professional report by luis e. de la mora

8/2/2019 Professional Report by Luis E. de La Mora

1/124

Copyright

by

Luis E De La Mora

2005


2/124

Transforming Remittances into Social Programs: Policy implications of Partnerships

between Hometown Associations in the U.S and Municipalities in Jalisco, Mxico

by

Luis E De La Mora, B.A. in Accounting

Report

Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austinin Partial Fulfillment

of the requirements

for the degree of

Masters of Public Affairs

The University of Texas at Austin

August 2005


3/124



APPROVED BY

SUPERVISING COMMITTEE

__________________________

Peter M. Ward

__________________________

David C. Warner


4/124

This Professional Report is dedicated to my parents and my sisters who always

believed in me. My thanks and appreciation to my girlfriend, my friends and all the

professors and special people that believed in me through the years. You all made the

difference, thank you.


5/124

Acknowledgements

This report was possible through the help of many government officials,

Hometown Association leaders, Professors and friends in Mexico and in the U.S. I am

specially grateful to Salvador Garca, President of the Jalisco Federation in Los

Angeles; Elizabeth Chavolla, Head of the State of Jalisco International office; Carlos

Leal Jimnez, Director of implementation and programming of the COPLADES

federal programs; Gloria Snchez Torres, Director of Migrant Projects at SEPROE;

Rafael Zaragoza, Head of the state of Jalisco Fondo Regional program; Eduardo

Rosales, Director ofCOPLADES Jalisco; M. Basilia Valenzuela V, Professor at the

University of Guadalajara; Juan Carlos Lepe, Head of 3x1 para Migrantes in theState of Jalisco; Jess David Valenzuela Romo, independent researcher; Macedonio

Len Rodrguez Avalos, Municipal President of Cabo Corrientes, Jalisco; Luis

Tarcisio Ramrez Gutirrez, Chief of Public Works and sustainable development of

Tepatitlan Jalisco; Juan Antonio Gonzlez Velzquez, Chief of Human Development,

Arandas, Jalisco;

I particularly appreciate the help and support of Peter M. Ward, C.B. SmithSr. Centennial Chair in US-Mexico Relations at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of

Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin; David C. Warner, Holder of the

Wilbur Cohen Professorship at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, The

University of Texas at Austin. Elspeth Rostow, Stiles Professor Emerita in American

Studies and Professor of Government at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public

Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin; Bobby R. Inman, Interim Dean and

Lyndon B. Johnson Centennial Chair in National Policy; Kenneth Matwiczak, Senior

Lecturer in public Affairs at The University of Texas at Austin. Finally, I am grateful

for all the support and friendliness that the faculty staff and OSAP gave me through

these two years.


6/124



by

Luis E De La Mora, M.P.Aff

The University of Texas at Austin, 2005

SUPERVISOR: Peter M. Ward

Remittances have impacted local communities in Mexico for many years.

However, the recent rapid increase of remittances reveals the importance of this

money for social programs at the local level. Through Hometown Associations

(HTAs), migrants organize and gain empowerment to participate as social actors in

their towns. The Mexican government realized the importance of remittances and

HTAs and thus developed outreach programs for the establishment of partnerships

with HTAs. This report analyzes the policy impact of transforming remittances into

the social program referred to as 3x1 Para Migrantes through collaboration

between HTAs and the government. This study will focus on the state-society

partnership in municipalities in Jalisco, Mxico, providing an overview of the impact

of the partnership. For instance, many social projects would not have been

accomplished without the collaboration of HTAs. Also, government accountability

and honesty are necessary features to attain community participation in social

projects. Wealthier communities seem to be taking more advantage of social capital

to pursue funding opportunities. Finally, the personal links between HTAs andfunctionaries facilitate interaction and access to funds due to the fact that the state-

society collaboration is not institutionalized. Though the state-society partnerships

undoubtedly benefit local communities, governance and decentralization practices

must be pursued in order to empower the community and not only a few leaders.

vi


7/124

Table of Contents

List of Tables ............................................................................................................ ix

List of Figures............................................................................................................x

Chapter 1. Migration and Remittances ....................................................................11

Introduction..................................................................................................11

Methodology................................................................................................14

Remittances..................................................................................................16

Demographics: Mexican Immigration to the US.........................................23

Chapter 2. Formation of Hometown Associations...................................................26

Contemporary Needs ................................................................................... 26

History of Hometown Associations.............................................................27

Chapter 3. Social Programs in Mexico ....................................................................35

Current Approaches of Social Programs...................................................... 35

Governmental Structure in Mexico..............................................................39

Social Programs in Mexico..........................................................................43

Success of Program Application..................................................................48

Problems in Program Application................................................................49

Actors...........................................................................................................51

Background of 3x1 para Migrantes..............................................................52

Chapter 4. 3x1 para Migrantes in Jalisco .............................................................62

Background: Jalisco.....................................................................................62

Hometown Associations from Jalisco..........................................................64

vii


8/124

History of Enlace Between Migrants and Government in Jalisco............66

Current Approaches ..................................................................................... 74

Case Study: Jamay.......................................................................................80Chapter 5. Policy Implications of Social Programs in Mexico................................ 86

Policy Implications of Collaborative Programs at the Local Level.............86

SEDESOLs role in 3x1...............................................................................86

Jalisco State Government.............................................................................91

Case Study: Jaliscos regional development program FONDOREG.......93

Case Study: Cabo Corrientes .......................................................................96

Case Study: Tepatitlan...............................................................................102

Case Study: Arandas..................................................................................105

Policy lessons and future of HTAs collaboration ...................................... 108

Chapter 6. Conclusions..........................................................................................110

Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 115

Vita.........................................................................................................................124

viii


9/124

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Estimate of Historical Remittances sent to Mexico since 1920 (in millionsof dollars).................................................................................................................... 17

Table 2.1 Mexican Hometown Associations in the U.S. ............................................ 27

Table 3.1 Social Programs in Mexico......................................................................... 45

ix


10/124

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Immigration Trends 1960-2010 (in millions of migrants) ....................... 24

Figure 3.1 3x1 Diagram of Operational Steps............................................................ 59

x


11/124

Chapter 1. Migration and Remittances

Introduction

Latinos are the largest minority living in the U.S. and the following impressive

figures illustrate why politicians, academics and businessman in the US and Latin

America now consider Latino communities a priority. Latinos in the U.S. reached 41.3

million as of July 2004. This figure represents approximately 14 percent of the total U.S.

population. Latinos accounted for almost half of the US population growth of 2.9 million

between July 2003 and July 2004, growing at a rate three times higher than the total

population. Latino population increased from 22.4 million in 1990 to 41.3 in 2004,

growing more than 84 percent in this 14 year period. 1 There are around 25 million

Mexicans included in these figures, representing 61 percent of the Latino population. Out

of these 25 million Mexicans, approximately 16 million are Mexican Americans while

about 9 million were born in Mexico.2

The breakdown of the 16 million Mexican-

Americans is of approximately 8.1 million first generation and 7.8 second generation or

longer Mexican-Americans.3

1 U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Census Bureau News. Online. Available: http://www.census.gov/Press-

Release/www/releases/archives/population/005164.html. Accessed: June 12, 2005.2 Consejo Nacional de Poblacin (CONAPO), La Migracin Mexicana hacia Estados Unidos. Online.

Available: http://www.conapo.gob.mx/publicaciones/nuevaera/03a.pdf. Accessed: May 30, 2005.

3 Rafael Lpez Vega, La poblacin Mexicana en Estados Unidos, (Consejo Nacional de Poblacin

CONAPO, Available through: www.conapo.gob.mx, June 26, 2003).

