthprint.

Warren, Karren. 2000. Ecofeminist Philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Weyland, Kurt. 2004. "Assessing Latin American Neoliberalism: Introduction to a Debate."
Latin American Research Review 39:143-49.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Rachel Hallum is a Ph.D. candidate in sociology at the University of Florida. Her main

areas of interest are gender, women's studies, race relations, and Latin American studies. She

has been working with the Guatemalan-based non-governmental organization, the Alliance for

International Reforestation, since 1992.





PAGE 1

1 A MATTER OF SURVIVAL: WOMEN, SUBSISTENCE FARMING, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION IN RURAL GUATEMALA By RACHEL HALLUM A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Rachel Hallum

PAGE 3

3 For my family and loved ones.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to everyone who has made this project possible, from my family and loved ones, to the staff and volunteers of the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR). My professors, Dr. Milagros Pea and Dr. Constance Shehan, have provided me with invaluable patience, support, and guidance. Most of all, I am grateful to the women in Guatemala who have allowed me the opportunity to tell their stories. May their courage and strength be an inspiration to us all.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........7 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ..............8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... .9 The Current Ecological Crisis..................................................................................................9 Globalization, Environmental Degradation, and Women.......................................................10 2 THEORETICAL AND LI TERATURE REVIEW.................................................................12 Socialist Ecofeminism.......................................................................................................... ..13 Capitalist-Patriarchy in Guatemala: From Colonization to Globalization.............................14 The Rise of Big Agriculture and Big I ndustry and the Exploitation of the Global South.......................................................................................................................... ..16 The Continued Destruction of Land a nd People: The Violence of Capitalist Patriarchy.....................................................................................................................18 Effects of Policies of Globa lization and Neoliberalism..................................................20 Rural Women and the Environment in Modern Guatemala............................................23 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS...........................................................................................27 Western (Eco)feminism and Scholarship on the Third World............................................27 A Feminist Project............................................................................................................. .....28 The Alliance for Internati onal Reforestation (AIR)........................................................28 Concerns....................................................................................................................... ...31 4 ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AN D WOMEN IN THE COMMUNITIES..........35 Highland Communities...........................................................................................................35 Acatenango..................................................................................................................... .37 Comalapa....................................................................................................................... ..38 Itzapa......................................................................................................................... ......39 Women Farmers.................................................................................................................. ....40 Deforestation.................................................................................................................. .........41 Emotional Consequences.................................................................................................42 Material Consequences....................................................................................................45 Storms and Mudslides........................................................................................................... ..47 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........51

PAGE 6

6 5 ORGANIZING FOR FAMILY AND COMMUNITY..........................................................53 Local and Transnational Orga nizing and Social Capital........................................................54 The Environment and the Family...........................................................................................58 Gender Differences............................................................................................................. ....60 The Environment and the Community...................................................................................63 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........65 6 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................... ..68 APPENDIX A GUIDING QUESTIONS (SPANISH)....................................................................................72 B GUIDING QUESTIONS (ENGLISH)...................................................................................73 LIST OF REFERENCES............................................................................................................. ..74 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................79

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-1 Deforested hillside in the Department of Chimaltenango..................................................36 4-2 Aftermath of mudslid es near Acatenango..........................................................................48 4-3 River on the outskirts of Acatenango that was covered over by a mudslide.....................50 5-1 Eroded areas and forested areas of a hillside, post-Hurricane Stan. ................................58 5-2 Label of manzanilla shampoo ma de by group of women in Itzapa...................................66

PAGE 8

8 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts A MATTER OF SURVIVAL: WOMEN, SUBSISTENCE FARMING, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION IN RURAL GUATEMALA By Rachel M. Hallum August 2007 Chair: Milagros Pea Major: Sociology This study uses a socialist ecofeminist framew ork to explore the historical and material links between environmental degradation and wo men's roles as subsistence farmers in rural Guatemala. Data was gathered from interviews with 20 women farmers, as well as observational research, to explore how women's work is spec ifically affected by processes and policies of development in Guatemala. Results reveal th at development processes have led to greater deforestation and soil erosion in the areas where poor women farm for themselves and their families. Despite the difficulties that the wome n face, they are more than victims of their situation; rather they have begun mobilizing bot h locally and transnationally to combat the environmental problems confronting their fa milies and communities. The study concludes by calling for policy makers to take into account the roles that women farmers play in preserving the environment in places like rural Guatemala. Ideas for future research are also discussed.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In recent decades, scholars have coined the term globalization to refer to processes of global economic restructuring, wi th a specific economic and tec hnological agenda that alters basic modes of cultural organization and internat ional exchange in many parts of the world (Eaton and Lorentzen 2003: 4). While proponent s of globalization declare endless benefits from the exchange of capital on a global scale, others critique the noti on that globalization is beneficial for everyone. These critics argue that policies of globalization are reordering the flow of capital and wealth within a global and he gemonic economic regime that serves only the interests of the elite and rich (5). In a globalized economy, economic and political power is being increasingly granted to institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Bank, as well as many transand multi-nationa l corporations, often at the expense of the self-governance of many Third World nations. Policies of free trade ar e designed to serve the interests of these institutions a nd corporations rather than the na tions citizens. Thus, as scholar Heather Eaton notes, as a result of some globalization initiatives there is a deterioration in educational and health systems, a rise in infant mortality, and a decline in democratic pluralism. Additionally, more and more c ountries are being coerced in to export dependant economies (2003: 25). Finally, policies of globalization and industr ial development have been linked with the increasing degradatio n of the environment. These cons equences of globalization have led some to characterize the phenomenon as one of vast human misery and environmental devastation (Ruether 2003: vii). The Current Ecological Crisis The connection between the alarming rate of environmental destruction and the rise of globalization is not coincidental. Over the past few decades, the world has witnessed a rise in

PAGE 10

10 global industry and a corresponding d ecline in environmental quality so severe that the present period has been called one of ecological crisis (Eaton 2005: 8). Increasing industrialization has led to rampant deforestation and pollution, bo th of which contribute to global warming. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that the rise in temperature over the past decade has been unpre cedented in the last 10,000 years (IPCC 2007). Industrial pollution also aff ects water resources, contaminating fresh water sources through run-off and the leaking of harmful chemi cals. Currently, the United Nations estimates that 20% of the global population is without ac cess to safe drinking water, and that water pollution affects the health of 1.2 bill ion people worldwide (UNEP 2006). Globalization, Environmental Degradation, and Women It is important to note, however, that lik e globalization, environmen tal degradation does not affect everyone equally. Much of the pres ent-day depletion and c ontamination of natural resources disproportionately affects the poorer nations of the world. It is also a generally agreed upon fact in the academic community that in th ese poor nations, the poorest citizens are the hardest hit by the degradation of environmental conditions. The majority of these poor citizensnearly 70%are women and girls (Mohan ty 2003: 234). This association between the degradation of the environment and the decline in well-being fo r women was also acknowledged by the United Nations when it reported in 1989 that, I t is now a universally established fact that it is the woman who is the wors t victim of environmental dest ruction. The poorer she is, the greater her burden (quoted in Philiopose 1989: 67). What is it that links the wellbeing of women in poor nations with the well-being of the environment? Why is it that, in these parts of the world, environmental problems disproportionately affect women (Eaton 2003: 24)? This thesis seeks to explore the links between historical processes of globalization, environmental de gradation, and the status of

PAGE 11

11 women using a socioeconomic ecofeminist lens As one type of ecofeminist theory, socioeconomic ecofeminism explores both em pirical and conceptual links between the degradation of the environmen t and the subordination of women. However, this and other theories of ecofeminism have been criticized for their failure to address issues of globalization. Scholars Heather Eaton and Lois Ann Lore ntzen suggest a few reasons for this: First, the largely theoretical discourse s linking women and nature, as developed thus far, do not sufficiently address mate rial exclusions resu lting from economic forces[this theory] doesnt help us ad equately analyze globalization as an extension of patriarchal capitalism. Second, while there are many grassroots activist womens organizations resisti ng the negative effects of globalization, these activities do not provide the primary data for ecofeminist discourse. Third, an adequate discussion of globalization must include not only an analysis of the economic agenda, its hegemonic impact, a nd implicit value syst em, but also the consequences of the erosion of nation-stat es and the rise of international civic movements (2003: 5). In this thesis, I hope to addr ess these gaps in ecofeminist research, and thereby contribute to the growing body of anti-capitalis t, anti-globalization scholarship. I will focus the analysis on indigenous and ladina women in rural Guatemala, where the increasing deforestation and pollution of the environment affect their day-to-day lives. Thus, this is an ecofeminist project that seeks to situate the local within the global, as advocated by Chandra Talpade Mohanty, being attentive to the micropolitics of contex tas well as to the macropolitics of global economic and political systems and processes. Only by providing such an analysis will we be able to read up the ladder of privilege and make visibleand responsiblethe global powers that are affecting the lives of countle ss men and women around the world (2003: 223).

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL AND LI TERATURE REVIEW One of the most important developments in theory that links women to the environment has been the advent of ecofeminism. Accordi ng to scholar Heather Eaton, ecofeminism can be broadly defined as a convergence of the ecological and feminist analyses and movements, and represents varieties of theoreti cal, practical, and critical effo rts to understand and resist the interrelated dominations of women and nature (2005: 11). Activ ism is also considered to be a key part of ecofeminism (Sturgeon 1997). However, it is important to note that under the broad umbrella of ecofeminism, there exists a wide array of theore tical frameworks. In her book Ecofeminist Philosophy, scholar Karren Warren identifies as many as ten ecofemini st theories: historical, conceptual, empirical, socialist, linguistic, symbolic a nd literary, spiritual and religious, epistemological, political, and ethical (2000: 21). Not all of these theories have been highly regarded by the academic community. Spiritual and religious ecofeminism in particular has been subject to critiques of essentialism, homogenization of women as a gr oup, romanticism, and political naivety (Agarwal 1992; Sydee and Beder 2001). The tendency of some types of ecofeminismpa rticularly those that developed in more affluent nations in the West and Northto essentialize and homogenize women is highly problematic, for several reasons. First, the homogenization of women as a group ignores important differences of class, culture, and race between women, and also i gnores the plight of impoverished women from less affluent nations (E aton and Lorentzen 2003: 5). To consider all women as being equally subordinated under patria rchy, and as experiencing the consequences of environmental degradation equally is misleading and uncritical, and so cially unliberatory. It also

PAGE 13

13 does not take into account how forces of globa lization impact women and the environment in different ways in different regions of the globe. Second, the essentializing of the women-Natu re connection does not take into account important empirical evidence of the interconne ctions between the domination of women and nature around the globe. In i gnoring such evidence, these esse ntialist views do not sufficiently address the material exclusions resulting from economic forces that result from capitalist patriarchys devaluation of bot h women and the environment. Ecofeminist Heather Eaton notes that the insistence upon the primacy of a women-nature connection, while illuminating symbolic and cultural constructs doesnt help us adequately analyze globalization as an extension of capitalist patriarchy (5). Socialist Ecofeminism One ecofeminist typology that does address issues of globa lization and capitalist patriarchy is socialist ecofeminism. Relying on empirical evidence of the domination of both women and nature, socialist ecofemi nists critique capitalism as the latest development in the system of patriarchy (Mies 1986: 38). Indeed, so me have argued that capitalism and patriarchy, rather than being separate systems of exploitati on and domination, are in fact one intrinsically interconnected system. Socialist ecofeminist Maria Mies contends th at capitalism cannot function without patriarchy, and th at the goal of this system, namely the never-ending process of capital accumulation, cannot be achieved unl ess patriarchal manwoman relations are maintained or newly created. For Mies, women are thus considered as exploited resources in the capitalist-patriarchal system (38). However, the socialist ecofem inist critique also recogni zes that not only women, but other historically subordinated groups have been grossly expl oited by capitalis t-patriarchy. Socialist ecofeminists argue that this exploitation is rooted in an oppressive conceptual

PAGE 14

14 framework that functions to explain, mainta in, and justify relati onships of unjustified domination and subordination (Wa rren 2000: 46). Common to these frameworks is the use of value-hierarchical thinking that serves to legitimate inequality; the concept of privilege as belonging to dominant groups; and the sanctioning of a logic of domination that assumes that superiority justifies subordin ation (46-47). In her book Ecofeminist Philosophy, Karen Warren identifies several hierarchical relationships that are characteristic of the global capitalist society. She notes that in an era of globalization, capit alist-patriarchal systems and logic have been implicated in the domination and subordination of the global South, indigenous groups, nature, as well as women. The following section will exam ine the ways in which all these groups have historically been used as expl oited resources at the hands of capitalist-patriarchy, within the context of Guatemala. Capitalist-Patriarchy in Guatemala: Fr om Colonization to Globalization The history of capitalist-patriarchal penetra tion into Latin America has been a history of violence, bloodshed, and gross human rights violat ions. It has also be en a history of the destruction of indigenous livelihoods as well as the environment. The roots of this history can be traced back to the early 1500s, when Spain co lonized much of what is now known as Latin America. The colonization of Guatemala marked the countrys first appearance on the world market. It was also an extraordinarily violen t process of domination and control, one that involved the brutal conquering a nd repression of many indigenous groups, including the Maya of Guatemala. To this day, the meaning of the co lonization process is still hotly contested in Guatemalan nationalist discourse, with much of the ladino population of primarily Spanish descent emphasizing the positive as pects of colonization as a vict ory on behalf of civilization, while many Maya choose to emphasize instead the violence of the first meeting between the

PAGE 15

15 Spanish and indigenous groups, the rapes that produced the racial mixing of mestizaje, and the appropriation of Maya land and culture (Nelson 1999: 12). It was not long after the Spanish arrival th at the colonizers began their systematic appropriation and exploitation of indigenous people and resources It is well documented that both Maya men and wome n were used as slave labor on Spanish haciendas, large plantations that cultivated and exported va rious agricultural crops Even after the slaves were freed in 1550, the dominant groups subordination of the indigenous population continued, as the former needed the cheap labor of Mayans to increase their profit. The haci enda system was subsequently replaced by an equally exploita tive and patriarchal system of repartimiento in which indigenous populations were allowed to remain on their land s as long as they provided wealthy landowners or padrones with free labor. The padrones controlled ne arly every aspect of life for the Maya laborers, from the amount of work they did, to their living arrangements and family life (Lovell 1988; Lutz and Lovell 2000: 17) However, the free labor that Mayans provided ev entually proved to be an insufficient and erratic source of wealth to materially-minded Spanish landowners, who soon turned to the land as a means of further increasing their profits. Thus, as the export value for Guatemalas major crop, indigo, increased, so did the Spanish ex ploitation of indigenous labor and land. As landowners became increasingly involved in the sy stematic cultivation of indigo and other export crops such as coffee, more and more indigenous land was appropriated and used to grow them. This in turn led to further displacement of indi genous groups, or their gradual incorporation into the ladino community (Pearce 1986: 15-17, Lovell 1988: 30-31).

