UC Santa Cruz Reprint Series

Title Rural Democratization and Decentralization at the State/Society Interface: What Counts as ‘Local’ Government in the Mexican Countryside?

Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/68d6b2bh

Author Fox, Jonathan A

Publication Date 2007-07-01

Peer reviewed

eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California This article was downloaded by:[Fox, Jonathan] On: 31 December 2007 Access Details: [subscription number 788560975] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Peasant Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713673200 Rural democratization and decentralization at the state/society interface: What counts as 'local' government in the mexican countryside? Jonathan Fox

Online Publication Date: 01 July 2007 To cite this Article: Fox, Jonathan (2007) 'Rural democratization and decentralization at the state/society interface: What counts as 'local' government in the mexican countryside?', Journal of Peasant Studies, 34:3, 527 - 559 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/03066150701802934 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150701802934

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 h uhri rtflfriptfo w eiwr,a ela h olwn eia activists Mexican following the as well as reviewers, entitled two chapter from Xo a input analysts (2007). of for Fox and version grateful from California, abridged State,’ is of the and author University of revised Level The the Fourth a at Invisible is Studies Mexico’s Decentralization: article Latino ‘Decentralizing and This American versus [email protected]. Latin Cruz of Santa society, professor is Fox to rural Jonathan in state for involvement important grassroots the of especially impact is represent and question significance they This the and state? over do state the debates bridge to point that society when participation what precise, representing and more at be representation To of begin? society, forms society at and looks off leave one state the does Where INTRODUCTION h ora fPaatSuis o.4 o.&,Jl/coe 07 pp.527–559 2007, 10.1080/03066150701802934 July/October DOI: online Nos.3&4, print/1743-9361 Vol.34, 0306-6150 Studies, ISSN Peasant of Journal author. The the by are Spanish from translations Xo Eaton, Kent Franco, (Quere Lazos Potosı Luis San ua eortzto n Decentralization and Democratization Rural tteSaeSceyItrae htCounts What Interface: State/Society the at oiia otsaini h agl ua,lwicm ttsof states low-income rural, Chiapas. and largely Oaxaca the of Hidalgo, process Guerrero, in unresolved contestation this analyzes political study the This at transition’ level. rural ‘regime sub-municipal a ongoing throughout to and leading invisible but movements self-governance, largely widespread, community civic government, for mobilized Grassroots have of Mexico socially. level and economic- municipa- politically, ally local’ within villages widely outlying reproduced smaller, ‘most is subordinating often lities, municipality the is the centralization be system, authoritarian federal to to Mexico’s society considered In representing sometimes sometimes state. terrain, society, the contested to is state Mexico the representing in government local Rural s‘oa’Gvrmn nteMexican the in Government ‘Local’ as tr)adFrad eo(aaa.Tak lot auDs o rs,Jennifer Brass, Tom Das, Raju to also Thanks (Oaxaca). Melo Fernando and ´taro) cilBd (Michoaca Bada ´chitl ) aoiDomı Matoui ´), cilLyaadJnie ono o omnso ale esos All versions. earlier on comments for Johnson Jennifer and Leyva ´chitl nuzEcbd Vrcu) alsGarcı Carlos (Veracruz), Escobedo ´nguez Countryside? OAHNFOX JONATHAN n,AaeiBrut Cips,Ja inrs(Hidalgo, Cisneros Juan (Chiapas), Burguete Araceli ´n), ª 07Tyo Francis & Taylor 2007 a(ureo,Flavio (Guerrero), ´a Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ihs a pedvr nvnyars pc,cas edradrace. and gender class, space, countries, across many unevenly have in to very rule ‘right safe spread The civilian is has terrain. elected it contested rights’ of much generally, years very More remains many areas. democratization after rural rural even in that roots participatory deep say and sink to of understood, to diffusion yet poorly has horizontal remain budgeting the innovations of determinants institutional in influence the these democratic Yet a participate direct allocation. of as exercise resource to praised to many over widely citizens in right been under-represented has Notably, for the budgeting means government. participatory for local cities, America’s of demands Latin oversight political and and decision-making civic widespread class-based explicitly redistribution. supercedes and and or services organization complements of over either forms contestation now more involved, with goods reprisals result, public a fewer As and rural permeable. are space sometimes for they are political did, they structure once and they reach, opportunity than within resources more political more have allocation the governments the resource Local changes of citizens. increasingly with governments Decentralization partisan demands. local time, have local with to same of governments target coinciding the the territorially-based sometimes become At competition, decentralization, rights. of electoral of political rise than of matter a widespread discretion more is bureaucratic participation channel to and how or permit level. to whether peasant village the autonomous beyond sustained, up for scaled room is little that is self-representation there states: revolutionary sae oenne a eetata moemn