11


12/124

Mexicans living in the U.S. are transforming politics in Mexico through growing

economic and social links. Many communities in Mexico have most of their population

living in the U.S. Migrants economic, social and political participation is expanding in

Mexico and in the U.S. and a recent article calculated that one fourth of the 24 million

families in Mexico receive money from migrants.4 Consequently, politicians in local

regions and at the national level realized that it is essential to include migrants in their

campaign promises and public policy proposals. Furthermore, migrants are increasing

their participation as political actors in their communities. Legislative changes in 1996

allowed Mexicans to have a dual nationality, reinforcing migrants binational links and

allowing them to be potential political candidates. Congressional approval of the dual

nationality also facilitates business and property ownership in Mexico since the double

nationality grants Mexicans living in the U.S. the same legal rights that Mexicans living

in Mexico have to participate in business transactions.5

Other recent proposals include the approved law that will allow Mexicans living

in the U.S. to vote in the July 2006 elections. Mexicans living abroad will vote outside of

Mexico for the first time in a federal election. Mexicans living in the U.S. will be able to

4 Roberto Gonzalez Amador, Migrant Dollars an Economic Powerhouse, Migrant Dollars Drive Mxico's

Economy, La Jornada, June 1, 2005.

5 La Prensa San Diego, Recuperar la Nacionalidad Mexicana: hasta el Ultimo Da. Online. Available:

http://www.laprensa-sandiego.org/archieve/march28-03/dual.htm. Accessed: June 02, 2005.

12


13/124

cast a vote by mailing a special ballot to Mexico. 6 These changes illustrate how the

migrant component is transforming politics in Mexico. Migrants sent around 16 billion

dollars in 2004. The Bank of Mexico is expecting remittances to reach at least 20 billion

dollars in 2005.7 Migrants economic participation is now translating into political rights,

community development, and the potential consolidation of a transnational civil society. 8

Remittances changed the dynamic between migrants and their communities.

Consequently, migrants are becoming important social actors in Mexico.

Remittances represent an important source of income for some developing

countries. Countries like Mexico greatly depend on remittances sent from migrants living

in the U.S. In a recent conference the Inter American Development Bank (IDB) stated

that Mexico receives 14 out of every 100 dollars sent through remittances in the world. 9

Consequently, Mexico is developing policies to maximize the benefits of remittances sent

from abroad. Current government efforts concentrate on maximizing collective

6 MSNBC, Mxico approves absentee voting for migrants. Online. Available:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8392267/. Accessed: June 28, 2005.

7La Jornada, Aumentan controles para evitar el lavado de dinero con remesas. Online. Available:

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2005/jun05/050623/032n1eco.php. Accessed: June 03, 2005.

8 Guillaume Lanly, and M. Basilia Valenzuela V, Clubes de migrantes oriundos mexicanos en los Estados

Unidos edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias EconmicoAdministrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004).

9 Roberto Gonzlez Amador, Mxico recibe 14 de cada 100 dlares de remesas en el mundo. La Jornada.

Online. Available: http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2005/jun05/050603/024n1eco.php. Accessed: June 13,

2005.

13


14/124

remittances since they are easier to identify and apply to services and infrastructure.

However, effective government policies to maximize remittances depend on many

factors. This analysis argues that civil society participation in the form of Hometown

Associations (HTAs) is one of the most important elements of effective public policies

and for some communities the only hope for developing services and infrastructure.

Migrants living in the U.S. learned the benefits of community participation and they want

to replicate this participation in Mexico. This analysis will focus on social programs in

communities in the state of Jalisco and it will focus mainly on the social program

Programa 3x1 para Migrantes. This is a social program that matches every dollar sent

by U.S. hometown associations with one dollar from Mexican local, state and federal

governments.

Methodology

This professional report analyzes the policy applicability of social programs that

require the collaboration of HTAs with social actors in Mexico. This report aims to

provide information on the effects of state-society partnerships in Jalisco through the

matching social program, 3x1 para Migrantes. The report will try to determine the

positive and negative aspects of this collaboration and its impact upon the community.

The limited scope of the study can only provide a hint of the effects of state-society

partnerships in Jalisco. However, the report will provide an overview of the current

approaches and the possible future of collaboration between HTAs and the government.

The report aims to answer the following questions:

14


15/124

What are the policy implications of social programs that require thecollaboration between Mexicans in the U.S. and their hometowns in

Mexico?

Is the state-society partnership promoting decentralization and goodgovernance practices?

Is the collaboration between state-society actors transforming socialcapital and bringing services and infrastructure to communities?

The professional report consists of six chapters. The first two chapters describe

the importance of remittances to Mexico and the significance of Mexicans in the U.S. and

HTAs formation. Chapter three describes the governmental structure in Mexico and an

analysis of the 3x1 program. In chapter four, the report analyzes the application of 3x1

in the state of Jalisco. Chapter five includes a series of case studies conducted in several

Jalisco municipalities during March 2005. These case studies include interviews with

social actors representing federal, state and municipal governments involved in social

programs at the local level. In chapter six, the conclusions of the report are presented.

The study includes interviews with SEDESOL functionaries in Jalisco. During the

interviews, the SEDESOL functionaries provided information on social programs and

referred to important data included on their website. The case studies include several

15


16/124

interviews with functionaries representing the state of Jalisco. The functionaries provided

detailed information on the pros and cons of 3x1 in Jalisco. They also provided written

and video material to support the information expressed in the interviews.

The study is also based on interviews with government officials from different

municipalities across Jalisco. These on-site interviews intended to seek a first-hand

experience of the impact of 3x1 in municipalities. The interviews were conducted in

municipalities with different characteristics, size and location in order to attain a smallyet diverse sample of local experiences with 3x1 throughout Jalisco. Some interviews

were directly conducted with the municipal presidents. Government officials involved in

social projects were also successful. This proved to be successful because the

functionaries provided an interesting historical background of the development of social

projects in their towns. These interviews were complemented by additional research

assessing the collaboration between state and society actors at the local level.

Remittances

The amount of remittances sent to households in Mexico started growing since the

early 1920s (see Table 1.1). This table reflects how remittances grew progressively

through most of the 20th century according to different sources. The older data is less

accurate but it still reveals how between 1940 and the early 1970s remittances grew at a

normal pace. The expansion of remittances started in the 1970s when a financial crisis

affected Mexico in the late 70s. This financial crisis tripled the rate of migration between

16


17/124

1970 and 1980, resulting in an increase of the remittances sent to Mexico. After the

1980s, the amount of remittances continued growing significantly and the government

realized the importance of this money for Mexican households. Consequently, the Bank

of Mexico started following remittances trends closely in the 1980s due to their

macroeconomic impact. One example of the macroeconomic impact was the significant

increase of remittances in the balance of payments account that went from 2.8 percent in

1980 to 4.6 percent in 1989.10 This important increase revealed the growing impact of

remittances in the Mexican economy.

Table 1.1

Estimate of Historical Remittances sent to Mexico since 1920

(in millions of dollars)

Remittances GrowthPeriod Estimated Remittances Percentage of Change

1920-1928 4.9 -1942-1945 63.0 1185.01956 120.0 90.41961 275.0 129.101976* 1272.0 362.51980 877.3 -31.021985 2013.5 129.511990 1980.0 -1.61995 3673.0 85.52000 6280.0 70.92004 16,612.8 164.52005** 20,000.0 20.3


Unidos, edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Econmico

Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 136.

17


18/124

Adapted from: Consejo Nacional de Poblacin (CONAPO),La situacin demogrfica de Mxico, 1999.

Online. Available: http://www.conapo.gob.mx/publicaciones/1999/PDF/99012.pdf. Accessed: August

3, 2005. Comisin Nacional para la Proteccin y Defensa de los Usuarios Financieros, transferencias

de dinero EE.UU.-Mxico. Online. Available:

http://www.condusef.gob.mx/transferencias_eu_mex/transferecnias.htm. *The 1976 period is an

average from three different estimates. **The 2005 figure is aBanco de Mexico estimate.

