Background

As early as 1990, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that the greatest single impact of climate change could be on human migration (Tegart, Sheldon, & Griffiths, 1990). Since then, the number of publications about the relationship between climate change and human mobility patterns has increased dramatically (Black, Bennett, Thomas, & Beddington, 2011; Laczko & Aghazarm, 2009; Piguet, 2013). In contrast, the number of empirical studies is still limited.

The Environmental Change and Forced Migration Scenarios (EACH-FOR) project (2007–2009) was the first large-scale empirical research project on environmentally induced migration: it consisted of 23 case studies in 6 regions of the world. One of the lessons learned from the project was that more research was needed to isolate independent climatic and environmental variables and find evidence to support policy around climate change, migration and displacement. Rainfall variability emerged as a common climatic stressor on rural livelihoods across most of the case studies (Warner, Ehrhart, de Sherbinin, Adamo, & Onn, 2009).

Based on the lessons learned from EACH-FOR, the Rainfalls project focuses on the relationship between rainfall variability and food security and how these factors interact with household decisions on mobility/migration among groups of people particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Aim

The Foresight report on Migration and Global Environmental Change shed light on two relatively understudied issues in the literature on climate change and migration.

First, it emphasized the importance of studying the specificities of mountain areas in order to understand the nexus between environmental change and migration in those areas (Kollmair & Banerjee, 2011). Second, it showed that future environmental change is equally likely to lead to an increase or a decrease in migration flows. In this context, those who might be willing but unable to move (“trapped”) will be extremely vulnerable (Foresight, 2011).

However, the Foresight report did only refer to few empirical studies on trapped populations. This empirical article aims at presenting data and insights on four Guatemalan mountain communities whose populations are exposed to the risk of becoming “trapped” in the near future in a place where they are extremely vulnerable to climate change.

In fact, in case of future natural disasters or climatic conditions which threaten the sustainability of local livelihoods, it is expected that migration will be vital for the survival of these populations. However, as this article shows, the profitability of in situ adaptation options is decreasing and combined with decreasing ex situ opportunities.

Rainfalls approach

The eight Rainfalls project case studies (Bangladesh, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Peru, Tanzania, Thailand and Vietnam) aim at enhancing understanding on how rainfall variability, food and livelihood security, and migration interact today in the research sites.

The guiding research question is: “Under what circumstances do households use migration as a risk-management strategy in relation to increasing rainfall variability and food insecurity?”

For a detailed description of the methodologies, including the household survey, a description of the participatory research approach (PRA) and the guiding questions for semi-structured expert interviews, please refer to the research protocol of the Rainfalls project (Rademacher-Schulz et al., 2012).

Site selection

The research site was selected through the following criteria:

• Background of variable rainy seasons and rainfall variability;

• Population highly vulnerable to rainfall variability (prevalence of rain-fed agricultural activities);

• Highly mountainous area whose farming zones are mostly located on soils of forest vocation, highly susceptible to erosion and degradation;

• High percentage of people living in conditions of poverty or extreme poverty;

• Previous evidence of seasonal and permanent migration.

Rainfall variability, food insecurity and migration in Cabricán, Guatemala

All authors

Andrea Milan & Sergio Ruano

https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2013.857589

Published online:

12 March 2014

Figure 1. Location of the research area (map prepared by Milan & Rossow).

Display full size

Research site

Fieldwork was conducted in August and September 2011 in four rural communities belonging to the municipality of Cabricán (region of Quetzaltenango): El Cerro, El Durazno, Quiquibaj and Buena Vista. The entire population of the research site belongs to the Mam ethnic group, and its mother tongue is also called Mam.

Cabricán is located 2,625 m above sea level (m.a.s.l.) on the Western Highlands of Guatemala (see Figure 1). In 2011, it had an estimated 25,085 inhabitants and its population is growing over time: in 1994, it amounted to 14,881 but it is expected to reach 30,000 by 2020 (Instituto Nacional de Estadística [INE], 1996, 2010). The municipality is divided into 6 aldeas (villages) and 27 caseríos (hamlets); 60% of its population lives in a rural area (INE, 2010).