PAGE 16

16 The Rise of Big Agriculture and Big Industry and the Exploitation of the Global South It was not until the late nineteenth centur y following the Spanish American War in 1898, however, that Guatemala and the rest of Cent ral Americaincluding El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Ricaentered definitively into the wo rld market. This was primarily due to the growth and expansion of the world coffee market, and the identification of Central America as an ideal region to grow the crop. Here we find the beginnings of Norths economic exploitation of the South, as multi-national coffee businesses began to appropriate land in much of Latin America in order to produce their highly prof itable crop. Oftentimes, Guatemalas political leaders worked with these multi-national businesse s to help them gain the land they needed. These leaders, called caudillos, or strongmen, were often form er generals who wielded both political and military power in their country, and used this power to force poor farmers off their land. This land was then handed over to the agribus inesses, often in return for economic or other forms of compensation (Lovell 1988; Brunk an d Fallaw 2006). Thus, once again, poor farmersthe majority of whom were Mayawer e displaced from the most ideal agricultural land and forced to resettle elsewhere. Incr easingly, Maya populations were becoming more concentrated in the western highlands of Guatem ala, where land was of little economic value to either the state or large agri businesses (Hamilton and Chinchi lla 2001: 20). However, through policies of forced labor such as debt peonage, va grancy laws, and genera lized rural repression, many Maya were recruited to provide labor for the coffee plantations. It is estimated that by the 1880s, at least 100,000 Maya highland workers, or one out of every eight Maya, migrated to the coffee plantations each year (Lutz and Lovell 2000: 32). Guatemalas incorporation into the worl d marketand concomitant exploitation by the Northcontinued into the twentieth century when greater numbers of multi-national agribusinesses (many of which were based in th e United States) entered into the country and

PAGE 17

17 took control of land, particularly along the Ca ribbean coastal region, where land was sparsely settled. The largest of these companies was United Fruit, which worked closely with the Guatemalan government to fund improvements in in frastructure for the country. In return, the Guatemalan government allocated more land for agricultural production to United Fruit. This land was given at the expense of ru ral small-scale farmers, both ladino and Maya (Hamilton and Chinchilla 2001: 24). The increas ing use of land for the cultivati on of export crops also led to higher rates of deforestation and general environmental deterioration in the region. It is important to note that the capitalist-driven expl oitation and subordination of indigenous groups and their lands did not go uncontested. The first half of the tw entieth century was marked by a series of revolts an d uprisings of both Maya and ladino farmers protesting government and corporate land takeovers. These pr otests were often met with violent repression on the part of state police. However, after a se ries of revolts in the early 1940s, a democratic administration was established in Guatemala that lasted ten years, from 1945-1954. This period saw the institution of numerous social reform po licies, including the expr opriation of the land of traditional Guatemalan landowners and the United Fruit Company and its subsequent redistribution to 100,000 peasant families (27). Ho wever, this period of socialist reform, which is referred to in Guatemala as the Ten Years of Spring, came to a halt in 1954 when a U.S.-led military coup ousted Guatemalan government leaders. The overthrow of the democratic administration, and the re-institution of military rule under caudillo leader General Ydigoras Fuentes led to the migration of several thousands of Guatemalans to neig hboring countries such as Honduras and Mexico (ibid.). Following this overthrow, Fuentes worked with both the military and ladino elites to institute a top-dow n redistributive land reform, in which rural

PAGE 18

18 farmers were allotted only the smallest of land plots that failed to meet the subsistence requirements of their families (Hough et al. 1982). The Continued Destruction of Land and People : The Violence of Capitalist Patriarchy The 1960s and 1970s represented period of in creasing industrializa tion and militarization for Guatemala. After the creation of the Ce ntral American Common Market, which reduced tariffs in order to attract fore ign investors, European and Japa nese investments in manufacturing increased substantially, as did U.S. investment in agriculture. This modernization resulted in the further displacement of rural farmersboth indigenous and ladino as their farmlands were once again taken over by large multiand trans-na tional corporations. Often, the military, which controlled the government during much of this period, was involved in evicting indigenous populations from their land, and then re-selling it to corporations at speculative prices (Hamilton and Chinchilla 2001:28). The land that was made available to the evi cted populations of poor indigenous and ladino farmers was often in areas that were poor for agricultural cultivation, mostly in the mountainous highlands. Additionally, the plots that were made available to these farmers were quite small, ranging between 0.5 to 2 hectares in size. In 1979, a widely skewed land distribution pattern was re ported, in which 88% of productiv e farm units were less than family subsistence size and held only 16% of arable land, while 2% of units held a whopping 65% of arable land (Tanaka and Wittman 2003). The dismal living conditions and continuing displacement of rural farmers were the major push factors that led to dram atic increases in Guatemalan emigration in the 1960s and 1970s. It is estimated that the number of Guatem alans entering Mexico increased from 10,000 to 15,000 annually in 1950 to 60,000 annually in the 1970s (T orres Rivas 1985: 58). Central American immigration to the United States, where many felt there would be greater economic opportunity for them, also increased substantially during this time, with the number of legally admitted

PAGE 19

19 immigrants more than tripling from 45,000 annua lly in the 1950s to 143,000 annually in the 1970s (60). The continued traditi on of displacement and migrati on was especially traumatic for Maya, whose religion and culture emphasize the importance of a ttachment and cultivation of ones land; indeed, many scholars have characteri zed traditional Maya religions as place based religions. Thus, displacement for many of thes e indigenous groups was more than traumatic; it was sacrilegious (St one 2000; Montejo 2000). Violence against rural populations in Guatemala continue d into the next decade, when brutal military regimes forced hundreds of t housands to flee. During the 1980s, and the especially vicious regimes of Generals Lucas Ga rca and Ros Montt, clashes between guerilla opposition groups and rural farmers and the military controlled Guatemalan government severely escalated. Under the command of these two ca udillo leaders, the military targeted rural communities where insurgents were believed to be hiding; often, whole villages were massacred, as was the case in El Mozote in Novemb er 1981, where 750 men, women, and children were killed (Danner 1994). The fact th at all villages targeted for destruction had been indigenous Maya, and the fact that 83% of those killed were Maya, have le d many to conclude that what may have begun as a civil war turned into a syst ematic campaign of genocide on the part of the Guatemalan government and military, which was deemed to be responsible for over 93% of the casualties (Falla 1993; Churchi ll 1998; CEH 1999; Sanford 2003). Not surprisingly, during this time the number of political and economic refugees from Guatemala increased exponentially, as an estima ted 1 million people were forced to flee from their homes between 1980 and 1983 (Lovell 1988). The high level of violence continued until the mid 1980s, when Vinico Cerezo Aravelo was el ected president and re-instituted democratic rule. It was more than ten years, however, until a peace treaty was signed in 1996, bringing an

PAGE 20

20 official end to the violence and human rights abuses that had pla gued the country for thirty-six bloody years. Thus, the story of Guatemalas involvement in the world market is one of the severe social and economic marginalization and suppressi on of poor, rural farmers, most of whom were indigenous Maya. The story is also one of increasing environm ental degradation in the region, due to the combined effects of i ndustrialization and thirty years of civil war. While the political strife in Guatemala may officially be over, the economic and ecological crisis is not. Policies of globalization and neoliberalism inst ituted in the 1980s have contribut ed to a decrease in both the quality of life and the environment in rural Guat emala. The following section details how these policies have impacted rural farmers in Guatemala, particularly women. Effects of Policies of Globalization and Neoliberalism The problem of environmental degradation in Guatemala in particular, and Central America in general, can be traced directly to globaliz ation and the implementation of neoliberal policies, beginning in the early 1980s. These pol icies represent a continuation of efforts to incorporate Guatemala into the world market, and were put into place by a powerful coalition of international financial institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and various Latin American governments. According to officials of these institutions, the goals of the new po licies were to reduce government corruption, provide greater economic stability to the region, reduce inflation, boost competitiveness and exports, and reduce poverty th rough trickle-down benefits. However, the tools used to implement these policies seem fa r-removed from the goals. In order to comply with demands of both the WTO and the World Bank, many Latin American governments instituted draconian cuts in spe nding on social programs; privatiz ed public utilities; eliminated government regulations in order to attract foreig n investments; liberaliz ed trade policies; and

PAGE 21

21 promoted free markets at virtually every level of the economy. The financial institutions and governments warned the public that the short-term effects would be painful for the sake of longterm benefits; and indeed, these pa inful effects were so dire that the 1980s are labeled the lost decade for Latin America. The pain has been fe lt disproportionately by the poorest citizens, who have experienced higher rates of unemploym ent at the very time social support programs have disappeared (Weyland 2004: 144-46). In addition to contributing to an increase ra ther than decrease in poverty, this free, deregulated trade has also led to an increase in environmental degrada tion in the region. The primary reason for this is due to the increase in export value for many types of non-traditional agricultural export (NTAX) crops. For example, export data shows that traditional exports such as sugar, coffee, cotton, cacao, tea and spices have lo st in export value over the last thirty years, ranging from a -25.3% loss in the value of sugar to a -50.4% loss for coffee. These losses have been replaced by huge increases since 1979 in th e export value of milk and dairy products (817%); forest products (435%); and a 387% increase in the export value of NTAX crops such as fruits, vegetables, and flowers (an industry most advanced in Mexico and Chile and strong in Guatemala). The size and timing of this shift fr om traditional exports to dairy, forest products, and non-traditional crops links it clearly to neo liberal structural adjustments and easing of trade restrictions (Deere 2005: 6, 27). Over the years, as the value of NTAX crops in Guatemala has increased, so has their production. More and more fertile valley land is now being used for growing crops for profit. This, in turn, has pushed the subsistence farmi ng of Guatemalas rural poor to mountainsides, where trees are slashed and burned to make way for corn and beans. The consequences of this destruction are also local because it is well-documented that deforestation causes soil erosion,

PAGE 22

22 reduced rainfall, and sediment-clogged waterw ays. The absence of established forests on mountainsides also intensifie s the devastation of hurrica nes and flooding (Carr 2003). The increased agricultural produc tion also results in increa sed pesticide and chemical fertilizer use, both of which have a harmful im pact not only on Guatemalas environment, but on rural populations. Many large s cale growers admit to using up to twenty applications per growing cycle (Hamilton and Fischer 2003: 95). The pesticide use in turn affects local environmental quality as it destroys various forms of plant and animal life. Agricultural run-off containing pesticide residue also results in the contamination of water sources, affecting the health of rural populations. The Guatemalan gove rnment sponsored research on pesticide use in 1997 through the Pesticides and Health Project (P lagsalud). The project reported that while agrochemical poisoning is rarely reported by farmers, nearly 2 million people living in rural areas come into direct contact with chemical pesticides on a daily basis. The project also indicated that while some pest icides were used by small-scale landowners and subsistence farmers, the vast majority were used on crops intended for export to the United States and Europe (PAHO 1998). Thus, as noted by socialist ecofeminists Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva, the economic, social, and ecological costs of co nstant growth in the industrialized countries have been and are shifted to the colonized coun tries of the South, to those countries environment and their peoples (1993: 58). Clearly, the neoliberal policies of Guatemala ha ve not affected everyone equally or in the same ways in the years since their implementa tion. While large-scale landowners and other capitalists have benefited, others have suffered; namely, the rural poor, the vast majority of whom are indigenous. As we have seen, indi genous Maya have a hi story of subordination, exploitation, and displacement in Guatemala as first the colonizers and now capitalists take