In the early 1990s there was a small decrease in the amount of remittances sent to

households in Mexico. This decrease reflected the positive economic outcomes of

policies introduced by President Salinas de Gortari. Unfortunately, the positive outcomes

did not last long and by 1994 another severe crisis struck Mexico. This crisis also led to a

dramatic increase of migrants and remittances. The rate of remittances continued

growing. Between 2000 and 2004, remittances grew approximately 150 percent to reach

$16.6 million. This amount represents the second source of foreign income after

petroleum.11 Other important effect was the increase of remittances percentage share of

the GDP. Remittances share of the GDP went from .86 percent in 1990-1994 to 1.21

percent in 1995-2000. The share of remittances as a percentage of the GDP reached a

remarkable 2.58 percent in 2004.12

11 Terra Noticias, Crecimiento de Remesas en Mxico: Un espejismo?. Online. Available:

http://www.terra.com/actualidad/articulo/html/act197089.htm. Accessed: June 20, 2005.

12 Banco de Mxico, Las Remesas familiares en Mxico. Online. Available:

http://portal.sre.gob.mx/ime/pdf/Remesas_Familiares.pdf. Accessed: June 17, 2005.

18


19/124

It is evident that remittances are impacting Mexicos economy. However, there

has been some controversy over the real impact of remittances in Mexico. Some critics

argue that the Bank of Mexico is overestimating the amount of remittances received. The

controversy originated due to data released by the U.S. Office of Economic Analysis that

established that there were less than $10 billion in remittances sent to Mexico in 2004.13

This is a large percentage difference when compared to the more than $16 billion

reported by the Bank of Mexico. This discrepancy could be due to the methodology used

to report the data. Other opinions state that remittances hardly contribute to poverty

reduction for the lowest income sectors in Mexico. However, regardless of the

differences in methodologies or the real impact in low-income sectors, it is clear that

remittances are having a positive effect for millions of Mexicans.

Some of the benefits were reported in a survey conducted by PEW Hispanic

Center in 2003. These reports reveal some of the outcomes for households in Mexico. For

instance, women receive most of the remittances sent and this money is normally used for

household expenditures like housing, food and medicines. Approximately, two thirds of

the people that receive remittances improve their quality of life according to the PEW

survey. Also, people that receive remittances invest around 78 percent in basic

consumption, ten percent of the money in savings or properties, seven percent on

13 Terra Noticias, Crecimiento de Remesas en Mxico: Un espejismo?. Online. Available:

http://www.terra.com/actualidad/articulo/html/act197089.htm. Accessed: June 20, 2005.

19


20/124

education and five percent in luxury items.14 According to the PEW report, remittances

range from an average of $190 to $390 monthly per household. This range is lower if the

methodology considers remittances not send through electronic transfers. Also, an

impressive 18 percent of the total adult population in Mexico receives remittances mainly

sent from the U.S. 15 In addition, the 2000 census in Mexico released data collected in a

survey that indicates households that receive remittances are mostly like to be

homeowners and that homes that receive remittances have more rooms and space

available.16

Almost half of the remittances go to the states of Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacn,

San Luis Potosi and Zacatecas. Other states like Mexico State and D.F. are increasingly

receiving more remittances due to higher migration rates. Also, according to 1996 data

around 55 percent of remittances goes to urban areas and 45 percent to rural areas. In this

same year remittances represented most of the annual income for 20 percent of rural

14 Mexicanos en el Exterior, Publicacin del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. Online. Available:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:OAbHrKS_MYgJ:portal.sre.gob.mx/ime/pdf/BOL7CO.doc+sedesol,+3

x1+para+migrantes&hl=en&client=firefox-a. Accessed: May 27, 2005.

15 PEW Hispanic Center & Bendixen & Fomin, Receptores de remesas en Mxico, encuesta de opininpublica. Online. Available: http://www.iadb.org/mif/v2/files/BendixenencuestaME2003.pdf. Accessed:

May 20, 2005.

16 Banco de Mxico, Las Remesas familiares en Mxico. Online. Available:

http://portal.sre.gob.mx/ime/pdf/Remesas_Familiares.pdf. Accessed: June 17, 2005.

20


21/124

households and more than half of the annual income for 45 percent of rural households. 17

This data reveals how even though there are more remittances sent to urban households;

the impact is more dramatic for rural communities. This distinction reflects the

importance of promoting policies that will target rural communities that have limited

resources to develop policies that could improve their access to economic opportunities.

The effect of family remittances is limited to the households expenditures and unless

there is some coordination from the community, the economic outcomes will be limited.

Important differences exist between family and collective remittances. Family

remittances represent the largest share of money sent and the most difficult to coordinate

since it is usually sent to specific households. Collective remittances are portions of

money sent by civil society groups like hometown associations or migrant clubs.

Governments and hometown associations are increasingly coordinating service and

infrastructure projects to benefit their communities. This partnership poses many

opportunities and challenges for communities in Mexico since they represent an essential

element in the success of social projects. This approach empowers communities,

17 Maria de Jess Santiago Cruz, Importancia econmica de la migracin internacional en Mxico.

Anlisis desde la perspectiva de las remesas. Online. Available:

http://www.ejournal.unam.mx/momento_economico/no114/MOE11403.pdf. Accessed: June 29, 2005.

21


22/124

recognizing that citizens have the capacity to actively participate in community

projects.18

The Mexican government is consciously cultivating relationships with migrants to

maximize the services and infrastructure provided to migrant communities. The public

sector is realizing that fostering a binational community and involving local governments

can encourage migrants to become new political actors, carrying out public works

projects that probably would not have been done without migrants participation.

Participation by government and migrants in social programs promotes collaboration

between communities, academic institutions, and non-governmental organizations. The

collaborative efforts of the Mexican government focus on coordinating projects with the

transnational civil society organized through hometown associations.19

Civil society participation depends on the accountability of the public sector.

There is a natural distrust of migrants toward the government. Traditionally, migrants

were seen by government as rural and uneducated citizens that represented a burden to

society. This role is changing and migrant communities are more empowered and aware

18 Briant Lindsay Lowell and Rodolfo O. de la Garza, A new Phase in the story of remittances,In sending

Money Home: Hispanics remittances and community development, edited by Briant Lindsay Lowell andRodolfo O. de la Garza (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc, 2002), p. 3-27.

19 Rodolfo Garca Zamora, Migracin internacional, remesas y proyectos sociales: una propuesta de

desarrollo regional para Zacatecas,In memoria: Seminario internacional sobre la transferencia y uso de

las remesas: Proyectos productivos y de ahorro (Zacatecas, Mxico 3-5 Octubre, Mxico City: Naciones

Unidas, CEPAL, 2001), p. 225-250.

22


23/124

of their potential. Through hometown associations, migrants are willing to cooperate with

authorities to help their communities back home. However, migrants need to regain trust

in public authorities in order to cooperate with the public sector. The democratic process

of cooperation needs to start with governments, followed by civil society living in

Mexico and in the US. This could start a virtuous cycle of cooperation that could boost

the amount and quality of services and infrastructure.

Demographics: Mexican Immigration to the US

Mexican immigration was limited before the 1900s. Some rough estimates

indicate that during the 1890s fewer than 10,000 Mexicans migrated to the United States.

Mexican migration increased significantly in the early 1900s registering approximately

50,000 new immigrants. Between 1910 and 1930 around 1.5 million Mexicans arrived to

the U.S. The main destinations were Texas and California. Agricultural and industrial

expansion helped to promote this rate of immigration.20

The period between 1930 and

1960 showed a decrease of Mexican immigrants since the U.S. congress established

tighter controls to immigrants from Latin America. Most of the immigrants of that period

were immigrants form Europe. In 1964, U.S. Congress increased the number of

immigrants allowed to come from Latin America and the Caribbean.21

20 California Labor History, The early years of Mexican migration to California, 1900-1930. Online.

Available: calpedia.sfsu.edu/calabor/context.html. Accessed: June 07, 2005.