The Human Development Index of Cabricán for 2002 was 0.64 (the national average is 0.7) and 84% of its population is poor (United Nations Development Programme, 2011). Cabricán is also highly vulnerable to chronic malnutrition: 70% of its school children face height retardation. The municipality has the 34th highest rate of stunting in Guatemala and very high nutritional vulnerability of children (Ministerio de Educación & Secretaría de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional, 2009).

The typical agricultural production sub-system in the research site is called milpa (maize field) and it is practiced by all households. Milpa is an association of maize (main crop), beans, piloy (a legume similar to and bigger than beans), lima beans and ayote (a variety of squash, cucurbiaceae). Maize is the only crop that follows a defined spatial order while the rest of the crops are sowed randomly. Currently, all households depend on rainfall for their agricultural production because there are no irrigation systems.

Cabricán's soil is steep, highly susceptible to erosion and characterized by low capacity of moisture absorption. The soil potential is for perennial crops, such as forests or pasturelands. This implies that annual crops face serious limitations and soils require intensive conservation practices such as terraces and level curves (Juarroz, 2004, p. 8).

Data collection

A rapid rural appraisal was conducted before the main fieldwork phase. The half-day activity consisted of open interviews regarding the study topic with male and female members of the El Cerro community (Ruano & Juarez, 2008).

Data were gathered through a multi-method approach, combining 136 household surveys, 17 interviews with local, regional and national experts, and 36 PRA sessions, involving 298 people (Table 1).

The selection of households to be surveyed was done through a two-stage random sampling. Each sector of each village was assigned a percentage of surveys corresponding to its percentage of the total population. Within each sector, households were selected randomly.¹

The research team planned to conduct 150 household surveys. However, due to theoretical saturation, sampling was reviewed during fieldwork to reduce the sample size to 130 (without compromising sample distribution and randomness). The final number of 136 surveys depended on updated data on population per village which the team was only able to access during fieldwork.²

In the case of PRA, all exercises (with the exception of the timeline which was conducted with men only) were conducted in parallel with men and women working in two separate groups. Moreover, specific focus group discussions to learn about the views of the younger generation on rainfall variability, food security and migration were conducted with young men and young women.

Limitations

The research team faced several limitations. Among them were the following:

• The study was only conducted in the area of origin of migrants;

• The research site is located between three meteorological stations but none of them within few kilometres from the area, which limits the possibility to use meteorological data for the analysis;

• The year before the research took place was characterized by heavy rains, due to extreme climatic events (Agatha and Frank tropical storms); therefore, people had in their mind more vividly the high rain events leaving the drought events in a secondary place;

• The team faced the reluctance of the population to mention migrants in their families³;

• Sectors 4 and 5 of Quiquibaj (for a total of 46 households) were not surveyed because of inaccessibility due to their distance, topography and dispersion of the houses. This meant eight surveys which were supposed to be done in those sectors were subsequently randomly redistributed among the other three sectors of Quiquibaj.

Socio-economic context

Exactly three-fifths of survey respondents indicated their income and they all fall below the poverty line: 88% of respondents declared to have an income per capita below US$1 (extreme poverty line) while only 12% have it between US$1 and US$2 (poverty line).⁴ However, survey respondents might not have accounted for all their income. Moreover, subsistence food production is the most important source of food but it is not reflected in household income.

The average land holding size is 0.54 ha and only 6% of the households farm more than one hectare of land. The communities are quite homogeneous in terms of socio-economic conditions and land tenure. However, there is a clear difference between old and new houses; all the latter have been built thanks to remittances from one or more persons living in the USA.

All households surveyed practice the rain-fed milpa agricultural system which provides them with one yearly harvest. Agriculture is the most important economic activity for 66% of the households surveyed; weaving is the most important for 22% of them while 5% mentioned other activities (and 7% did not reply).