PAGE 23

23 control over their lands and res ources. Today, the burdens of Guatemalas long history of the appropriation of land and res ources are disproportionately borne by Guatemalas rural populations. With regards to land rights, this hi story has left rural popula tions with one of the most uneven land distribution patte rns in Latin America; now, less than 1% of landowners hold 75% of the best agricultural land. Additionally, an estimated 90% of rural inhabitants live in poverty, with over 500,000 campesino (farmworker) families living below subsistence level. Most of these inhabitants are indigenous (Tanaka and Wittman 2003). Rural Women and the Environment in Modern Guatemala However, even within the indigenous commun ity, not everyone has been affected in the same ways. An ecofeminist analysis requires that we view environm ental degradation through the lens of gender. When we do so, we note th at environmental degradation disproportionately affects women in many nations, due in large part to a gendered divi sion of labor that considers family sustenance to be a womans work. The gendered division of labor, as noted by ecofeminist Maria Mies, is a key part of the capitalist patriarchal sy stem. She argues that womens subsistence work is a necessary precond ition for the existence a nd continuation of the capitalist system. Thus: This general production of life, or s ubsistence productionmainly performed through the non-wage labour of women a nd other non-wage labourers as slaves, contract workers, and peasants in the coloniesconstitutes the perennial basis upon which capitalist productive labour can be built up and exploited. Without the ongoing subsistence production of non-wa ge labourers (mainly women), wage labour would not be productive (1986: 48). Ecofeminist scholar Heather Eat on reaffirms this argument. Sh e notes that as primary care givers, women are responsible for the food and health of family members, and that due to environmental destruction in many poor countri es, it is becoming increasingly difficult to

PAGE 24

24 provide food, fuel, and water for many families (2005: 24). Ecofeminist and theologian Ivone Gebara makes a similar connection between women and the environment: Ecofeminism is born of daily life, of day-to-day sharing among people, of enduring together garbage in the streets, bad smells, the absence of sewers and safe drinking water, poor nutrition and in adequate health care. The ecofeminist issue is born of the lack of municipal garbage collection, of the multiplication of rats, cockroaches, and mosquitoes, and of the sores on childrens skin. This is true because it is usually women who have to deal with the daily survival issues: keeping the house clean and feeding a nd washing the children (1999: 2). This close connection between women and the environment is a reality in many developing countries, including Gu atemala, where rural women as wives and/or mothers are primarily responsible for sustenance farming. T hus, in rural Guatemala, it is very often the women who are primarily responsible for cultivating their families milpa, or subsistence crops (Deere and Leon 2001: 102). However, historically, it has been difficult to measure womens participation in farming in Guatemala. Some ecofeminist scholars argue that such is due to capitalist patriarchys devaluation of womens work as being non-pr oductive, so that even when women work outside the home, their work is often seen as me rely an extension of their natural role as caretakers (Mies 1986: 45). Thus, in capitalism, the concept of labor is usually used to refer to mens work outside of the home, under cap italist conditions, which means work for the production of surplus value (46). This same type of devaluation is a gr eat problem in Guatemala, where womens subsistence work has traditionally been ignored and/or discounted, even by official surveys. In Guatemala and other Latin American countries, it is simply the case th at all productive work including farmingis seen as mens work. Agricultural economists Carmen Diana Deere and Magdalena Leon write that:

PAGE 25

25 Irrespective of the amount of labor that rural women dedicate to agriculture whether as unpaid family workers or as wage workersagriculture in Latin America has been socially constructed as a male occupation. As a result, womens work in agriculture is largely invisible. If considered at all, it is usually seen as supplementary assistance to the principal male farmer. even in the agricultural censuses, the agriculturalist of the hous ehold unit is assumed to be the male household head (2001: 102). The devaluation of womens work in farming is clearly evident of a capitalist-patriarchal ideology, which has led to a gross underestimation of womens work in th e agricultural sector. The extent of such underestimation was recently made evident by the combined research efforts of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) from 1991 through 1995. The aim of the IICA/IDB research was to gather employment data for Latin American nati ons that would be more accurate than official, national employment data. In this project, re searchers undertook time-use studies, and found that a large majority of rural women work 14 to18 hours a day in a variety of ta sks: cultivating their own land; tending livestock; caring for children; gardening; and making products for sale. This studys findings contrasted sharply with those of government surveys, which oftentimes have not even recognized women as laborers. Of the 18 nations included in the IICA/IDB study, Guatemala was found to have the most severe undercount; researchers concluded that the government had underestimated the percentage of economically active rural women by nearly 500% (Kleysen and Campillo 1996: 17). Both Deere and the IICA/IDBs study conclude that women in rural Guatemala have daily, close contact with their land a nd environment. These studies also raise important questions, however. What is the nature of the relationship between rural women and their land? What is the nature, if any, of environmental degradati on in the communities where these women live? How are the women affected by such degradatio n? And what are the women doing about the

PAGE 26

26 situation? This thesis seeks to answer these and other questions using the previously outlined socialist ecofeminist framework. Using this fram ework will allow for an analysis of important connections between the exploitati on of women and nature in the global South, in the context of rural Guatemala. This framework will also allow for an analysis of how decisions made at a global level impact the day-to-day lives of wo men in Guatemala. Perhaps most importantly, however, this framework will allow for an imput ation of responsibility to the agents of globalization whose policies have resulted in mass environmental devastation and correspondingly, a decline in the quality of life for millions of people like the women of rural Guatemala.

PAGE 27

27 CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS Western (Eco)feminism and Scholarship on the Third World In past years, Western feminist scholarsh ip has come under harsh, and, I would argue, well-deserved criticism in its analyses of situatio ns in the Third World. In her seminal piece Under Western Eyes, feminist scholar Chandra Talpede Mohanty criticizes Western feminist scholarship for the ways in which it has tradit ionally portrayed citizens of the Third Worldand women in particularas singul ar, monolithic subject[s] (1986: 17). She argues that this ethnocentric universalism that of ten pervades much Western femi nist scholarship is really a new form of colonialism in that it is implicated in perpetuating relations of structural domination, and a suppression of those it claims to represent ( 18). Ecofeminist Maria Mies similarly critiques how traditional feminist scholar ship has been used as yet another instrument of domination and legitimati on of power elites (1993: 38). Both Mohanty and Mies call for a radical ch ange in the way that Western feminist scholarship engages in discussions of the Thir d World. In a follow-up piece to Under Western Eyes, Mohanty argues that feminist scholars mu st be attentive to the micropolitics of context subjectivity, and struggle, as well as to the macropolitics of global economic and political systems and processes (2003: 223). Engaging in such scholarship makes homogenizing and universalizing impossible; rath er, we understand peoples situ ations in relation to their immediate locale and link their ev eryday life and local gendered contexts and ideologies to the larger, transnational political and economic struct ures and ideologies of capitalism (225). Key, too, to this scholarship is the idea of directionality: in situating the lo cal within the global, we are able to read up the ladder of privilege, and make visibleand respons iblethe global powers that are affecting the da y-to-day lives of countle ss people throughout the world.

PAGE 28

28 A Feminist Project This thesis draws from both Mohanty and Mies call for an anti-imperialist, anticapitalist, and contextualized feminist project that expos e[s] and make[s] visible the various, overlapping forms of subjugation of womens lives (Mohanty 2003: 236). The feminist project of this thesis is to investigate the effects that policies of gl obalization and neoliberalism have had on both the environment and women in rural Guatemala. The research conducted for this thesis involves a review of fieldnotes and surveys of rural farmers in Guatemala conducted in May and June of 2006 by staff members of an environmental non-governmental organization (NGO). During this ti me, I served as part of a team of volunteer workers who assisted the NGO, the Alliance for In ternational Reforestati on (AIR) in gathering general fieldnotes about communities in the department of Chimaltenango, in the central highlands of Guatemala. The research was primarily gathered from three different communities in which AIR is currently workingA catenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa. The Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR) I have been working with the Alliance for International Reforestation (AIR), for over fifteen years, assisting with both fundraising as well as agroforestry projects. The organization is transnational, having offices in both the Unite d States and Chimaltenango, Guatemala. The purpose of AIR is to combat the deleterious e ffects of deforestation by working with local farmers in Guatemala to establish agroforestry programs in their communities. The farmers work with AIR on a voluntary basis; the orga nization simply advertises its services in community centers, and then farmers contact AIR s staff if they are interested in receiving assistance. Participation in AIRs agroforestry programs is free for the farmers; the organization provides the technical knowledge, basic tools, an d seeds necessary to implement the programs.

PAGE 29

29 Significantly, most of the farmers who seek out the assistance of AIRnearly 77%are women. AIR has been working in Guatemala for fifteen years, and in this time, has worked with over 50 communities throughout the department of Chimaltenango. AIR staff includes six tecnicos, or field extension agents. Three of the tecnicos are indigenous Maya and fluent in both Spanish and Kaqchikel. The tecnicos also hold degrees in agroforestry and are trained in community farming methods. One tecnico will work with farmers in a particular community for up to five years to ensure the continued succe ss and sustainability of the communitys tree nurseries and agroforestry projects. Each year, the tecnicos along with other volunteers, c onduct a series of both field observations and interviews in various communities with which AIR works. The purpose of these observations and interviews is to obtain detailed informa tion on the general environmental and economic condition of each community, as we ll as the number and makeup of the group of farmers in the community (inc luding how many men and women are involved, and how many of the farmers are indigenous). This information is recorded and compiled in an annual report and other reports on the work of farmers. In the summer of 2006, AIR staff and volunt eers conducted both field observations and interviews with women farmers in three comm unities in the department of Chimaltenango, Guatemala. In these communitiesAcatenango, Comalapa, and ItzapaAIR works extensively with groups of women farmers to help them impl ement agroforestry projects in their fields. These groups range in size between 20 a nd 40 members and are comprised of both ladina and indigenous Maya women. For this study, se ven women farmers were interviewed in Acatenango, five in Comalapa, and eight in Itzapa. The women all volunteered to be

PAGE 30

30 interviewed, and were able to take time away from their day to meet with the interviewers. While AIR staff members have experience in conducting similar interviews, they were reminded to inform the women that their responses would be kept completely confidential, and that their answers may be used in AIRs reports, as well as an academic research paper on women and the environment. Each interviewer was provided with a set of guiding questions to ask each woman, and was instructed to record her answers as accurately as possible (see Appendices A and B for guiding questions). No recording devices were used due in part to a lack of financial resources, as well as a general agreement amongst AIR staff and volunteers that many women may be reluctant to be tape recorded. Throughout this paper, the name s of the cities and geographic landmarks have remained unchanged, while the name s of the women are false in order to assure confidentiality. In addition to the interviews, a total of fifteen observationa l studies were conducted, with five studies ranging from one to six hours conducted in each of the three communities. The fieldnotes based on these observations contain important information on the nature of the environment and environmental degradation (if any) in the communities, as well as general information on the population of the community, wh at percent of the community is indigenous, etc. These observations served to supplemen t the interviews, providing a way of establishing both the reliability and validity of th e data obtained from the interviews. For this thesis, I reviewed the notes from both the interviews and field observations conducted by AIR staff and vol unteers in Acatenango, Comala pa, and Itzapa, utilizing the grounded theory method as outlined by Strauss and Co rbin (1998) in order to analyze the data. Upon my initial reviews of the da ta, during the open coding phase of analysis, I identified and tentatively labeled similarities that became apparent across interviews. At this phase of analysis,

PAGE 31

31 I was able to group similar items according to de fined properties, and thereby develop concepts (121). My familiarity with feminist and ecofemini st literature was helpful in identifying common themes that emerged from the data during this phase. For example, as many ecofeminists have pointed out, in many parts of the world women are responsible for subsistence farming, and are therefore affected as farmers by environmental degradation in their communities. As noted by Gebara (1999), Shiva (1989), and others, many ta sks relating to womens farm workincluding gathering firewood and water, planting and harvestinghave been adversely impacted by processes of deforestation and so il, air, and water pollution. This theme in ecofeminist literature served to enhance [my] sensitivity to this th eme in the data, as I was more readily able to identify the various, subtle ways in which th e women farmers work in Guatemala has been affected by deforestation in their commun ities (Strauss and Corbin 1998: 49). Following this open coding phase of analysis, I then attempted to link these discrete concepts at the level of their pr operties and dimensions to form larger conceptual categories in the process of axial coding (123). Thus, task s relating specifically to womens farmwork, including gathering firewood, cultivating crops, a nd cooking, were linked and grouped within the larger, more general category of gendered divisi on of labor. Finally, I again referred to the ecofeminist literature to assist me in both checking the validity of the data, as well as refining the conceptual framework used to explain the data. Concerns My main concerns with this project revol ve around the ways in which the data were collected, how that data was inte rpreted, and how the da ta is presented. Fe minist scholarship requires that researchers be reflex ive of their position of privilege in relation to their participants, and be attentive to the corre sponding power differences (Moh anty 2003: 224). Feminist scholarship also acknowledges that there is no su ch thing as objective, value-free research.

PAGE 32

32 In acknowledging that objectivity in any type of research is neith er possible nor desirable, feminist scholars must examine the ways in whic h their research method and data may be biased. One source of bias is the way in which the rese arch was conducted. For instance, in this study, the fieldnotes and surveys were recorded by AIR staff and volunteers. Th e staff members, as middle class, college-educated men occupy a dis tinctly privileged social position in Guatemala relative to the poor, uneducated female farmer s. This differential positioning may have influenced the women farmers responses somewh at, although it is also important to consider that the women have been work ing with all of AIRs tecnicos for at least two years and have reported that they not only trust the men but li ke them on a friendly, personal level as well. While many of the interviews between the tecnicos and women were conducted in Spanish, some were conducted in the Maya Kaqchi kel language. These were then translated by the Kaqchikel and Spanish speaking tecnicos into Spanish, and a Peace Corps volunteer from Spain then assisted me in translating the interv iews into English. Unfortunately, some of the original meanings may have been lost through thes e layers of translation; we tried our best to respect the womens messages and retain the integrity of what they told us. In addition to taking into consid eration the issues of data co llection, I must also be aware of the ways in which my social positiona s a white, North American, middle-class woman may influence my interpretation of the data. Scho lars have noted that there has been a tendency of white North American feminists to essentia lize all Third World women as a homogenous, powerless group often located as implicit vict ims of particular socioeconomic systems (Mohanty 1986: 23). I must be careful to avoi d this tendency, and to focus my analysis on demonstrating the production of women as socio economic political groups within particular local contexts, while paying attention to social class a nd ethnic identities (31).