Unidos edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Econmico

Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 40, 376.

23


24/124

Figure 1.1

Immigration Trends 1960-2010

(in millions of migrants)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010

Number of Migrants

Adapted from: Consejo Nacional de Poblacin, CONAPO, Migracin Mexicana hacia Estados Unidos.

Online. Available: http://www.conapo.gob.mx/mig_int/03.htm. Accessed: August 6, 2005. CONAPO,

Proyecciones de la Poblacin de Mexico, 2000-2050. Online. Available:

http://www.conapo.gob.mx/00cifras/proy/0nacional.pdf. Accessed: August 6, 2005.

Figure 1.1 shows the effect of U.S. policy change towards Latin American

immigrants. Between 1960 and 1970 almost 300,000 new immigrants arrived from

Mexico. This immigration trend continued in subsequent years. By 1980, there were

approximately 1.5 million new immigrants. The rate of Mexican migrants increased

sharply after the 1980s due to the political and social climate in Mexico. Consequently,

roughly more than 2.5 million Mexicans arrived in the U.S. between 1980 and 1990. The

immigration flow of the 1990s reveals a dramatic increase of more than 3 million

24


25/124

migrants by the year 2000. Some of the reasons behind this increase include lack of

economic opportunities in rural and urban communities.22

Furthermore, a demographic study released by the Consejo Nacional de

Poblacin, Mexican National Council of Population, CONAPO revealed that the current

migration rates are among the highest ever recorded. The study presented by this

institution forecasted that the current rate of migration will continue until 2010 and then

the rate will linearly decrease until 2050. According, to these projections the migration

rate in the 2050s will be half of the rate observed in the 1995-2000 period. 23

22 Ibid.

23 Consejo Nacional de Poblacin, CONPAPO, Proyecciones de la Poblacin de Mexico, 2000-2050

Online. Available: http://www.conapo.gob.mx/00cifras/proy/0nacional.pdf. Accessed: August 6, 2005.

25


26/124

Chapter 2. Formation of Hometown Associations

Contemporary Needs

Hometowns associations or migrants clubs represent an innovative way of

association for Mexicans living in the U.S. According to Mexican Foreign Ministry there

are more than 623 Hometown Associations (HTAs) of Mexican communities in the U.S.

This is a large increase from the 215 HTAs registered in 1995. 1 HTAs in the U.S. are

mostly linked to communities located in the states of Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Michoacn

Jalisco, Guerrero, Oaxaca and Puebla. Most Mexican communities living in the U.S.

came from those states and created HTAs mostly in the states of California, Texas and

Illinois (see table 2.1). These groups started many years ago through the association of

immigrant communities that shared similar values, ethnicity or experiences. These groups

shared an embedded membership that facilitated community association. This community

structures laid the foundation for the hometown associations that today represent an

important link for Mexican communities in the U.S.2 Hometown Associations are

normally formed by Mexicans that were born in the same state or town. This is an

additional element that contributes to the identity component embedded in the formation

of HTAs.

1 Rafael Fernndez de Castro, Las remesas: Una ventana hacia el desarrollo, Diario Presente. Online.

Available: http://www.presente.com.mx/Portal/ArticleView.php?article_id=16855. Accessed: June 24,

2005.

2 Takeshi Wada, Who are the main actors and brokers in Mexican popular contention? Online. Available:

http://136.142.158.105/Lasa2003/WadaTakeshi.pdf. Accessed: May 15, 2005.

26


27/124

Table 2.1

Mexican Hometown Associations in the U.S.

Concentration of HTAs in the U.S.

HTAs origin California Texas Illinois Other states Total

Zacatecas 95 7 18 6 126Jalisco 64 3 24 9 100Michoacn 30 1 16 4 51Guerrero 6 2 41 2 51Guanajuato 8 7 26 7 48Oaxaca 29 1 3 3 36Puebla* 5 1 3 25 34

Other states 82 26 39 30 177Total 319 48 170 86 623

Adapted from: Guillaume Lanly, and M. Basilia Valenzuela V, Clubes de migrantes oriundos mexicanos en

los Estados Unidos edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias

Econmico Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 15,131, 322, 323, 384. *Puebla

concentrates 23 HTAs in the New York area.

History of Hometown Associations

The first form of migrant association started in the early 20th century with

mutualist organizations that included Mexican immigrants regardless of their place of

origin. These organizations were formed by members who lived in the same geographical

region in the U.S. The goal of these organizations was to provide shelter and support to

other immigrants that were arriving to the U.S. These organizations focused on cultural

heritage and celebrations that strengthen their links with Mexico. However, supporting

communities back home was not the main goal of mutualist societies. Nonetheless, these

mutual societies sent donations or remittances to Mexico in special circumstances. Some

examples include donations to the Mexican government that contributed to finance the

27


28/124

cost of the petroleum expropriation decreed by President Lzaro Crdenas in 1938. Other

examples include donations to cities affected by natural disasters. Mutualist clubs from

Los Angeles helped communities in Sinaloa, Mxico that were affected by a hurricane in

1943.3

These mutualist societies were dominated by males. Families had limited formal

participation in these societies and they contributed more to the consolidation of migrant

communities. Between 1920 and 1940 there were created more than 200 mutualistsocieties concentrating in states such as Illinois, California, Texas and Arizona. Mutualist

organizations were apolitical and their goal was to spread good citizenship, community

development and services to Mexican immigrants. Some of the services supported by

mutualist organizations included help to families with deportation issues. Also, mutualist

organizations and Mexican communities have always helped families that needed to

transport human remains back to Mexico. The spirit of these organizations laid the

foundation for more formal HTAs of future generations of immigrants.4

Migrant clubs that were linked to specific communities in Mexico started to

appear between 1950 and 1970. These clubs or hometown associations concentrated in

3 Jess David Valenzuela Romo, Las Organizaciones de Mexicanos en Estados Unidos,edited by Lanly

and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Econmico Administrativas, Universidad

de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 37-80.

4 Ibid.

28


29/124

cities with large migrant communities like Los Angeles, San Antonio and Chicago. These

organizations originated from events organized mostly by soccer or religious groups.

Also, the emergence of HTAs and migrant clubs reflected the large growth of Mexican

immigrants that started arriving to the U.S. after the bracero program ended in 1964.

HTAs and migrant clubs shared the conviction of the mutualist clubs in regard to the

importance of strengthening and preserving their Mexican heritage. They also share a

strong leadership dominated by male leaders of migrant communities with limited

activity from the community. However, HTAs and clubs focused more on helping their

hometowns in Mexico on a regular basis and not only in extraordinary circumstances.5

HTAs helped their communities by sending money to assist church and town

activities. Usually, the money was sent to the local catholic parish and the priest who

coordinated the ways in which the money was spent. On some rare occasions, HTAs

coordinated with other prominent members of their towns like doctors, teachers or

politicians. One example includes the 1967 program that theHuichol migrant club from

Nayarit, Mxico established directly with the municipal president and other prominent

town members to coordinate social projects in an institutional and continuous basis. 6

5 Ibid.

6 Cecilia Imaz, Poder Poltico de las Organizaciones transnacionales de migrantes mexicanos en sus

comunidades de origen. Estudio comparativo de clubes sociales de migrantes en Nayarit-California y

Puebla-Nueva York,edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias

Econmico Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 37-80.

29


30/124

Other events sponsored by HTAs included annual town fairs that commemorated their

local saint and that later incorporated a celebration of the migrants living in the U.S. who

returned to their towns for those events. Unfortunately, the life span of the HTAs in this

era was very short and normally limited to the duration of a specific project.