n otsainin contestation while and organizations, empowerment some actual with reflect or others. may regions, some governance’ grassroots top- in ‘shared political include may spaces’ the for nation-state ‘invited in same valid down variation the empirically venues since this representation, challenging, grassroots of are official for generalizations context channels the grassroots official places, In of direct intended character protest. response, and a potential governmental contain be preemptive times to partial could a instead a or other reflect protest, be representation At of could waves ‘incorporation’ demand. previous official to for concession channels development rural Such government participatory institutions. officially in or government local eovdt lwr eeso oenet h netvsfrcontesting for incentives the increase. government, government of local local increasingly levels over are as control ‘lower’ resources counts’ and to ‘what on devolved of marches decentralization question As the government. problematizing by democratization 528 usinaotsaesceyrltos svlaegvrmn omof form a government village is relations, state–society about question nbt ra n ua ra,poesso eortzto aeldto led have democratization of processes areas, rural and urban both In agencies, development international and governments national many For hssuyfcsso n ftetrioildmnin frural of dimensions territorial the of one on focuses study This 1 utn costi aito safauesae ybt eoms and reformist both by shared feature a is variation this across Cutting 3 ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL ofaeti su ntrso a of terms in issue this frame To 2 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 eioi logvre ya‘orhlvl’wihamnsesvillages administers which rural level,’ of ‘fourth much a municipalities. Yet by system. governed three-tier also is official Mexico Mexico’s of in government control of the level under remain involve projects struggles agencies. infrastructure their development federal large-scale rural when most democratic and time, authorities same grassroots the funds At level leads democratization. local state which for demands states, target the constitutionally to to three movements regulation governance on the delegates municipal based system federal of is This government. governance of levels of recognized system federal Mexico’s REGIMES GOVERNANCE RURAL SUB-MUNICIPAL MEXICO’S the into state the of penetration the represent it locality? does or expression, societal COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ o xml,terssac oteeporaino omnt agrarian community of expropriation the as to community. often (known scholarly single resistance lands municipality a and reform the within given unfold journalistic example, a conflicts both such involving For that result, struggles impression a the power As creates ‘local’ villages. of of millions in literally coverage the live and – who anthropologist occasional citizens the but all to invisible fSnSlao tno–tenm ftemncplcne.Ytthe Yet center. municipal the of name the – Atenco community homogeneous Salvador implicitly the San of terms of the in described widely was hni sfi osyta uhbde aeasgicn ereo ‘stateness’. of degree significant yes, a is have questions bodies these such of that higher one say least to from at fair come of to is answer it that the then degree funds If are government? officials? administer high of higher-level of indicators government by levels branch above, village a the key from sense does named leaders some two Second, given local in are be Yet First, to artificial, state. government arenas. the village be two considering for level Any these relevant would local’ box. ‘most between societal this government at the interpenetration society in state–society and rural state it of between put and of boundary explicitly a discussion Uphoff draw but to their society? government interface, effort local state-society in of locate the relationship, expression example, non-zero-sum at potentially an for a vs. as most 361], relations the state, considered [2004: the be it Krishna of would criteria expression what by local sense, some have in not community, may or may may which government of communities self-representation. levels to distinct these rights many yet encompass government, scientists turn of political level in and local’ analysts ‘most policy the by as treated often are municipalities and h ovninlwso od httemncplt stems local most the is municipality the that holds wisdom conventional The vni ilg oenetwr ersnaieo h aoiyo the of majority the of representative were government village if Even 4 o oa slcl nwy ua itit,counties, districts, Rural anyway? local, is local How 5 hslyro u-uiia oennehsbe largely been has governance sub-municipal of layer This ejidos obidanwMxc iyaroti 2001 in airport City Mexico new a build to ) panchayats within 529 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 novdargoa ovrec f1 ‘ 13 of convergence regional a involved fteqeto fhwterrlpo a hneteblneo power of up’ balance the ‘scaling change these can center of poor the how rural at process the is of how levels the of regional question question to the the village Yet of from invisible action together. and renders identities analytical came collective an practice communities from this but different view shorthand, of convenient certainly point [ is land’ ‘The center to municipal the limited ( not called Land’ were the is that Tierra of campaign la Defense de the in Defensa led Communities of that Coalition organization The municipality. nytoemncplte