PAGE 33

33 Finally, I am concerned with how to best address problems of scholarly language, particularly with regard to the politics of naming. In her article Changing the Terms, feminist scholar Nancy Naples notes that how we explicate and frame our approach to the intersection of global an d local organizing says a great deal about out political orientation, disciplinary assumptions, and cross-cultural sensibili ty (2000: 5). The term Third World, for instance, has been used since the early 1980s to refer to underdeveloped or developing nations that were economically disadvantaged and th erefore dependent on Fi rst World nations for financial, scientific, and technica l assistance (ibid). However, this term has been criticized by feminists who argue that it discursively justifie s the construction of Fi rst World countries in North America and Western Europe as dominant and more advanced. Additionally, the use of the term Third World may contribute to the oth ering of women in these countries. Feminist scholars have proposed alternative terms, such as the Two-thirds World, which has been used to refer to women living in Third World nations, and brings attention to the fact that at least two thirds of the worlds pop ulation live in countries with low average per-capita income (Bulbeck 2006: 38). Third World countries have also been referre d to as developing in the discourse of globalization. Such a term is equally problematic, as it places the notion of development as a goal that countries should strive to achieve. Therefore, developing countries like Guatemala are seen as lagging behind developed countries like the United St ates. Some feminist scholars have argued that instead of de scribing various First World c ountries as developed, we should instead use the term overdeveloped (Minh-ha 1989). For the purposes of this paper, I will periodically use the term North to refer to countries generally considered to be part of the First World, as well as the term South to refer to

PAGE 34

34 countries considered to be Thir d World. Like transnational femi nist scholars Chandra Mohanty, Trinh T. Minh-ha, and Vandana Shiva, I will us e the terms North/First World and South/Third World interchangeably. These terms reflect the historical ways in which countries in the northern hemisphere have historically exploited c ountries in the southern hemisphere, through imperialism, colonialism, and, most recently, th rough policies of neoliber alism and globalization (Minh-ha 1989; Mies and Shiva 1993; Shiva 2000). Of course, it is important to recognize that the historical exploitation of some countries by others has not always been so neatly geographically ordered; this has only been a general historical tendency. Throughout this thesis, I will also use the term globalization to refer to the processes of global economic restructuring, wi th a specific economic and tec hnological agenda that alters basic modes of cultural organization and internat ional exchange in many parts of the world (Eaton and Lorentzen 2003: 4). While proponent s of globalization declare endless benefits from the exchange of capital on a global scale, others critique the noti on that globalization is beneficial for everyone. These critics argue that policies of globalization are reordering the flow of capital and wealth within a global and he gemonic economic regime that serves only the interests of the elit e and rich (4). Through this thesis, I hope to explore how th ese global, historical processes and policies are played out an everyday, microsocial level. Specifically, I want to asses how the policies affect both women and the environment in the contex t of rural Guatemala. In doing so, I hope to contribute to the growing body of anti-capitalist, anti-globalization literature, and to read up the ladder of privilege, in the words of Mohanty (1986), making visible and responsible the global powers that are affecting th e lives of countless people.

PAGE 35

35 CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AN D WOMEN IN THE COMMUNITIES All three of the communities presented in th is study are located in the Department of Chimaltenango, in the central highlands of Guatem ala. This is a particularly mountainous region of the country, with altitudes typically ranging between 1,500 and 2,500 meters (4,900 to 8,200 feet). The mountains and hills dominate the la ndscape, and there are only a few valley areas with flat terrain suitable for farming. These areas, however, are often occupied by large-scale growers and trans-national agribusinesses such as Del Monte and Chiquita, both of which bought out the land holdings of the United Fruit Comp any in the 1970s (La Feber 1993). Companies like Del Monte specialize in the growth of nontraditional agricultural export (NTAX) crops like cabbage, snow peas, and broccoli (Fischer a nd Hendrickson 2003: 1). The value that NTAX crops have for the large scale growers who cultivat e them, the corporations that contract with these growers, and the Guatemalan economy virtua lly guarantees that only the best farmland will be used to grow these crops. In Chimaltenango, one of the most ideal areas for farming is the valley of Tecpn, a large flatland area in the cen ter of the department that spans an area of approximately 50 square kilometers. As Fisc her and Hendrickson note in their 2003 study of the area, the valley of Tecpn provides an ideal place for growing crops, and the vast majority of the land is used to grow export crops. It is also notable that in this ar ea of flat terrain and loose, rich soil, there are no subsistence plots of corn and beans. Highland Communities Instead of being allowed to farm in areas such as Tecpn, most rural subsistence farmers have been displaced to areas high in the m ountains of Chimaltenango. Here, farmers have slashed and burned many areas in order to make room for their milpa, small plots of land used for growing subsistence crops of corn and beans (see Figure 4-1). As Fischer and Hendrickson

PAGE 36

36 note, the deforested mountainsides of the central Guatemalan highlands have become symbols of such socio-historical issues as unequal access to quality agricu ltural land, the ecological issues of deforestation, and po litical favoritism in the use of community resources (2). However, for the farmers who grow their subs istence crops in these areas, the deforested mountains are more than symbols; they are real ities that must be faced every day. The women farmers in this study all confront the problems of cultivating crops for their families survival in the difficult, unforgiving terrain of the highlands of Chimaltenango. Figure 4-1. Deforested hillside in the Department of Chimaltenango. As it is so difficult to cultivate crops here for ones family, let alone for ones income, many of the residents of the highland communitie s are impoverished. In Guatemala, the more rural areas tend to have the highe st rates of poverty, as most of the wealthy elite of the country reside in large houses behind high walls in ur ban centers like Guatemala City or Antigua (Fischer and Hendrickson 2003: 27). The lives of the elite in Guatemala are a far cry from the lives of the rural poor, and Guatem ala is notorious for high rates of inequality, with the top 20%

PAGE 37

37 of the population earning 63% of all income, while the bottom 20% ea rn only 2.1% of all income. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) estimates that nearly 87% of the population of Guatemala lives in poverty, with 67% living in extreme poverty, defined as income below what is needed for minimal subsistence levels and caloric intake (UNDP 2000). Most of the residents of the communities pres ented in this study liv e in extreme poverty, many earning annual incomes of less than 2,700 Quetzal s, or about US $350. For many residents, farming is their only means of su rvival, and yet this task can be quite difficult in the mountainous highland communities. The following section expl ores the general environmental and farming conditions of each community. Acatenango Acatenango is a relatively small town with a population of about 15,000 located approximately fifteen miles to the southwest of the city of Chimaltenango and ten miles to the south of the valley of Tecpn. It is in a region of Guatemala that is renowned for its coffee. This particular area provides fertile gr ound for growing many types of cr ops, due in large part to the rich volcanic soil found in th e region. The volcano Acatenan go is one of the largest in Guatemala at 3,500 meters, and still active. The ash that it spews mixes in with the soil and provides valuable nutrients th at help with plant growth. However, in the town of Acatenango, the most valuable, easily farmed land is used for growing export coffee crops. Large corporati ons like Starbucks and Folgers contract with growers in this region in order to supply a h eavy demand for the rich coffee grown on the fertile volcanic slopes. The subsistence farming that many of the residents depend on for survival has in turn been gradually pushed to the steeper m ountain slopes around the outs kirts of the city. In Acatenango, a group of twenty ladina farmers have been working with AIR for nearly three years to implement methods of su stainable agriculture in their fi elds. While many of the women

PAGE 38

38 live within the city limits of Acatenango, or on the outskirts, th eir fields can be up to three kilometers outside of the city. Their fields average about 0.5 hectares (1.24 acres) in size. It is estimated that in Guatemala, a family of six needs between 0.6 to 1.1 hectares in order to grow enough corn to feed themselves for a year (Fisch er and Hendrickson 2003: 129). The families of the women in this study range in size between four and eight members. Given the small sizes of their milpa plots, all of the families in Acatenango as well as Comalapa and Itzapa, live in what the United Nations defines as extreme poverty (UNDP 2000). Comalapa Comalapa is a somewhat large city of near ly 30,000, located approximately fifteen miles northwest of Chimaltenango, and ten miles southeas t of the valley of Tecpn. Like Acatenango, it is a very mountainous area. Trav el to and from Comalapa is difficult, as the mountain roads can be very steep and difficult for vehicles to traverse, particularly if it is raini ng. Thus, although Comalapa is only a short distance away from the large city of Chimalte nango, it can take up to 2.5 hours to travel from one city to the other. Most of the indigenous Maya residents of Comalapa are fa rmers, and tend to reside on the outskirts of the city, closer to their fields, or in small nearby communities such as Palemos. Located high in the mountains, these areas are quite serene and beautiful, w ith lush greenery and pine forests. However, this beauty can be deceptive, as the incredibly hard, rocky soil makes it difficult to grow crops. Additi onally, the combination of loose rocks and steep slopes can make farming not only difficult but dangerous; many farmers were observed tying ropes around their waists and anchoring themselves to nearby tr ees in order to keep from tumbling down a mountain slope. Because of the considerable st ruggle involved in farming, many families living around here farm only for subsistence, as they are not able to grow enough to sell any excess. To supplement their farming, the families may also raise chickens, goats, and occasionally cows.

PAGE 39

39 Here, a group of twenty Kaqchikel Maya women have been working with AIR for approximately two years to implement methods of agroforestry in their fields. Th eir fields are close in size to those of the farmers of A catenango, averaging about 0.5 hectares. Itzapa Like Comalapa, Itzapa is a fairly large co mmunity of about 40,000 that is approximately ten miles to the southwest of Chimaltenango, and fi fteen miles to the southeast of the valley of Tecpn. It is slightly more industrialized and polluted than Comalapa, and more crowded as well. Here there is a group of forty Kaqchikel Maya women who have been working with AIR for over five years. All of them farm for subsistence, and thei r fields are located between one and five kilometers outside of the city limits. Th eir subsistence plots are comparable in size to the plots of farmers in Acatena ngo and Comalapa, averaging about 0.4 hectares, or 0.98 acres. The farming areas around Itzapa are not as steep as the areas around Acatenango and Comalapa, and thus the women here do not have to cont end with the same dangers and difficulties of farming on rocky mountainsides. However, Itzapa also lies at a somewhat lower elevation than Acatenango or Comalapa, and some of its lowlying areas are suscepti ble to flooding when it rains heavily. During the rainy season, from Ma y until August, it is not uncommon for roads and bridges to collapse when the ground becomes over-s aturated. This, in turn, can make travel to and from ones milpa a difficult and arduous process. While the three communities in this study differ according to various geographical characteristics, they all face similar environm ental problems. These problems are rooted in neoliberal policies and historical processes of land appropriation that have gradually pushed subsistence farmers to more mountainous areas wh ere more and more forests are being slashed and burned to make way for corn and beans. Th e increasing deforestation of these areas has had profound impacts on the lives and liv elihoods of the residents of th ese communities, particularly

PAGE 40

40 those whose survival depends upon subsistence farming. The following section explores how this environmental degradation impacts the live s and livelihoods of the women farmers in this study. Women Farmers It has been noted repeatedly by various femi nist scholars over the years that the gendered division of labor that pervades much of the world defines productive wage labor work as mens work, and non-productive work inside the home as womens work (Nash and Fernandez-Kelly 1983; Mies 1986; Mies and Shiva 1993; Mohanty 1997). Ecofeminists note that in many countries in the global South, th is gendered division of labor has traditionally placed women in rural areas in the role of subs istence farmers for their families (Mies and Shiva 1993; Gebara 1999; Eaton and Lorentzen 2003). The patriarchal logic that informs this division views womens work as subsistence farmers as a natural extension of their roles as primary care givers. Thus, their labor intensive farm work becomes yet another way for women to nurture and care for their families, and allows their husbands to engage in productive wage earning labor outside the home (Mies 1986). The interviews conducted with the Guatemalan women in this study confirm that they do indeed play a prominent role in the cultivati on of their families subsistence plots, or milpa, which typically consist of corn and beans. Of the twenty women interviewed, fourteen indicated that cultivating their fa milies land was primarily their responsi bility. Five indicated that they shared this responsibility with their husbands, and only one Maya woman in Comalapa indicated that her husband was the primary farmer. She noted that while she helped him occasionally with the farming, her primary activity involved weaving and selling huipils, beautiful and elaborate blouses that are a trademark of traditional Maya dress for women, and that can take up to four months to make.