The 1980s registered an important increase of immigrants promoting the

formation of more HTAs and migrant clubs. This period is also characterized by the

growing interest of politicians living in communities with high rates of migration likeZacatecas, Mxico. The flow of Mexican immigrants increased due to the 1982 financial

crisis in which President Lpez Portillo nationalized Mexican banks due to high inflation

that led to the peso devaluation. Other factors that increased the number of Mexican

immigrants were the approval of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).

This law granted legal residency to undocumented workers that could prove their

continuous residency in the U.S. since at least January 1, 1982. It also granted amnesty to

those who worked as agricultural workers for at least 90 days between May 1, 1985 and

May 1986.7 This law allowed workers who gained legal residents to bring relatives such

as parents or children to the U.S., increasing significantly the number of Mexicans living

in the U.S.

7 Numbers USA, US Amnesties for Illegal Immigrants. Online. Available:

www.numbersusa.com/interests/amnesty_print.html. Accessed: May 21, 2005.

30


31/124

The 1990s represented a period of formal organization and consolidation of

Mexican communities in the U.S. In this period the federal government recognized the

importance of HTAs and contributed to their consolidation. Mexicans in the U.S.

continued forming groups of migrants linked to specific communities in Mexico. Some of

the events that led the Mexican government to interact more with migrant communities

included the decentralization process that started in 1983. The decentralization process

granted more autonomy to municipalities in Mexico. This autonomy facilitated

collaboration within different sectors of the community, including the migrant

community.8 Additionally, the political climate of Mexico during the 1980s played a

decisive role in the recognition of Mexican communities living in the U.S. Some of the

political events included the controversial presidential election of 1988 in which

Cuauhtmoc Crdenas successfully campaigned in the U.S. This strategy contributed to

votes from Mexicans that were influenced by relatives who saw Crdenas in the U.S.

This situation alerted the PRI regime of the political importance of Mexican communities

abroad.

The Mexican government realized that the easiest way to approach Mexicans

living in the U.S. was through HTAs. Consequently, one of the government main policies

was to promote the concentration of migrants in HTAs or clubs. The steps taken by the

government to achieve this goal included the expansion of Mexican consulates in the

8 Victoria Rodriguez,Decentralization in Mexico, (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997).

31


32/124

U.S. This expansion consisted of more personnel and better facilities. However, the main

change consisted of new consulates guidelines. These guidelines included an active role

in the well being and respect of Mexicans human rights in the U.S. Through its

consulates, the Mexican government played an active role in deportation cases,

contesting death penalty and the strengthening of Mexican heritage in communities

through out the U.S.9

The Mexican government created institutional channels to interact consistentlywith HTAs. Some of the programs included the Programa Paisano created in 1989 which

focused on facilitating migrants traveling through Mexico when they visited their

hometowns. Other programs included the Program for Mexican Communities Abroad,

Programa para las Comunidades Mexicanas en el Exterior, PCME. This program is now

called the Institute for Mexicans Abroad,Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior, IME

and it is still coordinated by the Mexican Foreign Ministry. This institute consists of a

strategy carried out by Mexican consulates in the U.S. to provide Mexican nationals with

information regarding health, education, entrepreneurship and cultural events.10

9 Carlo Zabin, Luis Escala, From civic association to political participation:Mexican Hometown

Associations and Mexican immigrant political empowerment in Los Angeles, Frontera Norte, enero-junio,

ao /vol. 14 numero 027, Colegio de la Frontera Norte 2002. Online. Available:http://148.215.4.212/rev/136/13602701.pdf. Accessed: June 30, 2005.

10 Guillaume Lanly and Volker Hamann, Solidaridades transfronterizas y la emergencia de una sociedad

civil transnacional: la participacin de dos clubes de migrantes en el desarrollo local del Occidente de

Mxico,edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Econmico

Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 127-174.

32


33/124

One of the main roles ofPCMEprogram was increasing the links between the

Mexican government and migrants. The PCMEprogram encouraged the formation of

HTAs and facilitated the interaction between migrants and government officials. PCME

even coordinated governors visits with people from their communities in the U.S. PCME

also encouraged HTAs to send material and financial resources to their communities back

home. These efforts led to the commitment of the Mexican government to match funds

for social projects. This led eventually to the formation of the 2x1 matching program that

formalized the willingness of migrants to help their community in Mexico. The 2x1

federal program was modeled after the Zacatecas matching program that was coordinated

by the state government and HTAs from Zacatecas. The Zacatecas and Federal 2x1

programs laid the foundation for what later would become the 3X1 para Migrantes

matching funds program coordinated by the Secretara de Desarrollo Social (Secretary of

Social Development, SEDESOL).11

The Mexican government not only matches migrants monetary contributions to

help their communities. Programs like 3x1 provide a structure through which HTA

leaders can interact with local, state and federal governments in Mexico. The relationship

between migrants and government is necessary for these social programs to succeed.

However, this relationship is controversial due to the government structure in Mexico.

11 Katrina Burgess, Migrant Philanthropy and local governance in Mexico, Online. Available:

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/programs/placa/Conference2005/Conference%202005%20papers/B

urgess-PLACA%20paper.pdf. Accessed: July 4, 2005.

33


34/124

Migrants perception of the government is normally negative and the lack of government

efficiency has affected their communities for many years. Migrants power relationship

with the government is changing and a new state-society relationship is developing

within sending towns and regions. HTAs leaders acquire far more influence in Mexico by

living in the U.S. These migrant leaders are now dealing face to face with high level

functionaries, a thought almost impossible if they would have stayed living in Mexico.12

12 Carlo Zabin, Luis Escala, From civic association to political participation, Frontera Norte , enero-

junio, ao /vol. 14 numero 027, Colegio de la Frontera Norte 2002. Online. Available:

http://148.215.4.212/rev/136/13602701.pdf. Accessed: June 30, 2005.

34


35/124

Chapter 3. Social Programs in Mexico

Current Approaches of Social Programs

Some authors argue that civil society participation, especially at local level, is

one of the most important factors for the development of a country. The participation

of civil society combined with decision making by local governments could

encourage more public works and services. Granting local governments and

communities the right to make decisions has pros and cons. Positive aspects include

enhancing the ability of local governments to better approach local problems and

identify which services are more necessary. Challenges in empowering local actors

include their lack of technical capacity to carry out projects.1 Other obstacles include

slow decision-making by bureaucratic state and central governments far from rural

communities. Ethical behavior from public servants is an essential component in

encouraging civil society participation. Ethical behavior includes reducing corruption,

cacicazgos and compadrazgos.2

1 UNDP, Promoting democracy through reform. Online. Available: http://www.undp.org/governance/.

Accessed: July 22, 2005.

2 Adriana Corts, Fundaciones comunitarias: Un Nuevo instrumento de participacin ciudadana para

el desarrollo,In memoria: Seminario internacional sobre la transferencia y uso de las remesas:

Proyectos productivos y de ahorro (Zacatecas, Mexico 3-5 Octubre, Mexico City: Naciones Unidas,

CEPAL, 2001), p. 103-111.

35


36/124

Many reports from multilateral organizations address the impact of civil

society participation at the local level mentioned above. Organizations like the World

Bank, the United Nations and the OECD recognize the importance of popular

participation and accountability for effective local governments. Many developing

countries experienced failed transitions that led multilateral agencies to analyze

institutional design, government accountability and rule of law. This analysis led

agencies like the World Bankto develop more than 600 governance programs.

Consequently, programs related to decentralization3 and local governance4 became

essential for the design of government strategies in the late 1990s.5

Today most developing countries embrace programs that consider

decentralization and good governance at some degree. The programs that involve

good governance and decentralization are especially important for social projects

3 Decentralization concerns the processes by which people and their institutions are empowered

throughout an entire societal system whether at the global, national, local or household level. The

greater the extent to which people are involved in decision-making, management and service delivery

at all levels, the greater the potential for effective, sustainable and equitable development.