htaetosal eoeadpo ob worth be to poor pattern. and this remote escape the domination. small, directly economic use too control perpetuate to are to and that trying able create municipalities both are to those elites state Only political local domination the corrupt class of political and levers of of authoritarian mechanisms process the since account the into control, taking that most without indicates power, understood be political centers, cannot of and regional domination economic in local political of notably of and concentration social The machinery villages. economic, the outlying their transport use reinforce merchants, – to landowners, professionals government – and inequalities. centers agro-industrialists ethnic municipal and owners, in local class based of underlying elites practices mirrors Local directly actual centers of municipal patterns the on be The will regime.’ autonomy. ‘sub-municipal however, in here, changes involved focus that laws passed states four nwihdfeetlyr fsbmncpllaeswr hsnthrough chosen were leaders sub-municipal of [ systems, mixed means layers had different 2006, states different four of officials which and sub-municipal as authorities, states in laws and municipal thirteen the municipal elected by in state named systems, between were of elected review divided had governance a states evenly thirteen on sub-municipal remarkably Based regimes. are ‘regime determine appointed of they states form and democracy ongoing Mexico’s rural structures, unresolved, local Legally, an over struggle constitutes change.’ the autonomy that village is indigenous and argument specifically main and The rural regions. on concentrating governments, municipal’ vis 13 but one, not affect to was expropriation 530 usd h oncne.Byn h suso fca oesadwho and powers official of issues – the authority Beyond formal of center. invested way be town to the supposed the are in funds outside investment much social lack government when usually except they and auxiliaries’ h oiia uodnto fsbmncplrrlcmuiisto communities rural sub-municipal of subordination political The hssuyfcsso h otsaino oe vrMxc’ ‘sub- Mexico’s over power of contestation the on focuses study This omly eiossbmncpllaesaecniee ob ‘municipal be to considered are leaders sub-municipal Mexico’s Formally, h tt i hscs h tt’ uiia branch). municipal state’s the case this (in state the Fox ,‘ oeetta ruh oehrrgoa struggles regional together brought that movement ‘a ), 07.Ntby uigte19–06dcd,only decade, 1996–2006 the during Notably, 2007]. , PRODH pueblos 06.T ee otenm fthe of name the to refer To 2006]. , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL 6 itntvlae ihnthe within villages distinct – ’ ejidos rned ubo en Pueblos de Frente n h movement the and , vis-a ` - Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 su fdcnrlzto oegnrly o xml,Subcomandante Mexico: of example, state the For in community generally. in indigenous the does more [cited as – decentralization Marcos spectrum of ideological conventional issue the across rural cuts represented throughout authorities sub-municipal demo- social federal grassroots targeted receive and Mexico. have to municipalities, struggles entitled through cratic main are channeled three they funds least cohesion, at investment political social for grassroots matter with and struggles be, resistance legitimacy may broader ground they can as they reasons: weak and small governance, ni eety otrrlaeswr oendb nofiilda power dual to official elected municipalities an those by by rule by governance seats? civil governed agrarian combining municipal with governance, were of will territorial outside areas who local of live rural of system who question most people the recently, rural is Until of however, interests finances, the ‘micro’ represent public the controls COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ h upr fbt h u-uiia edr n h edr fteaffected the of leaders had the Land and leaders the airport sub-municipal of Atenco the ejidos Defense the both in of of Communities case support of institutions the the in Coalition local as The these – when resistance campaign, democratic, sustained territorial both of of capable were structures proved dual and these overlapped Where from result, governance concerns governance. micro-democratic a municipal their As to of focus significant. agrarian the more shifted citizens authorities rural municipal many made funds investment role. development economic their lost they dismantled, udn ob cnmcatr,btatrteSlnsearfrso h early the of titles. reforms era many Salinas land of the after role but the government actors, sufficient 1990s, with economic empowered be were to they funding when deal great a mattered h usino o omnte usd h uiia etr hudbe should centers municipal the outside communities how of question The utas Just tstepol h hudb ncharge. in be should who people the It’s . ah er acighm n fh’ etn ih ecnkc i out. La him wrong kick of can the we folks take rich, to getting same he’s begins better if very charge and who in him, The municipal their watching person because we’re Marquesa? the the path, here, name if La way, be not That of that should Marquesa. and problems it themselves the state, way knows communities they the That’s the not authorities. charge, it’s the the in in of [government], it government the do that’s not we it’s way Republic There the of Chiapas. That’s one in [governing]. put communities turns and Zapatista take organize even and can doesn’t in, themselves folks own who the their else, if here, somewhere folks from