Outcomes of PRA sessions show a clear division of labour within households: men are responsible for most agricultural activities, while women take care of livestock and the housework. Both men and women are engaged in textile-related work.

Rainfall patterns

The average annual rainfall for the 1977/2010 period recorded in the closest meteorological station (Labor Ovalle, 27 km away from Cabricán) is 880.6 mm/year. Figure 2 shows that rainfall patterns in the research site, similar to the rest of the country, are bimodal, with peaks in June and September, the latter being the wettest month.

Rainfall variability, food insecurity and migration in Cabricán, Guatemala

All authors

Andrea Milan & Sergio Ruano

https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2013.857589

Published online:

12 March 2014

Figure 2. Mean monthly rainfall (mm) and mean monthly temperature (°C) in the study area (years 1977–2011). Source: Elaboration of the authors on data from INSIVUMEH, Labor Ovalle Meteorological Station, Quetzaltenango.

Display full size

Survey data show that 74% of respondents noted changes in rainfall patterns in the last two decades. When comparing current climatic patterns with those of 20 years ago, exactly half of the survey respondents indicated that there are more drought/dry spells, 39% of them mentioned more floods, 68% more heavy rain and 65% more extreme weather events. As noted earlier, these results could be biased by heavy rains which characterized the year prior to the research, destroying local harvests.

Survey respondents and participants to PRA sessions also emphasized that rainfall is increasingly variable. Perceived changes in rainfall in the last 20 years relate mostly to its changing seasonality and unpredictability. Survey respondents also mentioned increased intensity and decreased frequency of rain events.⁵

The overall amount of annual rainfall is perceived to be more or less unchanged. However, Figure 3 shows that the 1977–2011 period is characterized by a first decreasing stage from 1977 to 1993, followed by an increasing trend from 1994 to 1998, a new decrease from 1999 to 2003 and another increase from 2004 to date. The area received the highest amounts of rainfall in 2010 and 2011.

Rainfall variability, food insecurity and migration in Cabricán, Guatemala

All authors

Andrea Milan & Sergio Ruano

https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2013.857589

Published online:

12 March 2014

Figure 3. Annual rainfall (mm) in the study area (1977–2011). Source: Elaboration of the authors on data from INSIVUMEH, Labor Ovalle Meteorological Station, Quetzaltenango.

Display full size

Rainfall impacts

Survey respondents were asked whether changes in rainfall had affected their food production: 68% answered “yes, a lot”, 29% “yes, but only a little” while 1% stated that rainfall does not affect their food production (and 2% did not answer). In particular, 87% mentioned a decrease in crop production, 8% mentioned both a decrease in crop production and one or more additional impacts (decline of fodder production, decline of pasture plants and water shortage for animals), while 2% did not answer and 1% mentioned an increase in crop production.⁶

These results are consistent with the outcomes of PRA sessions on rainfall patterns and impacts. PRA participants added that rainfall-induced decreases in food production trigger several further problems: lack of money to buy food, lack of job opportunities, increase in costs of agricultural inputs, reduction in the amount of food consumed, decrease of animal productivity and reduction in opportunities related to livestock production and selling.

Furthermore, they remarked the impact of droughts which affect water availability for human consumption as well as crops during their growing process. For the former, with the support of a Non-governmental organization (NGO), many households are installing water reservoirs to collect rain during the rainy season. For the latter, farmers have been adapting by planting crop varieties which are more tolerant to drought, such as some local corn and bean germplasms.

Food security

Food insecurity constitutes a problem for most households in the research site: 78% of survey respondents indicated having suffered food scarcity at least once in the last 10 years while only 16% have not (and 6% did not know).

Given the prevalence of rain-fed subsistence agriculture in the area and the strong dependence of local market dynamics on local production, the relationship between rainfall and food security is mostly related to food production. However, nutrition-related problems in the area are often exacerbated by issues related to access to food (few products are available in the local market) and consumption habits (people tend to over-consume corn).