PAGE 41

41 The farm work that the women in this study are involved with places them in direct and immediate contact with their local environment on a regular basis. As farmers, the women are intimately aware of any amount of environmenta l degradation occurring in their communities and in the areas where they fa rm. When asked about the major environmental problems facing their communities, the women responded clearly and unequivocally that deforestation and soil erosion constituted the biggest threats. Deforestation In each of the communities, the women are l ong term residents. Many have grown up in the same area together and are li fe-long friends. The fact that they have lived in the areas so long means that the women are able to see how gradua lly, more and more trees are being cleared from surrounding areas to make way for farming. Doa Fi delia, a Kaqchikel Maya, is the oldest in the group of women working in Itzapa. At over eigh ty years old, and a lifelong resident, she has seen many changes and upheavals in her community over the years. She not es that the problem of deforestation has gotte n worse in recent years: Now [deforestation] is worse, and it sicken s me. I have always planted trees with my milpa. It is the way my family has always done it. We have always understood the importance of trees, for the so il, for the water, for our crops, and for firewood. But now, people come in and cut them down, and they do not understand what they are doing. And yes, it has gotten worse, especially because people need trees for firewood, and now ther e are less and less trees. Last week, at night, people came and cut two of my casuarinas. I have never had that problem before, people stealing trees! The increasing deforestation in her community m eans that Doa Fidelia is now having to deal with problems she has never before had to addre ss in over eighty years of living in Itzapa. In addition to distressing her emotionally, the problem of increased deforesta tion is also directly impacting her livelihood, as pe ople are invading her property to steal her resources. Her concerns are shared by other women who were in terviewed. Doa Cecili a, a 43 year old ladina

PAGE 42

42 farmer from Acatenango also recognizes that the problem of deforestatio n in her community has gotten worse in recent years. She notes that, We [in the womens group] have all gr own up together here, in Acatenango. Most of us come from families of farmers, so we have been doing this our whole life. But over the years, more people, more farmers have moved here, and have bought land here. Of course, they have to farm, too, and this means that they cut the trees. We here, my compaeras and I realized that something had to be done. Like Doa Fidelia, Cecilia and the other wome n with whom she works are concerned about the increasing rates of deforestation in their communities. As the women elaborate, many of their concerns relate to both the emotional and material consequences of deforestation. Emotional Consequences The farm work that the women do requires them to be in their fields between one and four days each week, on average, tending to th eir crops. This work places them in close, intimate contact with their environment, as they clear away brush, till the soil, plant the seeds, and nurture the crops that will be used to feed th eir families. The direct physical connection with their crops and the surrounding e nvironment in turn fosters an emotional connection to the environment that many women expr essed. Doa Patricia, a ladina farmer in Acatenango, describes the fields where she works as her home, and explains that for her, farming is relaxing and enjoyable. She says, I work so much inside the house, with three young children, and I am very tired on the days that I spend in the house. On days that I come to farm, I bring my children with me, of course, and I feel be tter I feel like the field, like the trees are my home, and my home is actually where I work [laughs]. So yes, it is sad for me to see trees being cut, because when they are cut, I feel like I am losing part of my home. When asked about what the environment meant to her, Doa Santiaga, a ladina farmer from Acatenango, responded that her feelings were complicated and profound, and she felt that a poem best expressed how she felt about Gods creation:

PAGE 43

43 Ambiente Sagrado Monumento de la Creacin Dios, Dios te ha designado como Ejemplo y Bendicion Caminando, caminando Hoy no pude visitor aquellos Inmensos arboles donde Un dia Sali a jugar Caminando, caminando El aires fresco me abrazo Y el agua se calmo Juntos salvemos El medio Ambiente In English, the poem reads, Sacred environment Monument of Creation God, God has designed you as a Model and a Blessing Walking, walking, Today I could not see Those immense trees where I once used to play Walking, walking, The fresh air embraced me And the water calmed me Together, let us save The Environment. Clearly, Santiaga feels that the fields are more than a place of work; for her, the connection that she has with the environment is more than physical but emotional and spiritual as well. Like Patricia, Santiaga feels that the fields are more than a place of work. For Patricia, the fields are like a second home, while for Santiaga, they are a sacred place, a Monument of Creation. Santiaga goes on to say that to do harm to th e environment is to commit a sin, and that the deforestation that she sees around her causes her grief that she feel s in [her] heart and in [her] spirit.

PAGE 44

44 The sacred quality of the environment was also expressed by many Maya women farmers, and is perhaps not surprising, give n the great importance that Maya culture has traditionally placed on farming and on peoples connection to the land. In her memoir, Maya activist Rigoberta Mench repeatedly notes how the earth, the seed, and corn are all recognized as the main sources of sustenance and therefor e sacred for many Maya (1984). It is also not uncommon for religious ceremonies to be he ld in rural Maya households when corn is both planted and harvested, and it is c onsidered a sin by many Maya to use land in a wasteful manner (Mench 1984; Montejo 1999; Fisc her and Hendrickson 2003; Fisc her 2004). Doa Lourdes, a Kaqchikel farmer in her mid-40s in Comalapa, laments the deforestation in the area, a sadness that she says is shared by the other Kaqchikel women she works with. She notes, Of course this [deforestation] is a prob lem, a big problem that concerns us and saddens us. Everytime I walked down the road, and I would s ee more trees cut, more naked land, my heart would cry. It would cry for what we have lost, what has been wasted, and also for what we will lose, for our future, for our children. Lourdes sadness and sense of lo ss is related to the ways in which the valuable, sacred land around her community has been mistreated and was ted. Her sadness is also related to the value of trees and the land in sustaining the co mmunity. When the land is mistreated, as she notes, the future of the community is placed in jeopardy. Doa Fidelia, the elderly farmer in Itzapa, expresses a similar sense of loss and concern for the future when she talks about the deforestation of her area. It is especially sad to know that so ma ny Maya are doing this to the land. We are farmers, and we have always been farmers, and people are supposed to know better! But people have forgotten that th ey are Maya, and they have forgotten how to care properly for the land, and now we have these problems. I try to tell people, to remind them of the importance of caring for the land. I show them my field, how strong the crops are, how great the trees are, and I tell them that the crops are strong because the trees are strong! People must listen, they must understand, because if they do notour land wi ll forget us the way that we have forgotten it.

PAGE 45

45 For Fidelia, deforestation thus represents more than a loss of trees; it also represents a loss of environmental knowledge and a lo ss of connection to the land that has traditionally been of great importance to Maya men and women alike for centuries. For women like Fidelia, the deforestation is even more painful when it is perpetuated by other Maya, who are supposed to know better, but have, over generations of resettlement and displacement, become disconnected from the land and forgotten how to properly care for it. Material Consequences The sadness and sense of loss that many wome n expressed represent only part of the story of environmental degradation in the communities. As the women also noted, the deforestation has very real, im mediate consequences for them as well. Primarily, these consequences relate to concerns of firewood and soil erosion. In areas of rural Guatemala, many families continue to cook over open fires. This cooking requires a tremendous amount of firewood; AIR staff member s estimate that nearly two tons of firewood are required to feed a family of four each year. Obtaining firewood does not necessitate felling trees; branches and limbs may be pruned to obtain fuel. However, the increasing deforesta tion of the areas means that it is becoming increasingly di fficult to find trees with branches suitable for use as firewood. This problem has directly impacted many of the women, who indicate that all the tasks relating to meal preparationincluding finding firewood fo r cookingare often their responsibility. For the women who cannot afford to buy firewood on a re gular basis, this means that they have to procure it themselves, usually in th e mountains or fields outside of the city. Doa Ivelisse in Itzapa notes that prior to working with AIR, her search for firewood could often turn into an all day, exhausting affair:

PAGE 46

46 Every week, once each week, I would walk nearly two or three hours, out of the city, past the farms, up into the mountai ns, up, up, just to find some branches for cooking. I would have to walk so far, because I had no trees in my field, and no one else had trees, and I wa s not going to steal other peoples trees or branches! Then, I would carry all this back down, on my head or my back, and it was very difficult if it ever started to rain! Fi nally, I would get home, almost eight hours after I left. And then I would have to cook for six people! After working for AIR for more than five years, however, Ivelisse and ot her women in Itzapa are able to prune branches from trees in their fields in order to cook. While th e trees in their fields do not yield enough firewood for the amounts requi red by open fire cooking, they do reduce the number of times that the women must make long treks to find obtain wood. Ivelisse, for instance, notes that the number of time she mu st travel outside of Itzapa for wood has been reduced from four to two times each month. Doa Elsa, 38, also from Itzapa, explains that while she and her family were able to afford to buy firewood at least twi ce each month, she no longer has to, as she and her husband own two plots of land that have both been re-forested through AIR. These two plots now yield enough firewood for the family to cook with, although it should be noted that Elsa uses a more fuel-efficient stove that only requires one third of the firewood that the traditional open-fire method requires. Despite the improvements in the situations of women like Ivelisse and Elsa, the lack of firewood remains a deep concern for many of th e women interviewed. As Doa Fidelia noted, the problem has become so severe that people are literally steali ng trees from others property. Women in Acatenango and Comalapa also noted th at firewood is becoming increasingly scarce, and while some women are able to buy firew ood in town, others reported having to walk between two and six kilometers (one way) at l east once each week in order to obtain wood from outside the city limits. While most of the wo men state that they prune branches for firewood instead of cutting entire trees, many residents will cu t trees if cutting branches is insufficient.

PAGE 47

47 The high demand for firewood in rural areas, comb ined with the continued push of subsistence farming to the mountains, thus perpetuates a cycl e of deforestation that directly impacts the women and the work they do to feed their fam ilies. Finding firewood to cook with is but one concern that the women expressed with regards to deforestation, however. The following section will explore how deforestation is linked to othe r forms of environmental degradation in the communities. Storms and Mudslides The deforestation of mountain slopes and st eep hillsides aggravates a greater, more ominous threat of mudslides. While not every woman explicitly mentioned deforestation as an environmental problem in their communities, it is notable that every woman mentioned mudslides as a major concern. Many women li nked the problem of deforestation with soil erosion and mudslides, as did Doa Clementina, 53, from Acatenango: We have to farm to eat, of course, but the only places to farm are here, on these mountains that are very steep. This is a problem because people must clear spaces for their crops, and not everyone knows the importance of trees. But then, when the rain is strong, there are many crops that are washed away, and then what do people have to eat? While mudslides are always a threat during the ra iny season, they have been an especially grave problem in the months following Hurricane Stan. In October 2005, Stan made landfall south of Veracruz, Mexico, and brought heavy rains and flooding to much of Central America. In Guatemala, the heavy flooding caused massive landslides, destroying thousands of homes and partially or completely wiping out the water and sanitation system s of entire villages (see Figure 4-2). Overall, Hurricane Stan is estimate d to have caused between 669 and 1,500 deaths, and may have destroyed as many as 200,000 homes. According to Guatemalas Ministry of Agriculture, the immediate damage done to agriculture was assessed at approximately $46

PAGE 48

48 million, with subsistence farmers in rural areas particularly affected (American Red Cross 2005; Unitarian Universalist Service Committee 2005). Figure 4-2. Aftermath of m udslides near Acatenango. Even in June, nearly nine months after Stan passed through, the communities are still recovering, and mudslides continue to pose a threat. The torrential ra ins of Hurricane Stan led to vast amounts of soil erosion here, and saturated the ground. This sa turation in turn increases the probability of future mudslides, as any additional amount of rain causes the soil to move. In Guatemala, the rainy season runs from May through August, and in these months after Stan, soil erosion represents a grave problem that threatens the safety of many families in highland communities. In Acatenango, Doa Emelia 38, identifies mudslides as the biggest environmental problem facing th e community. She notes that, This was only a small problem before St an, but after Stan, a big problem. A family in town completely lost their house because of a mudslide, and another friend of mine has much fear because now, during this time of year, there is much rain, and her house is at the bottom of a hill. She has a husband and three small children, and she has fear because there is no place she can go, and every day, it rains more, and more mud slides down. We are trying to find a house for her if she loses hers, but it is difficult, because our houses are so small, and our families are big, so there is not enough room. I dont know what will happen to her.