4 Local governance comprises of a set of institutions, mechanisms and processes through which

citizens and their groups can articulate their interests and needs, mediate their differences and exercise

their rights and obligations at the local level. It requires partnership between local governmental

institutions, civil society organizations and private sector for participatory, transparent, accountableand equitable service delivery and local development.


http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/programs/placa/Conference2005/Conference%202005%20pap

ers/Burgess-PLACA%20paper.pdf. Accessed: July 4, 2005.

36


37/124

since decentralization and governance address the interaction between citizens and

government. The process to apply these concepts remains challenging. The challenges

include the amount of reforms taking place at the same time. Most developing

countries face political, market and social reforms at the same time, making it hard to

focus in only one reform. However, some agencies see good governance and

decentralization as ends in themselves and not as an element to improve countries

economies or other reforms.6

Mexico adopted in theory many of the decentralization and governance

principles that the new literacy of multilateral organizations was advocating for. In

some cases Mexican social programs like 3x1 para Migrantes have been a row

model of a successful partnership based on accountability and civil society

participation.7 However, many social programs in Mexico struggle to implement

governance and decentralization principles. Countries like Mexico face many

challenges when attempting to implement principles that require practices that are

still not widespread in Mexico. Consequently, it is important to detect opportunities

and challenges that can contribute to develop efficient social programs that require

civil society participation.

6 Ibid.

7 Roberto Gonzlez Amador, Mxico recibe 14 de cada 100 dlares de remesas en el mundo, La

Jornada, June 2, 2005.

37


38/124

Some of the challenges associated with achieving decentralization and good

governance includes the transfer of power from top to bottom. Also, decentralization

and good governance practices require the continuous participation of civil society.

Unfortunately, the participation of civil society in Mexico is still not commonly

practiced. Social programs in Mexico that require the participation of civil society to

target the low-income require cross-sectoral8 coalitions that are hard to attain.

Jonathan Fox, stated the requirements for such a coalition, pro-poor reforms require

changes in three distinct arenas: within the state, within society, and at the state-

society interface.9 Even when actors share the same goals and motivations to work

together, past experiences and negative perceptions affect the possibility of a

successful partnership between government and society.10

There are some cases in which the distrust barrier is overcome and a

successful partnership is achieved. This usually means that political risks were taken

8 World Bank, Power, rights and poverty: Concepts and connections, A working meeting sponsored

by the DFID and the World Bank, March 23-24, 2004. Online. Available:

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEMPOWERMENT/Resources/PPFinalText.pdf. Accessed: July

16, 2005.

9 Ibid.




38


39/124

and there was a substantial investment of social capital11. The inability to maximize

social capital in Mexico remains one of the main challenges, especially for the lowest

income sectors of the community. It is especially challenging since the social capital

exists, but is hardly capitalized to empower civil society. The connection between

social capital and institutional reformers could start a virtuous cycle of cooperation

that can facilitate the implementation of social programs. 12 Civil society ability to

develop social capital is intrinsically part of the culture. However, due to the

historical relationship of distrust between state and society is hardly developed.

Governmental Structure in Mexico

In order to understand civil society interaction with the government at the

local level is important to describe the government structure in Mexico. The history

and structure of the Mexican government shaped the way Mexicans participate in

their community. Mexico is a federal republic that gained its independence from

Spain in 1810. The current government structure is organized under the principles

laid in the 1917 constitution. The 1917 constitution replicates many liberal concepts

of the U.S. constitution like separation of powers and a bill of rights. However, it also

includes contradictory provisions like capitalism and socialism. The constitution

11 Social capital refers to the collective value of all social networks and the inclinations that arise from

these networks to do things for each other.

12 World Bank, Power, rights and poverty: Concepts and connections.

39


40/124

prescribes a federal republic consisting of 31 states and a federal district. The federal

government is divided into executive, legislative, and judicial branches, but these

branches do not have comparable powers.13

The President is chief of the Mexican state and during the 71 years had direct

and unchallenged control over both the state apparatus and the ruling political party,

the PRI. The only restriction was the no reelection clause that applied to all elected

officials, including the President. The Presidential powers allowed the president toappoint officials at all levels and utilize discretionary spending and meta-

constitutional faculties. This unchallenged powers ended when Vicente Fox from the

PAN political party became elected in July 2, 2000.14

Each state in Mexico has its own constitution. The states constitutions

replicate most of the constitutional charters. The states also have the right to legislate

and levy taxes other than interstate taxes. States reproduce the federal structure and

also have executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Even though Mexico has a

federal structure, Mexico's political system is highly centralized. State governments

depend on Mexico City for most of their revenue. At the same time, municipal

13 Library of Congress, A country study: Mexico. Online. Available:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/mxtoc.html. Accessed: May 19, 2004.

14 Ibid.

40


41/124

governments have a clientelistic relationship with the state. The state executive

branch is headed by a governor, who is directly elected by simple majority vote for a

six-year term. State legislatures are unicameral, consisting of a single Chamber of

Deputies that meets in two ordinary sessions per year. Deputies serve three-year

terms and may not be immediately reelected.15

The basic unit of Mexican government is the municipality. There are 2,453

Municipal governments in Mexico. Municipalities are responsible for a variety ofpublic services, including water and sewerage; street lighting; cleaning and

maintenance; public safety and traffic; supervision of slaughterhouses; and the

maintenance of parks and cemeteries. Municipalities also assist state and federal

governments in the provision of elementary education, emergency fire and medical

services, environmental protection, and the maintenance of historical landmarks.

Municipal governments are headed by a municipal president and a municipal council

(regidores ) and are popularly elected for three-year terms.16

Article 115 of the 1917 constitution proclaims the autonomy of local

governments according to the principle of the free municipality. Municipalities are

authorized to collect property taxes and user fees. However, municipalities have

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid.

41


42/124

historically lacked the technical capacity or platform to do so. Municipalities rely

mainly on transfers from higher levels of government for approximately 80 percent of

their revenues. The excessive centralization of political and financial power was

reduced in 1983 when President de la Madrid amended Article 115, expanding the

autonomy of municipalities and facilitating the expansion of social projects. 17

Before 1983 Municipalities could not collect income or property taxes and

states had slightly more authority to collect taxes. This meant that the federalgovernment was responsible of providing services and infrastructure to communities

through out Mexico. Data revealed in a publication shows that, between 1940 and

1980 the states share of public revenue fell from 23.3 to 9.4 percent and the

municipal share fell from 5.3 to 1.1 percent.18 This dynamic of dependence became

the perfect set up for the clientelistic dependence between the federal, state and local

government, the PRI and local elites. Even in 1995, states received 18.5 percent from

the federal government and distributed 22.1 to municipalities.19

17 Ibid.




19 Ibid.

42


43/124

Social Programs in Mexico

The decentralization initiatives started by President Miguel de la Madrid in

1983 were followed by other reforms that included decentralization of public

agencies, personnel and decisions. These planning responsibilities led states to

develop a planning agency that would help bridge the gap between social and state

actors. Thus, the states created the Comit de Planeacin para el Desarrollo de los

Estados (State level development planning committees, COPLADES).20 These

committees coordinate many social programs and they are responsible for linking

local and federal governments.

Subsequent Presidents continued promoting social programs and developed

new strategies to help low-income communities. For instance, President Salinas

promoted decentralization through the poverty alleviation program, Programa

Nacional de Solidaridad, National Solidarity Program, PRONASOL. This program

provided a good example of community participation since this program required

citizens to identify and implement projects through decision made at local committees

linked to the program Solidaridad. The decisions, responsibilities and costs were

shared with the three levels of governments. This program empowered local

community since decisions making and fund allocation was made at the local level.

