Mexico's Native Communities Reverse the Flow of Accountability
A Citizenship DRC researcher speaks with community leaders in Veracruz, Mexico
They carried bows and arrows as symbols of their indigenous identity. Dozens stormed the Yuribia Dam, tied up the security guard and shut off the taps, cutting off the city below from its main source of water. State officials came personally to negotiate, arriving in luxury sedans with tinted windows, accompanied by an armed escort. Just one man - a local elite, a mestizo of mixed race - spoke on behalf of the indigenous communities to reach a settlement. As agreed, the men relinquished the dam, but the promises for new roads and better schools were never delivered.
Over ten years later, representatives from the various communities near the dam sat in a meeting with state and city officials. They praised the virtues of cooperation, smiled and joked. State officials complimented the local authorities on their thorough assessment of the environmental conditions in the watershed and announced the creation of a fund of 29 million pesos (£1.3 million). The money was to be spent by village collectives, under supervision of a watershed committee, for environmental restorations that would benefit local livelihoods and ensure continued supply of water to the city below.
What had changed in the intervening decade?
The reconfiguration of power relations in southern Veracruz, Mexico came about partly as a result of a research project supported by the Development Research Centre on Citizenship, Participation and Accountability and conducted by the National Autonomous University of Mexico and a non-governmental organisation, Decotux. The work - done in the action-research tradition that considers the act of seeking change as a legitimate form of investigation - has catalysed a shift from the patronage system that once benefited urban interests and local elites to a new, mutual understanding among actors that gives indigenous communities new resources and new responsibilities.
The case study demonstrates that building accountability and co-responsibility between numerous actors with diverse and contradictory interests requires an on-going process of negotiation and engagement through both formal and informal channels. Here, accountability is not created by decree, by a right-to-information law or by inviting all stakeholders to a meeting. Accountability gradually grows from a process that builds solidarity among indigenous communities and allows them to be recognised collectively.
In This Together
Water connects everyone in Southern Veracruz, but not harmoniously. The consequences of the persistent degradation of the basin, deforestation and erosion are contributing to a decline in water flows and quality. All stand to lose from the current situation, though few spaces exist for cooperation in mutual interest.
Week after week during three years of participatory research, researchers acted as an honest broker between village leaders, informed them about the politics of water management in the region and facilitated a series of community-led environmental studies. This process gradually allowed village leaders to articulate their opinions without having to rely on municipal representatives that had for years served only their own personal interest.
Meanwhile, researchers met with local and state officials to advocate for new institutional arrangements over the long term, encouraging authorities to value the “hydric environmental services” provided by the farming communities: the practices and activities that contribute to watershed conservation and hence to protecting the water supply.
This work created an opportunity for change when a natural catastrophe required a rapid response. After torrential rainfall caused hundreds of landslides that damaged the dam, village leaders quickly assembled a recovery plan. Though still reluctant to cooperate with indigenous leaders, state authorities had nowhere else to turn.
Now there are mechanisms that may lead to greater accountability and sustainable management of the watershed. These include:
- A shift toward increased dialogue between communities and urban and political institutions, although this does not exclude the possibility of social mobilisations;
- The creation of a watershed committee involving the local authorities of thirteen villages; and
- The elaboration of a plan for the ecological restoration and general development of the watershed.
Researchers stressed the importance of understanding historical and cultural context, of creating new parameters for negotiation and of respecting the often slow pace of political and social change. Outside agents such as researchers, however, can only create an opportunity. In this case, change only truly began once indigenous community groups took the initiative to demand their rights, and after a natural event opened the way for a new relationship among actors.
Related Resources
‘Managing watersheds and the right to water: Indigenous communities in search of accountability and inclusion in Southern Veracruz’ by Luisa Paré and Carlos Robles in Rights, Resources and the Politics of Accountability, edited by Peter Newell and Joanna Wheeler, Zed Books: London, 2006.
Who Speaks for Whom?: A Look at Civil Society Accountability in Bioprospecting Debates in Mexico
Hughes, A.
IDS Bulletin - Vol 33 (2), 2002.
Pare, L., C. Robles and C. Cortez
IDS Bulletin - Vol 33 (2), 2002.
Social strategies and public policies in an indigenous zone in Chiapas, Mexico
Pare, L., C. Robles and C. Cortez
IDS Bulletin - Vol 33 (2), 2002.
http://www.fondominkachorlavi.org/dtr/