the know comes who lawyer, f****** 9 nti otx,tee‘otlcl ntttoso sub-municipal of institutions local’ ‘most these context, this In ejidos 8 hl e gainrfr omnte eeactually were communities reform agrarian few While eaels eeat eaieylreijcin fsocial of injections large relatively relevant, less became Bellinghausen ejidos a iie oamnseignwindividual new administering to limited was 06]rcnl ttdhscs oan to case his stated recently 2006c] , ejido 10 leadership. h ow atsome want we do Why 7 Ejido powers 531 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ilg otemncplt,o ote ersn h uiiaiyt the rural. to are municipality determine villages. to outlying the their governments represent govern state should they the municipalities the allows do how represent constitution they or federal do The municipality, is point village? question the the key From to the they? governance, agencies are village democratic the agents govern whose of who but view Those agents,’ of turn order]. ‘municipal keeping as in in known role are are last their [this of agencies territories police because or term These sub-delegations jurisdictions, ‘delegations.’ smaller into divided or ‘commissions’ ‘agencies,’ for Center Ministry’s Interior it: the put of Studies director Municipal founding 1–2], [1999: Olmedo Gs onst pi,wt oeta ,0 n rnewt oethan than more population Carlos and with territory France smaller effectively. and a 8,000 has citizens [ country than Mexico each more rural that with noting represent Spain, 36,000, to to points NGOs, enough have Mexico Rodrı that contend not advocates municipal does Mexican municipalities, small the 532 aiis(aafrteya 00 ie nCNP 20].Wiemn of many munici- While [2001]). constitute distinct CONAPO to in of small cited 2000, too dozens year fewer are the of sometimes legally for ‘localities’ (data several, in which palities live inhabitants, least still 2,500 Mexicans at than million 25 include Almost they communities. towns; to Rau As state. the within deep from voice notable one been by also years has for discourse echoed self-governance-from-below the edge, revolutionary eiocretyhs248mncplte a f20) n 5 fthem of 85% and 2006), of (as municipalities 2,438 has currently Mexico municipal called are jurisdictions sub-municipal these areas, rural In otrrlmncplte r oecmaal ocute rdsrcsthan districts or counties to comparable more are municipalities rural Most a argument this gives authority federal of rejection Zapatista the While ge,drco foeo eioslaigmncpldevelopment municipal leading Mexico’s of one of director ´guez, a entknu yteidgnu epe,btas yneighborhood by to also cities. but right large peoples, in the indigenous organizations government the lack citizens’ by [local] the up to autonomous taken for and continue been demand has center urban, The . municipal . and . themselves the rural govern in – the concentrated communities [of structure: be actual colonialist democratization to and centralized continues electoral its power 1980s,] changed to the not able the be has and to [Since municipality] . it . Conquest weaken . . it. . to . organization, society, the dominate disorganize community of intentionally impede to to an legacy even designed and be was the and to is . period . . continues Colonial municipality community. the community, of current government the direct The the the really to not be is to closest and said abstraction is government it though of form, current level its in municipality Mexican The 11 Rodrı hl ainladsaeplc-aesotnfvrtefso of fusion the favor often policy-makers state and national While ´ guez 04 1]. 2004: , 12 ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL ´ l Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 essetefrsb uodnt omnte ocnttt hi own their ongoing villages. constitute outlying to and and to centers town ‘remunicipalization’) communities between as tensions known subordinate of (sometimes by loss to municipalities the both efforts leads resist dynamic to This in persistent are continue decentralization. decentralizing centralism authorities that in their inherent traditional power and communities Mexico’s state domains, Many in respective reproduce centers. town their live governments to subordinate people municipal politically are and rural they is, of that – pre-revolutionary ‘unfree’ millions classic the cannot phrase, use villages to these Mexican municipalities,’ Because ‘free villages. own larger their in hamlets, constitute lives small population are this ‘localities’ of designated most officially 200,000 almost Mexico’s COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ osiuinsml lmntd5 ftesaes16municipalities, indigenous developed bilingual also 116 government-designated regime [ through state’s post-revolutionary rule elites indirect the the of regional century, means mid-20th non-indigenous of By to 59 148]. them eliminated subordinating simply constitution oenne oeo hc aae ogvr h mle highland smaller self- the of govern institutions to indigenous 19 customary managed many the the own which Yet through been of their municipalities long exclusion. some had retained economic governance, government’ and had ‘local racial communities Instead, government of of people.’ level the embodiment the from far to was municipality ‘closest the power, political local mid-20 For the rebellion. until sidewalk Chiapas the the power, on political-economic with non-indigenous Cristo of attention center San regional world-wide the in to example, came politically up claims. regions ended land ancestral which and to centers, identities town drawn ethnic the shared often with of communities were influence dividing of regions In area these villages. the in surrounding reflect in boundaries the of of centers inter-municipal headquartered Mexico’s exploitation as addition, history economic often In neocolonial and and tensions. domination are colonial racial of ethnic govern- centuries governments with and municipal towns municipal market to outlying class flows regions, reinforcing and funding indigenous mutually increased centers level, and municipal municipal authoritarian ments, persistent the factors: between at three least rule at tensions by exacerbated these are communities that suggests eakbyltl le mgso akdIdaswakn wya a but at halls, away town whacking of Indians files readers. masked newspaper the City of Mexico trashed shocked Images palace’ and else. ‘municipal rebels stations the little centers, police remarkably municipal seven the of command destroyed in while rebellion, Chiapas nCips hr o-nieosrnhr n amr a monopolized had farmers and ranchers non-indigenous where Chiapas, In indigenous Mexico’s in centers municipal many of legacy colonial The literatures NGO and journalistic official, scholarly, the of here review The bld a aa,idgnu epewr obde rmwalking from forbidden were people indigenous Casas, las de ´bal th etr.I 91 oee,anwstate new a however, 1921, In century. th etr.Drn h rtdy fthe of days first the During century. 13 Burguete 14 2004: , 533 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 R’ lcoa oooy ngnrlrrldmcaiainlge behind lagged democratization the break rural to general change. first political the in urban among monopoly, were electoral municipalities rural PRI’s few a while However, Monjardin 534 efgvrac?I te od,wa rvssbmncplrgm change? regime sub-municipal drives what village words, for other allows In that and self-governance? change democratization institutional municipal or for decentralization, claims decentralizing civic grassroots first, comes Which FOUR STATES ACROSS DYNAMICS REGIME SUB-MUNICIPAL COMPARING [ stability and votes impunity delivering with for ruled exchange who professionals, in other or teachers often intermediaries, h otcnetdpbi fc nMxc [e.g., Mexico in Hindley office public most-contested the poiinatvsswr ilda hycmage o municipal for campaigned they Michoaca of states as the [e.g., of Chiapas killed areas and rural in were notably democratization, activists opposition ua tts–Cips iag,Gerr n Oaxaca. and Guerrero low-income, Hidalgo, most power Chiapas, Mexico’s of – of four states balance and across rural contested villages centers and the municipal centers compares town between between discussion relations The power villages. changing outlying the analyzing be by than center. rather town themselves, the govern from to or outsiders, capacity to whether by and be and right governed villagers, may the participate issue have For key to villages the parties. not Instead, opportunities political accountable. in created government all peoples local town rarely hold of indigenous the has and skeptical outside competition poor deeply live partisan rural often who the are Mexico, poor particular in rural elsewhere the As of centers. representation the far improving been has process been terms. rarely this those has level change’ in ‘regime municipal framed centers municipal town the Mexico’s between and rural at power homogeneous, Yet – from of through balance governance villages. the local flow outlying in contest and involved to to stakes [ communities the began raised rural time and for first investments incentives the new social created for for governments funds municipal of transition. amounts democratic contested a of are villages midst outlying the many in competition, still electoral experiencing are Mexico in ogbfr ainldmcaiain uiia oenetwsoften was government municipal democratization, national before Long h eto hsatceepoe ntttoso ua ertra governance territorial rural of institutions explores article this of rest The for insufficient be to appears municipalities of democratization Electoral substantial 1990s, the in decentralization encouraged policies federal As 1999; , 1986; , o n Herna and Fox Gutie Pare 15 ´ ´ 1990; , rrez fe h 98peieta lcin udeso left of hundreds election, presidential 1988 the After 97.Nwta vnms ua municipalities rural most even that Now 1997]. , ´ ndez Rubin 1992; , 1997; , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL o n Moguel and Fox o n Aranda and Fox Rodrı Rus onlu,Esntd and Eisenstadt Cornelius, 1994]. , ´ uzadWard and guez 1995; , 96.This 1996]. , n Guerrero ´n, 1995]. , Lo ´ pez Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 uhrte r ul ersne,adhv ttmsldtergoa coalition. regional the led times sub-municipal at bloc, have for civic and coalition represented, highlands, indigenous fully autonomous regional northern are this authorities a In the decade. sustained long-lasting of a authorities than most Sector more agrarian the Zoogocho and of the municipal One in whose reelection). is Mexico’s Municipal permit experiences that not regional (recall of does terms Front mayoral system leaders multiple village electoral United over local autonomy the of Miahuatla sustained coalition of have and of the municipality state vast and cases the Mazateca, the within the Sierra with the in power of Presidents as bargaining their government, increase federal to coalitions, sub- most regional for and municipalities for both jurisdictions. holds municipal Oaxaca in autonomy Local change institutional decentralization. and of action decentralization