20 Victoria Rodrguez,Decentralization in Mexico, (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997).

43


44/124

President Salinas also created other social programs at the local level that matched

resources with funds coming from state and federal funds.21

The municipal funds program sponsored projects proposed at the municipal

level with matching grants provided by the state and federal government. The grants

funded 50 percent of the projects in wealthier municipalities and 75 percent in poorer

ones. President Salinass initiative empowered communities and developed strategies

to develop service and infrastructure in a decentralized way. However, these policieswere politically geared and created direct dependence on federal grants for social

projects. The PRONASOL program and other social projects functioned in a federal

government platform that fought poverty at the local level, instead of empowering

local governments to fight poverty with federal support.22

This program was reorganized by President Zedillo. The PRONASOL program

was canceled due to the 1994 financial crisis and the dominant role of the federal

government. The new program was Programa de Educacin, Salud y Alimentacin,

Program for Education, health and nutrition, PROGRESA. President Zedillos

program distributed social assistance grants directly to the community. Thus,

reducing community participation and indirectly fomenting clientelism. Zedillos

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid.

44


45/124

program was more transparent and fair than PRONASOL but with PROGRESA local

governments lost the ability to make decisions at the local level. PROGRESA also

transfer funds back to the states, restricting municipalities ability to identify and

solve community needs.23

The government of Vicente Fox recognized at some extent the benefits of

community participation and SEDESOL developed some programs that require civil

society participation. Local governments are increasingly empowered to makedecisions and to promote the development of their communities. Therefore, there are

a number of social programs that represent current approaches involving the

participation of civil society and government at all levels. Such programs include the

following:

Table 3.1

Social Programs in Mexico

Summary of Social Programs in Mexico

Program CharacteristicsPrograma 3x1 paraMigrantes

Matching program previously known as Iniciativa Cuidadana 3x1.This program aims to concentrate collective remittances andcommunity participation to develop social projects. Most projectsfocus on projects located on towns linked to hometown associations in

the U.S. These projects aim to improve the quality of life andopportunities of communities in Mexico.

Programa de Co-inversin Program operates through the National Institute of Social

23 Katrina Burgess, Migrant Philanthropy and local governance in Mexico

45


46/124


Program CharacteristicsSocial (PCS) Ramo 20 Development (Indesol). The program aims to foster poverty reduction,

inequality, gender and marginalization. The main actors include civilsociety, municipalities, think tanks and universities. The program

intends to incorporate social actors with technical capacity andapplicable knowledge for social projects.

Programa Compra de Suelopara Vivienda

This program addresses housing problems by contributing withmonetary resources to households with an income of less than 41.8pesos (3.70usd) daily. It is mainly conducted through a federalsubsidy to municipalities and federal entities.

Programa para el DesarrolloLocal (Microrregiones)

According to the programs mission statement, Micro-regionaldevelopment promotes a better allocation of resources intended forsocial development. This in turn promotes better quality of life forfamilies, creates links between rural and urban areas, enables strongereconomic capacity and intensifies community participation in socialprograms.24

Programa Hbitat SEDESOL projects for the construction of access roads, drainage

systems, water and sanitation services, waste collection,environmental risk mitigation, and electrification and public lightingsystems. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) iscontributing $350 million to the funding of these projects and aim toimprove the standards of living in poverty-stricken urban areas.

Programa de IncentivosEstatales

Promotes state participation, accountability, innovation, developmentin order to reduce poverty. Some of the characteristics includeresources for states that have shown better outcomes that participatein open contests for resources and an earmarked trust.

Programa de OpcionesProductivas

This is a consolidated program that seeks to provide elements fordevelopment in poor communities. The program intends to promoteentrepreneurial projects and self-employment options.

Programa de Ahorro Subsidio

y Crdito para la Vivienda

This is a subsidy for housing programs for the low-income and very

low-income.Programa Vivienda Rural This is a subsidy program for housing and for housing improvementswhich includes specific criteria. This program seeks to offer morehousing options for the lowest income sector that lives in rural areas.

Programa Oportunidades Oportunidades is the principal anti-poverty program of the Mexicangovernment. (The original name of the program was Progresa; thename was changed in 2002). Oportunidades focuses on helping poorfamilies in rural and urban communities invest in human capital,thereby improving the education, health, and nutrition of children.The program requires families to send their children to school and foreach children in school families receive educational grants.

PROCAMPO PROCAMPO extends agricultural support via payments for thecontinued cultivation of a fixed area of land until 2010, a period

corresponding to the time in which agrarian price supports are to bephased out under NAFTA. The program extends a per hectare

24 Secretara de Desarrollo Social (SEDESOL), Microrregiones. Online. Available:

http://wwwmicrorregiones.gob.mx/. Accessed: May 04, 2005.

46


47/124


Program Characteristicspayment on the production of a wide range of crops.

Por mi Jalisco InvestmentProgram

Por mi Jalisco is a state program that encourages entrepreneurialactivities from migrants in Jalisco. This program sponsors 70 percent

of the funds and the rest is invested by migrant investors. Theseprojects must be outside urban areas. Migrants must elaborate abusiness plan that needs to be authorized by a committee formed bystate functionaries. The projects are funded by IBD and private sectorgrants as well as state funds. Most of the projects are organizedthrough the Jalisco Secretary of Economic Development (SEPROE)and HTAs.

Adapted from: Secretara de Desarrollo Social, SEDESOL, Programas. Online. Available:

http://www.sedesol.gob.mx/programas/main.htm. Accessed: July 27, 2005. Interview by Luis De

la Mora with Rafael Zaragoza, Director of the state regional funds program, FONDOREG,

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mxico, March 17, 2005. Interview by Luis De la Mora with Gloria Snchez,

Director of Por mi Jalisco Investment Program, Guadalajara, Jalisco, March 18, 2005.

Table 3.1 explains several social programs in Mexico and how different actors

are involved in the process. Some of these social programs require the direct

participation of civil society. Many others depend on local governments active

participation and ability to supervise and encourage community participation. Other

programs like Oportunidades that replaced Zedillos PROGRESA have earmarked

funds that are given in cash as long as they meet certain criteria. For instance,

Oportunidades requires families to make sure they children go to school in order to

receive cash funding.25 However, in most cases social programs success is based on

the coordination between government and members of the community, especially at

25 Secretara de Desarrollo Social (SEDESOL), Programa Oportunidades. Online. Available:

http://www.oportunidades.gob.mx/. Accessed: May 2, 2005.

47


48/124

the local level. Municipalities proximity to the community allows them to identify

and prioritize community needs.

Success of Program Application

Most successful social programs with migrant communities share a common

factor. The common factor was/is an active civil society in Mexico and an active

HTA in the US. Communities on both sides of the border work extensively to

improve their communities by sending money and putting work labor. Some of thefactors that motivate HTAs to participate in social projects includes the degree of

links that HTAs have with community members in Mexico. Successful social

programs with migrants also included responsible and innovative local government.

Usually, this meant that a proactive mayor created strong links with state and central

government officials and promoted social programs personally. HTAs started

participating when local government officials demonstrated that they were not

corrupt. This also meant that mayors did not place friends in key local government

positions (compadrazgos).26 In summary, most successful social programs that

involve HTAs require project identification, fundraising and an implementation plan

that sometimes involves a partnership with the government.

26 Interview by Luis De la Mora with Macedonio Len Rodrguez Avalos, Municipal President of

Cabo Corrientes Jalisco, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mxico, March 15, 2005.