PAGE 49

49 The immediacy of the threat is evident in Doa Emelias concern for her friend. While she is anxious about her friend, Emelia is also concer ned for herself as well. She goes on to say, Of course, I am worried about my own family, t oo. Really, when it rains so hard, no one is completely safe. Thus, Emelia is aware that the problem of mudslides is one that affects the entire community, and is not restri cted to one or two families. Other communities have been similarly affect ed. In Comalapa, for instance, mudslides have made it even more difficult to farm in an already precarious area. Doa Mona, 42, notes that while she is not overly concerned for her safety, she does have to take extra care when farming. She says that The soil can be loose, an d it is easy to slip on the rocks. I do not like to bring my young children with me, because it can be dangerous, so I ask my older ones to watch them when I am working [in the field]. She extends this danger beyond her own personal experiences, however, noting that I am only one of many farmers here. I know that others have the same difficulties like I have. Thus, Mona connects her experiences to the experiences of others in situations similar to hers, concluding that the dangers inherent in farming on steep, unstable slopes are dangers that many farmers in Comalapa have to contend with. As women are the primary farmers in these areas, they are also the ones who are placed in the greatest danger. In addition to affecting farming conditions, th e mudslides have affected other aspects of life in highland communities, including finding water for bathing and washing clothes, as well as travel. In Acatenango, while some residents have running water, many do not. In order to wash clothes, many women make w eekly trips to a community pila, a set of outdoor sinks constructed out of stone where people bring their clothes or dishes to wash. One of the main pilas in Acatenango was not equipped with running water, but was built near a river that ran outside of town, so that people could easily fetch water as needed. Unfortunatel y, the river ran alongside

PAGE 50

50 the base of a hillside that had been recently de forested in the summer of 2005. After Hurricane Stan passed through, a tremendous amount of soil a nd sediment was washed into the river, so that the water source was dried up (see Figur e 4-3). Now, women who used that pila on a daily or weekly basis must go to another part of to wn, which one woman described with distaste as being too far away and too crowded. Figure 4-3. River on the outskirts of Acaten ango that was covered over by a mudslide. Travel has also been affected by deforesta tion and the resulting so il erosion in and around the communities. Shortly after Hurricane Stan passed through, a mudslide covered one main road in Comalapa. Although few individuals ow n cars or trucks in this area, it was not uncommon for as many as ten farmers to crowd into a truck on their way to their fields, which can be as far as seven kilometers, or four miles away. Now, the mudslide has made this road inaccessible to vehicles, and farmers must walk to their fields, carrying their tools on their backs. Doa Sofia, 33, and Doa Mona must walk at leas t five kilometers, or about three miles on steep roads and paths in order to get to their milpa plots which border each other. In Itzapa, farmers

PAGE 51

51 have experienced similar problems with regards to travel, as many paved roads leading outside of the city have collapsed as the ground undern eath has given way due to over-saturation. In poor areas on the outskirts of both of these comm unities, the government has done little to repair damage done to roadways. Lourdes in Comalapa e xplains that, This area is very poor, so the government does not care much about us. This ro ad has been covered for almost eight months, and only once did people from the government visit, right after th e hurricane. They left and never came back, so you see how much they care about us. We have to take care of ourselves here. While the mudslides have been especially detrimental to the women and the farmwork they do, the women clearly view the mudslides as being a problem for the whole community. Lourdes skepticism regarding th e government is shared by othe rs in the group of women she works with, and is unsurprising given the governme nts history of neglecting the needs of the poor, particularly indigenous populations (Nel son 1999; Brass 2003; Sanf ord 2003). However, also implicit in Lourdes comments is a certain tenacity, and a realiza tion that in order to improve the present situation, the residents of Comalapa must act to take care of [themselves]. Conclusion Both the Maya and ladina women farmers in this study are painfully aware of and affected by the increasing environmental degradation occurring in their communities. As process of globalization and neolib eralism continue to push poor farmers to the highlands, rates of deforestation in highland communities increase as individuals slash and burn trees to make space for corn and beans. This deforestation affects the women of these communities personally: on an emotional level, they lament the loss of trees which many regard as sacred; while on a material level, they must confront the problems of securing firewood when there is a scarcity of trees, and they must also struggle with th e difficulties of planting crops on eroding mountainsides. Additionally, the women also re cognize that the deforestation is a community-

PAGE 52

52 wide problem, particularly with regards to its role in aggravating dangerous mudslides that threaten the lives of their families and their neig hbors. Thus, the connect ion that the women, as subsistence farmers, have to the land means th at they are both aware of and affected by the increasing environmental degradation of their comm unities. This connection has also fostered a sense of urgency, an awareness of the need to act and address the problems at hand. The following section explores the ways in which th e women of Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa have mobilized both locally and transnationally to combat the problems of environmental destruction in their communities.

PAGE 53

53 CHAPTER 5 ORGANIZING FOR FAMI LY AND COMMUNITY As we have seen, the connection that the wo men farmers in Guatemala have with their local environment is a close one, rooted in a ge ndered division of labor and the womens daily, lived experiences as both mothers and farmers fo r their families. This connection has in turn fostered an awareness amongst the women of pr ogressively worsening environmental conditions in their communities, as well as an awareness of the need to act to improve these conditions. In Acatenango, Comalapa, Itzapa, a nd other rural areas in Guatemal a women have taken steps to mobilize on behalf of the environment, their families, and their communities. Ecofeminist scholars note that such mobiliza tion is not uncommon for women in rural areas throughout the world, and is often fueled by the ecological insi ghts of women as subsistence farmers (Shiva 1989: 67). In Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development, ecofeminist Vandana Shiva highlights the work of women farmers in the Chipko movement, in which thousands of women mobilized in India in the 1970s to stop the logging of the forest s where they lived and farmed. As Shiva notes, this movement was motivated to protect the forests as sources of life and sustenance, and was organized on behalf of the co mmunity rather than on behalf of the women as individuals. Shiva writes that mobilizing around environmental issues is not uncommon in rural communities throu ghout the world, and that movements by rural women to protect forests or rivers have always been root ed in protecting their food base ( 97). As this food base nurtures not only the womens families but their communitie s as well, protecting it is a matter of both family and community survival. Thus, the uniqu e role that women have as farmers for their families means that they have an awareness of the need to act to preserve the environment as the source of life and food for themselves, their families, and their communities.

PAGE 54

54 Local and Transnational Organizing and Social Capital As poor farmers in rural Guatemala, the women in this study occupy a socially marginalized position in terms of their class and gender. The Maya women must also contend with the additional problem of racism, as di scrimination against indigenous populations in Guatemala has a long history dating back to th e colonial period and the enslavement and exploitation of the Maya by the Spanish. In orde r to empower themselves against these various intersecting oppressions, many women in rural areas of Guatemala have found it necessary to organize within their communities. All of th e women in this study belong to local womens groups that were organized by the women prior to their involvement with AIR. Each group has a leadership committee that is elec ted or informally agreed upon by the other group members. In Acatenango, Doas Santiaga and Emelia were elec ted to be the leaders because of their strong characters, as one woman asse rted, while in Itzapa, Doas Ma rta, Erelena, and Elsa were elected as president, vice-president, and secret ary, respectively, because they are among the few group members who are literate. Additionally, as Marta states, The other women also trust us, because we do not gossip. While the women do not use the term social capital in describing the groups, the concept is nonetheless helpful in understanding how the groups have proven to be helpful for the women who belong to them. As defined by Pierre Bourdieu, social capit al refers to the aggregate of the actual or potential resources wh ich are linked to possessi on of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognitionwhich provides each of its members with the backing of collectively owned capital, a credential which entitles them to credit, in the various senses of the word (1986: 248-9) While social capital may be conceptualized in the same way as econo mic capital, it is important to note that the

PAGE 55

55 former increases rather than decreases with use. Th at is, networks a nd relationships are strengthened the more they are used. For the women in this study, the groups they belong to serve as i nvaluable sources of social capital, providing means of both organizing and mobilizing resources. Doa Marta, a 43 year old Kaqchikel farmer in It zapa, describes the importance of the women working together for both social and financial reasons. She says, W e work together because we, as women, have many problems. We do not have a lot of education, and the majority of us cannot read or write. We are also very poor, but we do wh at we are able to help each ot her with these problems. As Marta also notes, the group of women serves as a source of emotional support and solidarity as well. She goes on: We work together because we understand each other. Psychologically, we understand the pain inside, and we know that we will listen to each othe r. We listen to each others problems, and we do not share them outside the group. So, yes, the group is important to us for many reasons. As a source of both social capital and emoti onal strength, the main tenance of the group and group solidarity is, therefore, imperative. It is thus important to note th at the groups in this study are homogenous in terms of ethnic makeup. In Acatenango, the women farmers are all ladina, while in Comalapa and Itzapa the women are all Kaqchikel Maya. This is perhaps not surprising given the fact that the history of Guatemala has been marked by racial tensions between ladina/o and Maya populations since the colonial period. These tensions continue to exist independent of class struct ure; thus, although both ladina/o and Maya farmers may be similarly impoverished, racism against the Maya con tinues to divide all cla ss levels in Guatemala (Mench 1984; Nelson 1999; Fischer and Hendr ickson 2003). Additionally, as the different ethnic groups share distinctly diffe rent histories and experiences, it may be easier to maintain

PAGE 56

56 group solidarity and cohesion if everyone shares th e same understandings of what it means to be a poor ladina or Maya woman farmer in contemporary Guatemala. While none of the women specifically mention the tendency to organize along racial boundaries, several of the women highlight the importance of sharing similar unde rstandings and values wi thin the group. Doa Marta notes that the Kaqchikel women in the group in Itzapa understand each other, while Doa Ana in Comalapa also notes that the group works well for similar reasons. She says that the group has existed for many years, because we are all organized, we are all friends, and we all want to work together and help each ot her. We understand the importance of working together, and of knowing what each one of us n eeds. We know this because we all grew up together, right here. We are like sisters. In Guatemala, ladina/o and Maya populations have expe rienced drastically different histories based on their race. Th ese differential experiences conti nue today, and continue to be a source of division within all social classes in Guatemala (Nelson 1999). Overcoming these divisions may prove difficult, and attempting to do so may neither be practical nor desirable, particularly for women like Marta, Ana, and others in difficult conditions where ones quality of life is so dependent upon strong relationships a nd social networks base d on mutual trust and understanding. In order to better understand how various soci al networks and social capital operate in poor communities like those in rural Guatemala, it is also important to note that simply because individuals have access to social capital does not mean that they will be able to use it. As Cecilia Menjvar notes in her book Fragmented Ties the social context in which individuals live, as well as their social position dictate the quality an d quantity of resources they have available. Menjvar notes that the kinds of resources that peopl e have access to is of great importance, as

PAGE 57

57 this access determines if and how well they will be able to mobilize their social capital. Thus, if individuals do not have access to desirable good s and information (or to people who control them), their ties, no matter how strong, may not yield any benefits (2000: 149). Therefore, while women farmers in Guatemala may have strong social ties, their ability to access the social and financial resources necessary to combat e nvironmental problems in their area is severely limited by structural factors lik e impoverishment and limited opport unities for the upward social mobility of poor women in Guatemala. As Menjv ar states, when all members of ones network live in highly constrained conditions, links to multip le social fields that could create social capital are practically non-existent (156). For women farmers in Guatemala, then, m obilizing locally to combat environmental degradation may be necessary, but it is not sufficient. In order to break the cycle of increasing deforestation and the myriad other problems a ssociated with it, th e women in Acatenango, Comalapa, and Itzapa, made collective decisions in their various groups to seek outside help from a transnational organization, the Alliance fo r International Reforest ation (AIR). In her book Latina Activists Across Borders (2007) feminist scholar Milagros Pea stresses the importance that both local and transnational ne tworking has for womens organizations, noting that transnational organizing serv es to not only link local struggles to larger movements, but can also allow disadvantaged populati ons to have access to resources they may not otherwise have. As the women in this study explained, they made the decision to work with AIR out of necessity, as they did not have the financial, social, or t echnical resources necessary to effectively address environmental problems in their communities. As their comments illustrate, the decision to work with AIR was primarily based in their concern fo r protecting the future of not only their families but their larger communities as well.

PAGE 58

58 The Environment and the Family Like the women participating in the Chipko movement in India, the women farmers who participated in this study were concerned with how environmental degradation in their communities would affect their abilities to provi de food for their families. When asked what motivated them to work with AIR, many women c ited their concern with pr otecting the future of their children. This point was strongly empha sized by the women in Acatenango and Comalapa, the communities that were most heavily impacted by Hurricane Stan and the resulting mudslides. When observing the hillsides that were washed aw ay by Stan, it is striking to note the differences between well-forested slopes and those that had b een deforested. In the areas where there had been few or no trees, the ground appears to have opened up completely; th ere is either only soil or a deep crevasse where, as many women indicated, families crops used to be (see Figure 5-1). Figure 5-1. Eroded areas and forested areas of a hillside, post-Hurricane Stan. This is near Acatenango, where the trees ar e nearly three years old. Note how the forested areas of the hillside have held, while othe r areas of the hillside have collapsed.

