IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i11p1145-d82321.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Food Flow Data to Assess Sustainability: Land Use Displacement and Regional Decoupling in Quintana Roo, Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Millones

    (Department of Geography, University of Mary Washington, 1301 College Ave, Fredericksburg, VA 23219, USA)

  • Benoit Parmentier

    (Sustainability Solutions Initiative, Mitchell Center, 5710 Norman Smith Hall, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, USA)

  • John Rogan

    (Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, 950 Main St. Worcester, MA 01610, USA)

  • Birgit Schmook

    (Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Chetumal, Av. Centenario km 5.5, Sin Número Exterior, Colonia Pacto Obrero Campesino, CP 77014, Quintana Roo, Mexico)

Abstract

Food flow data provide unique insights into the debates surrounding the sustainability of land based production and consumption at multiple scales. Trade flows disguise the spatial correspondence of production and consumption and make their connection to land difficult. Two key components of this spatial disjuncture are land use displacement and economic regional decoupling. By displacing the environmental impact associated with food production from one region to another, environmental trajectories can falsely appear to be sustainable at a particular site or scale. When regional coupling is strong, peripheral areas where land based production occurs are strongly linked and proximate to consumption centers, and the environmental impact of production activities is visible. When food flows occur over longer distances, regional coupling weakens, and environmental impact is frequently overlooked. In this study, we present an analysis of a locally collected food flow dataset containing agricultural and livestock products transported to and from counties in Quintana Roo (QRoo). QRoo is an extensively forested border state in southeast Mexico, which was fully colonized by the state and non-native settlers only in the last century and now is home to some of the major tourist destinations. To approximate land displacement and regional decoupling, we decompose flows to and from QRoo by (1) direction; (2) product types and; (3) scale. Results indicate that QRoo is predominantly a consumer state: incoming flows outnumber outgoing flows by a factor of six, while exports are few, specialized, and with varied geographic reach (Yucatan, south and central Mexico, USA). Imports come predominantly from central Mexico. Local production in QRoo accounts for a small portion of its total consumption. In combining both subsets of agricultural and livestock products, we found that in most years, land consumption requirements were above 100% of the available land not under conservation in QRoo, suggesting unsustainable rates of land consumption in a ´business as usual´ scenario. We found evidence of economic regional decoupling at the state level.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Millones & Benoit Parmentier & John Rogan & Birgit Schmook, 2016. "Using Food Flow Data to Assess Sustainability: Land Use Displacement and Regional Decoupling in Quintana Roo, Mexico," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-20, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:11:p:1145-:d:82321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/11/1145/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/11/1145/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Lutz & L. Prieto & W.C. Sanderson, 2000. "Population, Development, and Environment on the Yucatan Peninsula: From Ancient Maya to 2030," Working Papers rr00014, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. Schneider, Laura & Geoghegan, Jacqueline, 2006. "Land Abandonment in an Agricultural Frontier After a Plant Invasion: The Case of Bracken Fern in Southern Yucatán, Mexico," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 167-177, April.
    3. Peter Klepeis & Colin Vance, 2003. "Neoliberal Policy and Deforestation in Southeastern Mexico: An Assessment of the PROCAMPO Program," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(3), pages 221-240, July.
    4. Klaus Hubacek & Kuishuang Feng & Bin Chen & Shigemi Kagawa, 2016. "Linking Local Consumption to Global Impacts," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(3), pages 382-386, June.
    5. Angelsen, Arild, 2007. "Forest cover change in space and time : combining the von Thunen and forest transition theories," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4117, The World Bank.