48


49/124

Mexican citizens both in the US and in Mexico demand tangible proof of

government commitment to improve their communities. There are many cases in

which HTAs participated extensively after perceiving a real commitment from local

level authorities. HTAs donors also demand tangible proof of the projects they are

implementing. The demand for tangible proof of projects often leads HTAs to carry

on projects yielding concrete results that are immediately recognizable to HTA

members and town residents. The average funds raised by HTAs to sponsor projects

are normally around $10,000 (US) a year. This amount represents an important

contribution for rural communities that have fewer than 6,000 people and a municipal

budget for public works regularly under $50,000 (US) a year.27

Problems in Program Application

Social programs in local communities require more than an active civil

society. Even with proactive mayors, financial resources and an active civil society,

problems exist in applying social programs. Social programs like 3x1 para Migrantes

face problems when hometown associations contributing money want to impose their

own projects. Some of the projects proposed by HTAs focus on building

infrastructure that beautifies their towns. Migrants promote tangible and visible

projects that they can enjoy when they visit their communities. However,

27 Manuel Orozco and Michelle Lapointe, Mexican Hometown Associations and development

opportunities (Journal of International Affairs 57(2): 2004), p. 31-51.

49


50/124

communities in Mexico lack essential services and infrastructure that are not as

perceptible for migrants. HTAs normally embark on projects that are not

overambitious and usually under $10,000 (US) a year. Like mentioned above this is a

significant contribution for low-income towns in rural Mexico.28

Other problems applying social programs include the lack of technical

capacity at the local level. If the municipalities have the structure to manage

proposals, they will be more successful in developing projects in combination withcivil society and other levels of government. Municipalities must have technical

capacity and willingness to look for projects and resources. If local governments

increase their technical capacity, they will be able to develop and propose better

projects. Also, civil society will trust that the projects promoted by local governments

are useful to the community. Consequently, hometown associations will understand

and accept projects proposed by municipalities.29

28 Rodolfo Garca Zamora, Migracin internacional, remesas y proyectos sociales: una propuesta de

desarrollo regional para Zacatecas,In memoria: Seminario internacional sobre la transferencia y uso

de las remesas: Proyectos productivos y de ahorro (Zacatecas, Mxico 3-5 Octubre, Mxico City:

Naciones Unidas, CEPAL, 2001), p. 225-250.

29 Interview by Luis De la Mora with Macedonio Len Rodrguez Avalos, Municipal President of

Cabo Corrientes Jalisco, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mxico, March 15, 2005.

50


51/124

Actors

Successful social programs require the participation of many direct and

indirect actors. In Mexico, social programs at the local level require the participation

of local, state and federal government. Social programs like 3x1 require the

participation of the three levels of government and of HTAs created abroad. Social

programs also require the direct and indirect participation of civil society. The

participation is sometimes direct through sweat equity. Indirect participation occurs

through fundraisers and town hall meetings. Feedback on these programs is also

important for effective social programs. NGOs also participate through institutional

channels in order to provide resources and technical support to local government

projects.30

Other actors include the participation of academia in the analysis of social

programs. Academia represents a good resource to evaluate whether or not current

approaches are successful. The objective analysis of academics enhances the

knowledge and accountability of the actors in the process. Media also plays an

important role in social programs. The role of media is important since a positive

review of social programs promotes civil society approval and participation.

Additionally, multilateral organizations participate in social programs by illustrating



51


52/124

the experiences of other countries involved in social programs. Multilateral

organizations play an important role since they condense positive and negative

experiences. These organizations try to develop strategies based on current literature

that addresses the particular case of each nation. Finally, entrepreneurs can play a

potential important role in social programs. There are few examples of successful

participation of private sector in social programs. One of these examples is Cementos

Mexicanos, CEMEXparticipation in social programs in coordination with Hometown

associations. CEMEXsponsors events in the US and arranges the purchasing of

construction materials in the U.S. for delivery to Mexico.31

Background of 3x1 para Migrantes

The history of 3x1 para Migrantes illustrates how the participation of HTAs

transformed from an informal and uncoordinated role to a successful case of social

partnership in benefit of the community. HTAs commitment to help rural

communities along with the visibility that HTAs gained at state and national level led

to partnerships in several projects. States such as Zacatecas, Durango and Michoacn

started having partnerships on a case by case basis. HTAs received funding from state

or federal agencies who sought funds from special appropriation programs.32

31 Telephone interview by Luis De la Mora with Salvador Garca, President of the Jalisco Federation in

Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, March 10, 2005.



52


53/124

Zacatecas represents the first state that achieved a successful partnership

between government and HTAs to develop projects at the local level. This initiative

started when the just elected governor of Zacatecas, Genaro Borrego visited Los

Angeles. In this visit governor Borrego announced the matching program, Para los

Zacatecanos Ausentes (Program for Absent Zacatecans). The Zacatecas program

matched every peso the Zacatecas federation of HTAs invested. The Zacatecas

partnership between federated HTAs and government produced a total of 28 projects

between 1986 and 1992. Regardless of the amount of projects Zacatecas became

pioneer in matching programs, becoming the basis for subsequent programs. 33

Subsequent matching programs increased over time, particularly since 1993

when SEDESOL created the program International Solidarity 2x1 (Solidaridad

Internacional 2x1). This program coordinated the application of remittances towards

social programs based on the project implemented in Zacatecas in 1986. SEDESOL

formulated the 2x1 International Solidarity program in collaboration with Arturo

Romo, the Zacatecas governor that followed Genaro Borrego. Eventually the

initiative expanded to national coverage and included municipal governments. The

expansion of the 2x1 program matched every dollar invested by HTAs with two more

dollars, one coming from states funds and the other dollar from the federal

33 Katrina Burgess, Migrant Philanthropy and local governance in Mexico

53


54/124

government through PRONASOL. Between 1993 and 1995 more than 30 projects in

21 different were sponsored. Unfortunately, the program failed to expand efficiently

in Mexico. The program was cancelled in 1995 due to lack of coordination, President

Zedillos new social policies and also due to the financial crisis that affected Mexico

that year.34

The cancellation of International Solidarity 2x1 stopped the direct

participation of the federal program in matching programs. However, the impact that2x1 in its short operation period allowed social actors to perceive the potential

benefits of social partnerships. Regardless of the amount of projects that 2x1

developed, it triggered the initiation of matching programs between state, HTAs and

local government. For example, Zacatecas continued sponsoring 2x1 projects. Jalisco

developed FIDERAZA that sponsored economic and community development.

Guanajuato developed the program, Mi Comunidad in collaboration with the HTA

Casa Guanajuato and San Luis Potosi started their Fondo de Apoyo a

Comunidades.35

34 Guillaume Lanly, and M. Basilia Valenzuela V, Clubes de migrantes oriundos mexicanos en los

Estados Unidos, edited by Lanly and Valenzuela (Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias

Econmico Administrativas, Universidad de Guadalajara, 2004), p. 139.

35 Ibid.

54


55/124

The 3x1 program was officially implemented by Vicente Fox again in 2002.

The informal partnership between federal government and HTAs culminated with the

creation of the Citizen Initiative Program orIniciativa Cuidadana 3x1. The 3x1

replicated most of the 2x1 characteristics but expanded to include contributions from

the municipal government. 3x1 is a matching-grant program that involves the three

levels of the Mexican government in HTA activities. The 3x1 program sponsors

HTAs with matching funds to support community projects. 3x1 financed more than

3,000 projects between 2002 and 2004, benefiting more than 1 million Mexicans. In

2002 only 20 HTAs were registered in 3x1, by 2005 more than 527 HTAs sponsored

projects. In 2002, 942 projects funded and in 2003 there were 899 projects approved.

Most of these investments target public infrastructure, social services and productive

projects.36

The main objective of 3x1 is to improve the quality of life in communities

with high levels of migration and poverty. This objective is pursued through a

combination of resources from the federal, state and local governments and from

organized migrants abroad. Before 2004, any group was allowed to participate in 3x1

projects. However, the 3x1 rules changed and starting in 2004 all projects require the

participation of HTAs formed in the US, even the name changed to 3x1 para

36 Secretara de Desarrollo Social, SEDESOL, 3x1 Programa para Migrantes. Online. Available:

http://www.sedesol.gob.mx/acciones/3x1.htm. Accessed: May 13, 2005.

55

8/2/2019 Professional

professional report by luis e. de la mora

Documents