PAGE 59

59 A few of the women had crops that were wash ed away by the mudslides, with devastating effects. Doa Santiaga in Acatenango, says that: After Stan, there were several families w ho lost everything, everything. We were all affected, of course, but some of us we re not as badly affected as others. I know for me, it is because I plant trees with my crops, and I thank God that they saved my field. If they had not, I, too, would have lost everything, and my family would have nothing to eat. Santiaga goes on to emphasize how the greatest devastation that the mudslides caused was the destruction of so many families milpa plots: People come here and think Oh no, so many people lost their homes and they donate clothe s, or money, or whatever. But they do not understand that the biggest problem is that we lo st our food! All these hills that are washed away, those were the crops, the food of many fa milies, many families. Like Santiaga, Doa Emelia is concerned for the well-being of her own family and others. Emelia says that she is devastated by the pain that other families are going through, and while some of her crops were damaged during Hurricane Stan, she is convinced that the trees help ed to protect the majority of them. She says, I thank God that my fields we re saved. Now more than ever my husband and I understand the importance of planting trees with our crops. It is si mple: if there are no trees, then there are no crops, and no food fo r ourselves or our families. Thus, for women in both Acatenango and Coma lapa the destruction of Hurricane Stan continues to serve as a grim, da ily reminder of why they work with AIR. In Comalapa, Doa Lourdes contends that her crops were saved fr om Stan because of the trees she planted around them. While AIR has only been working with fa rmers in Comalapa for two years, Lourdes has been planting trees with her crops for much longe r, and says that it was through her prodding that other women in the area sought out AIRs help. She says,

PAGE 60

60 Where we live, it is difficult and dangerous to farm. It is very steep here, and even a little bit of rain can wash the soil away. It is foolish to not use trees to protect the soil; this is the way my family has always done things. Other families do the same, but many do not, and it is foolish. I do not understand why people do not want to take care of their future. Do they not understand that it is not only themselves they have to worry about, but their children and their grandchildren? Lourdes goes on to say that she and the other wo men who work with her try to help the other families whose crops were destroyed by Hurricane St an, but that it is difficult to do so, because they have barely enough to feed their own families. The difficu lties of this situation have motivated Lourdes and others to work even hard er to improve their situation. Lourdes says, Sometimes, when I think about how difficult li fe here is for so many people, I get angry, because no one should have to struggle like this. This anger is what has motivated me to work with AIR, because I have such a strong desire that our situation can improve, and it must improve, for ourselves and for our children. Doa Sofia echoes this sentiment, noting that We have many difficulties here [in Comalapa], but of course we cannot lose hope. In our struggles, we have found strength. We have to be strong, for our families and our communities. It is the only way to survive. For women like Lourde s and Sofia, the social and environmental injustices that have caused such difficulties fo r theirs and others families have motivated the women to work that much harder to ameliorate the problems faced by their communities. For them, the decision to work with AIR was motivat ed by necessity, by the need to survive, as Sofia notes. For these women, transnational organizing through their work with the NGO has become a crucial part of the struggle for su rvival in the highlands of Guatemala. Gender Differences Another interesting theme to emerge from th e interviews was some womens assertions that their concerns regarding the environment we re distinctly different from those of their husbands or other men in the communities. D oa Erelena in Itzapa no tes how her husband, who

PAGE 61

61 is a construction worker, initially made fun of the group of women when they decided to seek AIRs help. She says that, At first, when we first started working with AIR, he would always laugh when I told him about planting trees. He would say Oh, we had to cut down many trees today, so you and your friends better go pl ant some more. But now, after five years, our crops have doubled. And a nei ghbor of ours, after Stan, lost nearly 300 pounds of beans because he did not have any trees with his fields He, too, used to make fun of us. Now, he doe s not laugh, and neither does my husband. Doa Marta, also from Itzapa, similarly notes how men and women treat the environment differently. Like Erelenas husband, Doa Martas husband wa s skeptical about the womens decision to work with AIR. According to Mart a, despite considerable improvements in their crop yields since she began planting with tr ees, her husband still fails to acknowledge how important the trees are. She says, He just sees the trees as firewood, and ev en now, after our crops have more than doubled, he still asks me why I bother to plant trees. It makes me furious, and I reply, Why do I bother? I bother to plant tr ees because I have a family, because I have children to feed, and because I care a bout their future. I want them to have food, and I want them to have clean air, and water, and hope. But he always thinks so negatively, and it is so difficult to make him understand that the trees are more than tools; they are our future. Thus, for the husbands of some women in It zapa, trees and the environment have only utilitarian value as tools to construct or c ook with. In other commun ities, women also noted how men and women approached fa rming with different attitudes. In Comalapa, many of the men in the community are employed at large pl antations nearby, working to grow export crops such as snow peas and cabbage. Many of thes e men are required by the plantation owners to spray the crops with chemical pesticides on a regular basis, and some men use the same pesticides on their own milpa crops. One woma n in Comalapa tells a story of how she was angered when her husband brought home pesticides to use on their own crops. She says, I looked at him, and I told him, I have watche d you, ever since you began working there [on the

PAGE 62

62 plantation], ten years ago, and you have become more and more sick each year. And now you want me to use the same poisons that are maki ng you sick to grow food for your whole family? I refused. However, it was only when her husband spoke with a health care worker in the city that he became convinced that spraying his milpa might be detrim ental not only to his own health but the health of his family as well. While thei r family does not use pestic ides on their milpa, the husband continues to use them in his daily work at the plantation. Other women whose husbands worked on plantations, farming for wages, also noted similar differences in attitudes towards farming and the environment. When asked about these differences, some women noted that for the men saw the land as having only economic value, as a source of income. As Doa Clementina in Acatenango notes, Yes, we have to make a living from the la nd. But we also live with the land, with the environment. When we farm for our families, we recognize this, that we must protect the environment for our future. I do not think my husband is able to see this, because where he works, they are taught to farm in ways that are bad for themselves and the environment, with no consideration for the future, only for money. Thus, while women subsistence farmers recognize that farmwork is the only way for many rural families to secure an income, many also recognize that the land has more than mere utilitarian value, and must be protected and preserved as a resource for the health and well-being of present and future generations alike. Many women expr essed the recognition that the health of the environment is inextricably linked to the health a nd nourishment of their fam ilies, and that if it is neglected, the future of th eir children and community is similarly jeopardized. The women who shared farming responsibilitie s with their husbands, however, noted that their husbands not only supported but encouraged th em to work with AIR. Doa Lourdes, in Comalapa, notes that when she told her husband of the groups decision to work with AIR, he was very interested and wanted to learn more about the organization. He accompanied some

PAGE 63

63 of the women on their first trip to Chimaltenango to contact AIR. Lourdes says that, Everyone in my family knows the difficulties we face, and how life here can be a struggle. My husband and I both want the best for our family, and we want a future for our children. The work we do with AIR helps us to realize this future. Doa Ana, also from Comalapa, also i ndicates that her husband, Don Eduardo, was supportive of the womens decision to work with AIR. She says that, On many days that [my husband and I] work ed in the fields, we would talk about the problems of our community, about th e deforestation and the mudslides, about how it was becoming more and more difficult every year to grow crops here. We were concerned, for ourselves and for our children. We had heard about AIR through friends of ours, and when I told hi m that we [the women] wanted to go to Chimaltenango, he was very joyful. Ana goes on to say that since the group has been working with AIR, Eduardo has been very active in assisting the women with gr owing and nurturing the tr ees in the community nursery, which is near Anas house. She says that Now he helps take care of the trees in the nursery. He treats them like his own children. He is very tender with them, because he says that to care for them is to care for his own children. Lourdes and Anas comments suggest that for the husbands who share farmwork with their wi ves, the protection and preservation of the environment is of utmost importance, as it is linked to the protection of their own families. The Environment and the Community Many women emphasized that their motivation to work with AIR stemmed not only from concern with their family but with the wider community. Many of the families in these areas depend upon farming for their daily nourishment. Thus, for many women, the well-being and survival of not only their own families but thei r communities is linked to the health of the surrounding environment. As women in Acaten ango constructed many of the environmental problems in their area as community-wide problem s, many of the same women noted that their

PAGE 64

64 decision to seek out AIRs help was a decision th at would benefit the en tire community. Doa Emelia, whose friend lost many of her crops becaus e of Stan and is now in danger of losing her house, says that No one should ha ve to experience the problems that so many in Acatenango are experiencing. We realized this, and we realized that if we want ed to improve our situation, we had to ask for help. Doa Clementina, also fr om Acatenango, agrees. She says that, The work that we do here today with AIR gives all of us hope for a better future, with clean air, clean water, and strong crops. Thus, the motivation behind the womens decision to work with AIR is rooted in a concern for preserving the health and safety of not one or two families but all the members of the community. Similar sentiments were expressed by women in Comalapa and Itzapa. As nearly all the women in this study are lifelong residents of th eir communities, they ha ve close ties with many other individuals and families in the area. Many women spoke of their close relationships with others in the community, and as one women in Comalapa state d, We may not all be friends here, but we do care for each other. There are no strangers here The concern with protecting the community is therefore a heartfelt, sincere, and emotional one. Another woman in Comalapa says that, This work that we do [with AIR], we rec ognize that it is not only for us, for our families, it is for all of us, for everyone who lives here. I hope that more and more people here see the importance of the work we do, that it is not selfish work, but that we work for everyone. We all li ve here, many of us were children here together, and we have helped each other in the past. We must continue to help each other now, today. Doa Marta in Itzapa expresse s a similar sentiment when ta lking about working on behalf of the community: Because we ar e all close here, because we all know the troubles and joys and weaknesses and strengths of our town, we are concerned for its future. We all live here together, and we share the same troubles. Therefore, in order to overcome these troubles, we must work

PAGE 65

65 together. Another woman in Co malapa emphasizes that the work she does with AIR is out of a sense of spiritual responsibility to both the earth and the people of the community. She says that, It is difficult to live here, yes, but it is still our home, and it is s acred to us. Not only the trees, but the people, too. To care for the earth and fo r each other is to care fo r God. Thus, as these women explain, their sense of re sponsibility to their communiti es has emotional, social, and spiritual components. As they act as mothers a nd nurturers for the member s of their families, the women also act as providers for various member s of the community thr ough the environmental work they do. Many women describe how connect ed all members of the community are, and see how the work of one can benefit many. Doa Fi delia from Itzapa uses a beautiful analogy to describe this connectedness. She says, We are all like branches on a great tree, rooted in all that we share. When there is a sickness in the so il, then we are all affected. The concerns and troubles of one are the concerns of many. As the women have also demonstrated, the solutions and strength of one (or a few) can also be the strength of many. Conclusion The action that the women in this study took to mobilize both locally and transnationally was action they took on behalf of their families and communities. Recognizing that they had little chance of securing the economic and edu cational resources necessary to implement methods of agroforestry in their fields, the wome n decided to seek the help of a transnational NGO. As the women attest, this decision was made collectively, out of an interest of protecting the food base that feeds not only their own fa milies but their entire communities, which many women described as being like extended families. Interestingly, it is becoming evident in Itzap a, the community that has been working the longest with AIR, that the work the wome n have done on behalf of their families and communities has also benefited the women personally as well. Women have been working with

PAGE 66

66 AIR in Itzapa for nearly seven years, and have seen marked improvements in both the quality and quantity of crops that their fields produce. Both Marta an d Erelena report that their crop yields have nearly doubled sin ce they first began planting tree s in their fields with AIRs assistance. Now, the women have enough crops to f eed their families, with some left over to sell for profit. Both women have started advertising their crops within Itzapa, highlighting the fact that they are grown organically, w ithout chemical fertilizers or pesticides. Erelena notes that the demand for organically grown crops is increasin g, as there have been many reported cases of people becoming sick from crops sprayed with chemicals. With the money they have made from se lling their crops, both women have started working with other women in their group to st art a business of making and selling herbal shampoos, conditioners, and soaps. These products are made from plants that the women grow with their crops, including aloe, sebilla, and man zanilla. Marta reports th at the business is doing very well and has helped to supplement the incomes of the families of the women who are involved with it (see Figure 5-2). Figure 5-2. Label of manzanilla sham poo made by group of women in Itzapa.

PAGE 67

67 Thus, through the work they have done on behalf of their families and communities, the women of Itzapa have also empowered themselv es as well. Although the women of Acatenango and Comalapa have not yet seen all the fruits of the labor they do on behalf of their families and communities, their work has nonetheless proven be neficial in protecting both the environment and their food sources. The stories of these wo men are testament to th e power of collective action in the face of seemingl y insurmountable obstacles.

PAGE 68

68 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION In his article Surviving the Conquest, Guatemalan scholar W. George Lovell describes how Guatemala has been subject to at least three cy cles of conquest from the colonial period through modern times. Broadly, these cycles include the conquest by imperial Spain, the conquest by local and international capitalism, and the conquest by state terror during the civil war of the latter twentieth centur y. At the heart of these various cycles has been a struggle over land rights (1988). In the centuries from coloni zation to globalization, the conquest of land has left the rural poor of Guatemala, the vast majori ty of whom are indigenous, with small plots of land in Guatemalas highlands. Here, poor in digenous and ladina/o farmers must somehow carve out a living, farming to feed themselves in difficult, unforgiving te rrain. I would like to suggest that now, poor farmers in rural Guatemal a are facing a fourth cy cle of conquest of both land and resources, as the increasing globali zation of capitalism has led to unprecedented environmental degradation in Third World natio ns such as Guatemala. The spread of multinational agribusinesses like Chiquita, Starbuck s, and others, assisted by neoliberal reforms instituted by the WTO, the IMF, and the Worl d Bank, has continued to force poor farmers off their land, which is then used by the multinationals and their contra ctors to grow export crops. Forced off their lands, small scale farmers often relocate to the highlands, where they slash and burn trees to make way for their subsistence plot s. This process has become so widespread throughout Guatemala as well as Honduras and Nicaragua that st udies have found that Central America has lost the greatest percentage of forest cover in recent years of any world region (Carr 2003). Within this broad global and hist orical picture, I have tried to situate the stories of various Maya and ladina women in rural Guatemala, usin g a socialist ecofeminist analysis to show how

PAGE 69

69 their role as subsistence farmers has been imp acted by the environmenta l degradation occurring within their communities. It is true that a review of history and theory is necessary in understanding the progression of en vironmental degradation, and how this degradation affects individuals differentially according to intersecti ons of nationality, race, gender, and class. However, it is only through the wo rds and stories of people like D oas Marta, Santiaga, Lourdes, and others that we are able to see how these gl obal, historical processe s are played out in the everyday lives of individuals. Through these stor ies, we are able to see how deforestation, soil erosion, overuse of pesticides, and other problem s have impacted numerous aspects of life for these women and their families and communities. Deforestation has not only emotional but material consequences for these women farmers, as many express a sense of sadness and loss as more and more trees are cut in their communities. Additionally, as more trees are cut to make way for subsistence plots, these women must wa lk farther for firewood, and must also contend with the dangers of soil erosion and mudslides from deforested hillsides. In the various stories presente d here, however, we find not only a message of urgency but a message of hope and courage as well, as these women have taken it upon themselves to mobilize to fight the environmental degradation that threatens the well-being of their families and communities. As their role as farmers has made them more aware of the environmental problems in their various locales, it has also made them aware of the need to act to address these problems. Thus, these women have mobilized bo th locally and transnationally to secure the social, financial, and technical resources to stop and revers e environmentally destructive processes. As Vandana Shiva, Ivone Gebara, an d other ecofeminist scholars have pointed out, for women in Third World nations like Guatemala, mobilizing on behalf of the environment is

PAGE 70

70 more than a matter of tepid concern, but a matter of survival motivated in the need to protect a food base that nurtures the women, thei r families, and the larger community. Future, more large scale studies of this na ture that examine womens relationship with their environment in other regions of the globe could be helpful in de veloping both theory and policy that takes into account how historical processes of gl obalization and environmental degradation affect individuals diffe rently according to not only thei r gender, but their race, class, and nationality as well. Ecofemin ist theory in particular can bene fit from such studies, as it has often been criticized for being overly theore tical and lacking in em pirical evidence; for homogenizing women as a group and failing to take into account i ssues of difference; and for failing to take into account issues of globalizat ion as an extension of capitalist-patriarchy (Agarwal 1992; Sydee and Beder 2001; Eaton an d Lorentzen 2003). With regards to policy, studies similar to this have already had an im pact, as the United Nations has held conferences and generated policy initiatives that highlight the links between womens roles as farmers and providers for their families and their roles as environmental protectors. One such report by the United Nations Division for the Advancemen t of Women (UNDAW), entitled Making Risky Environments Safer, was developed from th e 1995 UN Fourth World Conference on Women. From a review of numerous case studies from around the globe, it concl udes that women and womens empowerment are indeed central in the development of an integrated global social movement toward sustainable development (UNDAW 2004: 9). A dditionally, the United Nations major document on sustainable developm ent, Agenda 21, has been adopted by more than 178 nations and includes a chapter on the importance of linking womens empowerment to the improvement of local environments (UNEP 1992).