    6. Bruckner, Martin & Fischer, Günther & Tramberend, Sylvia & Giljum, Stefan, 2015. "Measuring telecouplings in the global land system: A review and comparative evaluation of land footprint accounting methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 11-21.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. O. Ravaka Andriamihaja & Florence Metz & Julie G. Zaehringer & Manuel Fischer & Peter Messerli, 2019. "Land Competition under Telecoupling: Distant Actors’ Environmental versus Economic Claims on Land in North-Eastern Madagascar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chris D. Arnot & Martin K. Luckert & Peter C. Boxall, 2011. "What Is Tenure Security? Conceptual Implications for Empirical Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 297-311.
    2. Araujo, Claudio & Bonjean, Catherine Araujo & Combes, Jean-Louis & Combes Motel, Pascale & Reis, Eustaquio J., 2009. "Property rights and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2461-2468, June.
    3. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2021. "The international division of labor and embodied working time in trade for the US, the EU and China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Yergeau, Marie-Eve & Boccanfuso, Dorothée & Goyette, Jonathan, 2017. "Reprint of: Linking conservation and welfare: A theoretical model with application to Nepal," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 229-243.
    5. Schielein, Johannes & Börner, Jan, 2018. "Recent transformations of land-use and land-cover dynamics across different deforestation frontiers in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 81-94.
    6. Sims, Katharine R.E., 2010. "Conservation and development: Evidence from Thai protected areas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 94-114, September.
    7. Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez, 2023. "Attributes influencing responsible tourism consumer choices: Sustainable local food and drink, health-related services, and entertainment," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 14(2), pages 645-686, June.
    8. Julien Wolfersberger & Serge Garcia & Philippe Delacote, 2013. "An empirical analysis of the cumulative nature of deforestation," Working Papers 1303, Chaire Economie du climat.
    9. Bruckner, Martin & Giljum, Stefan & Fischer, Günther & Tramberend, Sylvia & Börner, Jan, 2018. "The global cropland footprint of the non-food bioeconomy," Discussion Papers 271062, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    10. Wehkamp, Johanna & Aquino, André & Fuss, Sabine & Reed, Erik W., 2015. "Analyzing the perception of deforestation drivers by African policy makers in light of possible REDD+ policy responses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 7-18.
    11. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    12. Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Johannes Többen & Konstantin Stadler & Thomas Kastner & Michaela C. Theurl & Karl-Heinz Erb & Kjartan-Steen Olsen & Kirsten S. Wiebe & Richard Wood, 2020. "Adding country resolution to EXIOBASE: impacts on land use embodied in trade," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.
    13. Raghavan, Roopali & Shrimali, Gireesh, 2015. "Forest cover increase in India: The role of policy and markets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 70-76.
    14. Schmook, Birgit & Vance, Colin, 2009. "Agricultural Policy, Market Barriers, and Deforestation: The Case of Mexico's Southern Yucatn," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1015-1025, May.
    15. Christopher B. Busch & Colin Vance, 2011. "The Diffusion of Cattle Ranching and Deforestation: Prospects for a Hollow Frontier in Mexico’s Yucatán," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 682-698.
    16. Alejandro López-Feldman, 2012. "Deforestación en México: Un análisis preliminar," Working Papers DTE 527, CIDE, División de Economía.
    17. Pascale COMBES MOTEL & Jean-Louis COMBES & Catherine ARAUJO BONJEAN & Claudio ARAUJO & Eustaquio J. REIS, 2010. "Does Land Tenure Insecurity Drive Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon?," Working Papers 201013, CERDI.
    18. Wu, Yu & Sills, Erin O., 2018. "The Evolving Relationship between Market Access and Deforestation on the Amazon Frontier," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274317, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Bruckner, Martin & Wood, Richard & Moran, Daniel & Kuschnig, Nikolas & Wieland, Hanspeter & Maus, Victor & Börner, Jan, 2019. "FABIO - The Construction of the Food and Agriculture Biomass Input-Output Model," Ecological Economic Papers 27, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    20. Tariq Ali & Bo Zhou & David Cleary & Wei Xie, 2022. "The Impact of Climate Change on China and Brazil’s Soybean Trade," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:11:p:1145-:d:82321. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.