citizen process this between a that drives interaction suggests patterns reciprocal state-wide four of of discussions following The COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ gainrfr omnte,wihmyo a o vra ihsub- with than overlap more several include not communities may agrarian include municipality. cases, or few one a municipalities may In agrarian which agencies. single with municipal communities, coincide reform Elsewhere boundaries agrarian local municipal communities. territorial between cases, of relations reform forms some of are In Both web communities. diverse governance. reform the agrarian by and influenced governments also are Mexico, ua uiia n u-uiia governance. sub-municipal and municipal rural eiinmkn n ontrqieteitreito fpltclparties. of political of 418 intermediation decade, the a require than not community do more non-Western and by For governed decision-making been law. have customary municipalities or 570 of balloting Oaxaca’s partisan furthest forms through the diverse themselves gone govern through to have are whether Municipalities laws decide self-governance. to whose to allowed state rights Mexican indigenous recognizing the towards as policy-makers, out stands development Oaxaca rural with Oaxaca activists. interviews research, NGO field and and of leaders Mexico’s results community the reports the synthesize in in assessments press communities trends The states. indigenous explores poorest grassroots in section four of This change capacity the authorities. regime the participation, local sub-municipal influence for influence turn to disincentives in communities and governance the local incentives On of creating accountable. institutions governments by municipal hand, shape hold will other to practices capacity and organizations citizens’ civic rural grassroots of density and breadth nsm ein,idgnu uiiaiishv oetgte oform to together come have municipalities indigenous regions, some In h oilfudtoso ua oennei aaa si uho rural of much in as Oaxaca, in governance rural of foundations social The 19 ne-omnt oflcsriecosctigise for issues cross-cutting raise conflicts Inter-community n e e uhrgoa coalitions regional such few Yet ´n. 20 16 nteoehn,the hand, one the On 535 18 17 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 fyuadImgigt ilyu’wiesotn e ntebc ntelocal the in back the in her shooting while [ you,’ tired ‘I’m kill clinic declared to The have medical going to candidate. I’m reported and is opposition if you He promised, of leading administration. had his she a audit and to leader, down elected, community region Afro-Mexican gun Pinotepa an the to was in challenger secure mayor party outgoing sufficiently political an and example, felt law notable minority customary one significant the In a both regimes). in (under persists The municipalities which exclusion. Oaxacan rule, political in of boss and keep social authoritarian to persistent involves important of first is forms it different several self-governance, mind village and cohesion community 536 ytmi uhmr ute hl ayOxcnvlae r nedself- indeed are villages Oaxacan many of While vis-a subtle. pattern governing more the much ago. is decades from system two different just quite found have and would transition, one exclusion in complete is rights citizenship akdvtn ihs ote on omngon ousa oa bosses local unseat to but ground information common the found had they [ women so lacked but the rights, clout while voting formal lacked politics, had local their men with returning about comply The information to duties. returned leadership who civic migrants local male region, among Mixteca allies Oaxaca’s found in women democracy sub-municipal to transition gendered oe u nyi ersnaino irn ubns nohr,married others, In [ [ common husbands. vote are to migrant reprisals leadership, positions right of exercise the leadership representation lose hold leadership in women and community only life but hold 60% public vote, In can in low. is but participate participation of [ vote vote, In level their elected. cannot can but be vote to women they can right they most the cases 21% and In assemblies positions. the the both in excluded, speak of and to completely by vote 9% are to governed According right women municipalities the shift system, from Oaxacan significant participation. customary the a non-partisan of indicate civic 10% the studies in full recent female survey, Yet than systems, comprehensive governance Mexico. broader less village rural indigenous as of towards – treated much all not in be though as – to many continue by citizens Women representation. [ region political Mixe the in leaders villager of – arrest autonomy their of their Ruı in exercise case intervene to the to attempt in that authorities local as communities government addition, with state conflicts In in on search. favor count to often beginning can before bosses waiting by escape murderer’s adnd n Artı and Maldonado Vela oevr nsieo aaasgnrlyhg eeso ohintra- both of levels high generally Oaxaca’s of spite in Moreover, hr essetpteno xlso nOxc’ ua oa governance local rural Oaxaca’s in exclusion of pattern persistent third A eod edrcniust eamjrai fecuinfo local from exclusion of axis major a be to continues gender Second, ´ Arrazola z ´ squez 04.I oevlae oe a xriea nietrgtto right indirect an exercise can women villages some In 2004]. , 2006b]. , -i h uiia etr nysm r ersne nthe in represented are some only center, municipal the `-vis Ruı ´ n Habana and z ´ a 2004]. , 22 Cuellar 04.Saeatoiisfclttdthe facilitated authorities State 2004]. , vrl,Oxc’ edrdrgm of regime gendered Oaxaca’s Overall, 02.Frtoewmnwodo who women those For 2002]. , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL Dalton 2005]. , 21 noecs fa of case one In Regino 2006, , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ilb epnil. nhsve,tesaegvrmn akdtelocal the backed government [ hall’ state town the the controlled view, subdelegate] always regional his have Governor’s ‘who In [the bosses responsible.’ comrades, other be to Lo to will or shots Antonio shot me the were before mayor-elect, to Shortly people happens the meeting. four council fired, town least first at were mayor’s San villages, new of the outlying case at from death the in votes example, of For majority withdraw. quietly affairs, always center Martı not municipal When do in de center. losers participate remain to the municipal they manage the do as at agencies long sub-municipal decision-making as from accepted disenfranchised the self-governance facto of village selection with the scale, funds. investment and in federal participate for gatekeepers to the the law right at are who the customary self-governance Oaxaca, – from authorities non-partisan local municipal excluded in their Oaxaca’s being retain case of in often cost the words, villages rather assembly system, other necessarily community sub- governance by In the not governed also where balloting. for is is vote than center states town also this the other citizens if but especially below, In authorities, from authorities. chosen municipal are municipal governments selecting municipal of process COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ eurdtesaegvrmn omk ulcteaonso h annual the of how know amounts to mayors the allow would public This make municipality. of each to to guidelines allocated levels government federal municipal grants Oaxaca, state the other In involves the transparency. government public those required of of of degree levels determinant) hold program’s between (and fund to power indicator of revealing capacity balance One the no accountable. government having vis-a the autonomous while be can government, authorities village words, other nieoslddmcaiain oa oieba wnyo h protesters the of independent, local, twenty of In beat case funds.’ paradigm police [ community a local as mishandling democratization, history of long indigenous-led impeach accused COCEI’s to the is voted of villagers who spite of agent], majority to the current assembly after new [the agent, They a municipal call (COCEI). new to Isthmus a ‘unwillingness elect the mayor’s their of COCEI force the Peasants protesting to and were attempted Students Juchita longtime Workers, villagers of the of Zapata, hall Coalition by Ejido town of controlled the into case were way the centers In town party. the ruling where municipalities to n ad n h conaiiyo uiia n tt oenet to governments allocation. resource state to comes and it municipal when especially of – other accountability the the on the on government, villagers and of levels hand, higher one from autonomy sub-municipal between Ruı nti es,teeapast easgicn rdofbtenautonomy between tradeoff significant a be to appears there sense, this In uhcnit vrlclatnm o uligvlae eentlimited not were villages outlying for autonomy local over conflicts Such h aaa xeineas ugssteiprac fdistinguishing of importance the suggests also experience Oaxacan The ´ Arrazola z nItys,atrtewnigmyrlcniaewntak oa to thanks won candidate mayoral winning the after Intuyoso, ´n 2006a]. , n ogudrtecnrlo h opposition the of control the under long ´n, pzMartı ´pez nzsi i something ‘if said ´nez Ruı ´ n Rojas and z -i h eto the of rest the `-vis 2005]. , 23 537 In Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 r raie n aegnrtdrgo-iepaatavcc and advocacy peasant region-wide generated have many organizations. and but marketing cohesion, social organized of degrees are widely-ranging have [ villages Guerrero accountable officials Guerrero government for state hold to newspaper needed and tools Trasparencia the independent to with municipal them funds provide local municipal to both effort about an a [ information in leaders, disseminate statewide of community to continued leaders the supplement have all municipal NGOs special published to which also least a group, distribution at Ministry interest Nevertheless, as public state Finance run. Oaxacan data press a state outside entire reached the little bulletin’s copy one the 2003, circulate purchase Under in to bulletin. would attempted However, state bulletin official offices. the this government in state data circumstances, Oaxaca’s the share. normal published as fair Ministry insofar a requirement, Finance them transparency its this giving with are complied formally mayors government their whether assess funding their to compare characteristics. to similar as of well municipalities as other due, with were villages levels and towns their much iceinr oe ocet itit ob diitrdb appointed by administered be councilors. the to town commis- has elected districts be mayor of simultaneously the create can council who inhabitants, ‘delegates,’ to advisory are 20,000 municipal power over commissioners a with district discretionary municipalities form Formally, In levels. to sioners. two mandated includes and that elected hybrid a is 538 oiia xlso ynnidgnu oiia ossbsdi h town the in based bosses persistent case, political this non-indigenous In villages. by outlying exclusion the in political lives and Amuzgo ethnically obcm e uiiaiis si h aeo ohslhaa which Xochistlahuaca, of case the