PAGE 71

71 However, scholarly research has only begun to reveal the nature of the complexities and potentialities that characteri ze the relationship between the environment and women throughout the world. This relationship is complex and dynami c, and varies according to nation, race, class, and a host of other social markers. The more we learn about these connections, however, the better equipped we can be to challenge the system of capitalist-patriarchy that is implicated in both the exploitation of women as well as the na tural world. As Doa Marta in Itzapa says, People must recognize this: that we are all conne cted, not only to each other, but to the natural world. When we learn to care for each other, to not take advantage of each other, for money or other reasons, only then can there be equality and peace. We women here, in Itzapa, and in many other places, I think, recognize this. Now we just have to teach everyone else.

PAGE 72

72 APPENDIX A GUIDING QUESTIONS (SPANISH) Preguntas 1. Cuanto tiempo lleva viviendo en su comunidad? 2. Cuanto tiempo lleva trabajando con su grupo de mujeres? 3. Siente usted que es importante que las muje res trabajen juntas? Por que o por que no? 4. Por que razn el grupo d ecidio trabajar con AIRES? 5. En su opinin, cuales son los problemas ambien tales mas grandes con la que su comunidad se escuentra? 6. En general, que tipo de dificultades han es tos problemas causado en su comunidad y a usted en particular? 7. Se considera usted la agricultora principal de la milpa de la familia? 8. Esta Casada? (Si contesta si, prosiga con preguntas 9 y 10. Si contesta no, salte a pregunta 11). 9. Su marido la ayuda con el trabajo que hace con AIRES? 10. Que tipo de actitud tiene su marido re specto al trabajo que hace con AIRES? 11. En general, cual es la actitud de los hombres en la comunidad respecto al trabajo que hace con AIRES? 12. En su trabajo con AIRES, ha usted vist o algun benefico? Que tipo de beneficios? Muchisimas gracias por todo!

PAGE 73

73 APPENDIX B GUIDING QUESTIONS (ENGLISH) Questions 1. How long have you been living in this community? 2. How long have you been working with this group of women? 3. Do you feel it is important for wo men to work together? Why or why not? 4. Why did they group decide to work with AIR? 5. In your opinion, what are the biggest environmental problems facing your community? 6. What sort of difficulties have these problems caused your community in general, and you in particular? 7. Do you consider yourself the primary farmer of your family's milpa? 8. Are you married? If yes, ask questions 9 and 10. If no, go on to question 11. 9. Does your husband help with the work you do with AIR? 10. What sort of attitude does your hu sband have about your work with AIR? 11. In general, what is the attitude of men in the community about the work you do with AIR? 12. Have you seen any benefits from your wo rk with AIR? What type of benefits? Thank you for your time and help!

PAGE 74

74 LIST OF REFERENCES Agarwal, Bina. 1992. The Gender and Envi ronment Debate: Lessons from India. Feminist Studies 18 (1): 119-158. American Red Cross. 2005. Hurricane Stan: Mexico and Central America. American Red Cross Annual Report Washington, D.C.: The Ameri can National Red Cross. 3-4. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. The Forms of Capital. Pp. 241-258 in Handbook of Theory and Research of the Sociology of Education, edited by J.C. Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press. Brunk, Samuel and Ben Fallaw, eds. 2006. Heroes and Hero Cults in Latin America. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Bulbeck, Chilla. 2006. Fracturing Binarisms: First and Third Worlds. Pp. 37-41 in Beyond Borders, edited by P.S. Rothenberg. New York: Worth. Carr, David L. 2003. The Event Ecology of Deforestati on on the Agricultural Fron tier: The Sierra de Lacondon National Park, Guatemala. Paper pres ented at the Association of American Geographers Annual Conference, Los Angeles. Comisin para el Esclarecim iento Histrico (CEH). 1999. Guatemala Memoria del Silencio. Guatemala City: CEH. Churchill, Ward. 1998. A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to Present. San Francisco: City Lights. Danner, Mark. 1994. The Massacre at El Mozote: A Parable of the Cold War. New York: Vintage. Deere, Carmen Diana. 2005. The Feminization of Agriculture? Economic Restructuring in Rural Latin America New York: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Deere, Carmen Diana and Magdalena Leon. 2001. Empowering Women: Land and Property Rights in Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Eaton, Heather. 2005. Introducing Ecofeminist Theologies. New York: T and T Clark International. ------. 2003. Can Ecofeminism Withstand Co rporate Globalization? Pp. 23-37 in Ecofeminism and Globalization: Exploring Cu lture, Context, and Religion, edited by H. Eaton and L.A. Lorentzen New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Eaton, Heather and Lois Ann Lorentzen. 2003. Introduction. Pp. 1-8 in Ecofeminism and Globalization: Exploring Cu lture, Context, and Religion, edited by H Eaton and L.A. Lorentzen New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

PAGE 75

75 Eaton, Heather and Lois Ann Lorentzen, eds. 2003. Ecofeminism and Globaliz ation: Exploring Culture, Context, and Religion. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Falla, Ricardo. 1992. Massacres in the Jungle. Guatemala City: Editorial Universitario. Gebara, Ivone. 1999. Longing for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Fischer, Edward F. 2004. The Janus Face of Globalization: Economic Production and Cultural Reproduction in Highland Guatemala. Pp. 257-290 in Pluralizing Ethnography, edited by J.M. Watanabe and E.F. Fischer. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press. Fischer, Edward F. and Carol Hendrickson. 2003. Tecpan Guatemala: A Modern Maya Town in Global and Local Context Boulder: Westview. Hamilton, Nora and Norma Stoltz Chinchilla. 2001. Seeking Community in a Global City: Guatemalans and Salvadorans in Los Angeles. Philadelphia: Temple. Hamilton, Sarah and Edward F. Fischer. 2003. N on-Traditional Agricultural Exports in Highland Guatemala: Understandings of Risk and Perceptions of Change Latin American Research Review 38: 82-110. Hough, Richard, John Kelly, and Stephen Miller. 1982. Tierra y trabajo en Guatemala: Un evaluacin. Guatemala City: Ediciones Papiro. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis New York: Cambridge University Press. Kleysen, Brenda and Fabiola Campillo. 1996. Productoras de Alimentos en 18 Paises de America Latina y el Caribe. San Jose, Costa Rica: Instituto In teramericano de Cooperacion para la Agricultura. La Feber, Walter. 1993. Inevitable Revolutions: the United States in Central America. New York: W.W. Norton. Lovell, W. George. 1988. Surviving Conquest: The Maya of Guatemala in Historical Perspective. Latin American Research Review 23: 25-57. Lutz, Christopher H. and W. George Lovell. 2000. Survivors on the Move: Maya Migration in Time and Space. Pp 200-210 in The Maya Diaspora: Guatemalan Roots, New American Lives, edited by J. Loucky and M.M. Moors. Phil adelphia: Temple University Press. Menchu, Rigoberta. 1984. I, Rigoberta Menchu: An Indian Woman in Guatemala. London: Verso.

PAGE 76

76 Menjvar, Cecelia. 2000. Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Mies, Maria. 1986. Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale. London: Zed. Mies, Maria and Vandana Shiva. (1993). Ecofeminism. London: Zed. Minh-ha, Trinh T. 1989. Woman, Native, Other. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. 1986. Under Western Ey es: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. Pp. 17-42 in Feminism Without Borders: D ecolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity, edited by C.T. Mohanty. Durham: Duke University Press. ------. 1997. Women Workers and Capitalist Scri pts: Ideologies of Domination, Common Interests, and the Politics of Solidarity. Pp. 3-29 in Feminist Geneal ogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures, edited by M.J Aexander and C.T. Mohanty. New York: Routledge. ------. 2003. Under Western Eyes Revisited: Fe minist Solidarity Through Anticapitalist Struggles. Pp. 221-237 in Feminism Without Borders: De colonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity, edited by C.T. Mohanty. Durham: Duke University Press. Montejo, Victor. 1999. Voices From Exile: Violence and Surviv al in Modern Maya History. Norman, OK: Oklahoma University Press. Naples, Nancy. 2002. Changing the Terms. Pp. 1-14 in Womens Activism and Globalization: Linking Local Str uggles and Transnational Politics, edited by N. Naples and M. Desai. New York: Routledge. Nash, June and Maria Patric ia-Fernndez-Kelley, eds. 1983. Women, Men, and the International Division of Labor. New York: State University of New York Press. Nelson, Diane M. 1999. A Finger in the Wound: Body Polit ics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). 1998. Health in the Americas, Volume II. Washington, D.C.: World Health Organization. Pearce, Jenny. 1986. Promised Land: Peasant Rebellion in Chalatenango, El Salvador. London: Latin American Bureau. Pea, Milagros. 2007. Latina Activists Across Borders: Womens Grassroots Organizing in Mexico and Texas. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

PAGE 77

77 Philipose, Pamela. 1989. Women Act: Women and Environmental Protection in India. Pp. 67-75 in Healing the Wounds: The Pr omise of Ecofeminism, edited by J. Plant. Toronto: Between the Lines. Ress, Mary Judith. 2006. Ecofeminism in Latin America. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 1996. Women Healing Earth: Thir d World Women on Ecology, Feminism, and Religion. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. ------. 2003. Foreword: Ecofeminism and the Cha llenges of Globalization. Pp. vii-xii in Ecofeminism and Globalization: Explor ing Culture, Context, and Religion, edited by H Eaton and L.A. Lorentzen New York: Rowman and Littlefield. ------. 2005. Integrating Ecofeminism, Gl obalization, and World Religions. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Sanford, Victoria. Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Shiva, Vandana. 1989. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development. London: Zed. ------. 2000. War Against Nature and th e People of the South. Pp. 91-125 in Views From the South, edited by S. Anderson. Chicago: Food First Books. Stone, Michael C. 2000. Becoming Belizean: Maya Id entity and the Politics of Nation. Pp. 90-100 in The Maya Diaspora: Guatemalan Roots, New American Lives, edited by J. Loucky and M. M. Moors. Philadelphia: Temple. Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sturgeon, Noel. 1997. Ecofeminist Natures: Race, Gender, Feminist Theory, and Political Action. New York: Routledge. Sydee, Jasmin and Sharon Beder. 2001. Eco feminism and Globalization: A Critical Appraisal. Democracy and Nature 7 (2):281-302. Tanaka, Laura Saldivar and Hannah Wittman. 2003. Backgrounder Part I: The Agrarian Question in Guatemala Oakland, CA: Land Research Action Network. Torres Rivas, Edelberto. 1985. Report on the C ondition of Central American Refugees and Migrants. Washingt on, D.C.: CIPRA. Unitarian Universalist Service Committee ( UUSC). 2005. Hurricane Stan Strikes: Floods, mudslides cause death and despair in Guatemala. UUSC Annual Report. Washington, D.C.: American Red Cross Press.

PAGE 78

78 United Nations Development Program. 2000. Human Development Report 1999. Oxford: Oxford University Press. United Nations Division for the Advancemen t of Women (UNDAW). 2004. Making Risky Environments Safer. New York: UNDAW/DESA Press. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1992. Agenda 21: United Nations Program of Action from Rio. New York: United Nations Press. ------. 2006. Planet in Peril: Atlas of Current Th reats to People and the Environment. New York: Earthprint. Warren, Karren. 2000. Ecofeminist Philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Weyland, Kurt. 2004. Assessing Latin American Neo liberalism: Introduction to a Debate. Latin American Research Review 39:143-49.

PAGE 79

79 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Rachel Hallum is a Ph.D. candidate in sociolog y at the University of Florida. Her main areas of interest are gender, wo mens studies, race relations, and Latin American studies. She has been working with the Guatemalan-based non-governmental organization, the Alliance for International Reforestation, since 1992.