Participants to PRA sessions on food security also emphasized that the highest food insecurity period is from May to November, the latter being when corn fields are harvested.

Survey results also show that when households did not have enough food (or money to buy food) in the last 10 years, 46% of them modified food production to increase output, 20% sold assets (mostly livestock, the first option is poultry, and then pigs), 18% reduced food consumption, 12% reduced their expenditures, 10% diversified their activities while other coping strategies were mentioned by very few respondents.⁷

PRA participants added that in conditions of food scarcity, families with relatives who work in the USA, Quetzaltenango or Guatemala City ask them for a remittance; moreover, men often sell their labour within their community or in a neighbouring one and/or they ask for an “informal” loan from a relative, friend or neighbour (in this order). Local women highlighted that the governmental programmes Mi Familia Progresa (My Family Progresses) and Bolsa Solidaria (Solidarity Budget) are important sources of support. Mi Familia Progresa provides cash payments to poor mothers upon the condition that they send their children to school and health checks. Bolsa Solidaria distributes monthly food rations to the neediest families.

In situ livelihood diversification

Migration patterns

Survey data show that 25% of the households have one or more migrants (22% international and 3% internal) who still depend on/contribute to the financial resources of the household. These data are likely to be an underestimation since (as mentioned in the “Limitations” section) people tended to deny having a household member living abroad.

The typical migrant is a young man: three-quarters of migrants are men and they are 23 years old on average. Moreover, 78% of migrants are married or under consensual union. The schooling level of migrants is nearly two years above the average of the population.

All except one surveyed migrant declared to have moved primarily for economic rather than educational reasons. However, outcomes of focus group discussions and PRA sessions show that even migration decisions which seem to be mainly caused by economic considerations are usually influenced by rainfall patterns and their impact on rain-fed agricultural production.

PRA sessions also revealed that, in the past and for several decades, seasonal migration to work on the cotton fields in the Southern Coastline of Guatemala was very common. Migration to the midlands above the coastline was also frequent for those who wanted to work in the coffee farms.

At present, employment opportunities in the Southern Coastline have decreased because former cotton fields have now been converted to sugar cane which demands less labour. Moreover, sugar cane farmers tend to have their group of full-time workers, particularly during harvest time. The case of coffee and other crops is similar to the one of sugar cane in terms of having full-time workers.

Survey data show that 70% of migrants from households currently based in Cabricán have moved to the USA, while the rest of them are either seasonal workers going to the coastline or people who moved to Quetzaltenango and Guatemala City.

Outcomes of the PRA sessions on migration confirm these results. Participants remarked that most migrants to the USA have plans to come back once they have saved enough money to renovate their house and possibly to ensure a better future for their households.

People migrating to Guatemala City usually move there to work as construction workers or in textile factories, but they have less saving capacity and possibilities to send money back home. However, they also aim to return to Cabricán.

PRA participants also revealed that, in the last five or six years, migration flows to the USA have decreased significantly, one of the main reasons being the price to be paid to a travel assistant called “coyote”. As of 2011, the cost of the trip fluctuated between 45,000 and 50,000 Quetzals (approximately US$6,000), which is an extremely high price for locals.

This decrease in migration flows to the USA is also influenced by the rigidity of immigration laws in the USA following the terrorist attack against the World Trade Centre in 2001. High risk in terms of personal security while travelling through Mexico, especially in terms of abuses, crime, human trafficking and drug-dealing, also plays a role. Moreover, communities perceive that there is a significant reduction of work opportunities in the USA.

The population expressed its strong attachment to the communities and its willingness to stay there; as a consequence, households as a whole only tend to use migration as a risk-management strategy when in situ options are not profitable. In contrast, migration of just one (or several) household member is commonly used as a risk-management strategy, usually in combination with other non-migratory strategies.