repression. in of as decade or long municipalities, centers, a gain town experienced to new the efforts in become elites of authoritarian form to and the violent take from often autonomy campaigns costly. village and these political long regions been regional indigenous has by democratization In municipal controlled for struggle are The decision-making authorities bosses). municipal municipal but from where democratization, excluded (especially are of communities processes local notable elsewhere experienced have municipalities elected dominate, will governance appointed. sub-municipal of vs. system which of terms in afdzno ureosmncplte ihppltosgetrta 20,000 rural. than a substantially greater least or populations primarily at with either management, are municipalities urban Guerrero’s for of primarily dozen designed half be to appears provision h aai lohgl eeatfrsbmncpllaes opri them permit to leaders, sub-municipal for relevant highly also is data The npatc,tesaesmncplgvrac eiei ntasto.Some transition. in is regime governance municipal state’s the practice, In 2005]. , 24 ureossse fsbmncplgovernance sub-municipal of system Guerrero’s 26 27 ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL hscetssbtnilambiguity substantial creates This h aoiyo h ouainis population the of majority The Trasparencia 03.Local 2003]. , 25 hl this While EDUCA/ Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 R-oiae tt ogesadrmvdfo fc.Ide,i snot is political partisan it a as Indeed, used a be office. to by charges from corruption corruption for removed with Mexico elected in and charged uncommon where was congress municipality 1979, state The rural from PRI-dominated opponents. low-income date political very governments by a left-wing attacked Alcozauca, law. been of of have rule mayor mayor the who promoting the presidents of municipal name against the state charges in the law legal the pressure broke to pursuing leaders – municipal by road another [ up coast to federal responsible follow commissioners the to blocking 22 – government public leading protests for irregularities, of responsible round serious officials found they state mayor, which detained the expel and and [ hall hall works town response, town the a the audit getting to not center- occupied authorities After the state ticket). on Revolution pressure elected been Democratic to had the (he of corruption Party left alleged mayor’s the protest to pcfi oa ulcwrs hi etrcnlds‘ecl nalthe all on call ‘we concludes letter Their works. [ communities public daily local commissioners national the village specific to Chilapa, wrote Elders of of municipality Jornada Council the indigenous the of with case together the In mayors. aal feggn nmltn ietaction. are direct they militant ignored, in are petitions engaging [ their of when programs’ capable and rural together, to come from services do benefit municipality basic provide can they we that that Principales us, due so is communities rights by our what demand to front, tlattet ilnsadmr hnfit retwrat gis local against warrants it, arrest put leaders fifty Suljaa’s than of one more Valtierra, and David with As killings met municipality, activists. been twenty autonomous has democracy facto least municipal de for at campaign own This their Suljaa’. declare as known to villagers led center COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ u-ucpllaeshv locm oehri ureot defend to Guerrero in together come also have leaders Sub-muncipal u-uiia edr fe oetgte opoetaantcorrupt against protest to together come often leaders Sub-municipal ntemncplt fSnLi Acatla Luis San of municipality the In moelaeso u omnte....I pt falo our of all not of [ are government spite responsible the those in In working . deaths, . are . communities. and they free, beatings only our the of on denunciations leaders impose etra rtedybfr.I ea ihteageso gis our against aggression the [ with law began from customary the It our isn’t respect and before. problem not people day This did the delegates. authorities or their municipal yesterday elect couldn’t just the to they that [right] what but was communities’ long, more too for any poverty take with up put folks Here Habana oacs h ao fbekn ro gemnst ar out carry to agreements prior breaking of mayor the accuse to 03.We oto h ilg omsinr nalrerural large a in commissioners village the of most When 2003]. , aaa Ruı Habana, pueblos 2003b; , ftemncplt fCiaat omacommon a form to Chilapa of municipality the of ] aaaadSaavedra and Habana ´ n Saavedra and z ssycostumbres y usos n 0cmisoescm together came commissioners 30 ´n, 04.I fet hs sub- these effect, In 2004]. , 03.Te o naudit, an won They 2003]. , Rojas ,we hytidto tried they when ], 04 20]. 2004: , osj de Consejo 539 La Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 nysrie o eaei pt fhsiiyfo h tt oenet it government, state crime. the reducing from substantially hostility of in spite succeeded in decade also a for survived only aosas cue h oenro xrm atsnba ntedistribution the in [ bias municipalities partisan to extreme funds of of governor [ the the money’ accused in stolen also no mayors declare is who to There al. Anyone them. together there. et see are came can funds to municipal leaders like with would village built works the ‘The press: case, national this In weapon. ersne hog einlasml,teRgoa ewr of Network Regional the assembly, the regional are including Comunitarias [CRAC, diocese, They Authorities 1995, a leaders. catholic village Community the in through sub-municipal and by organizations governed represented coops is social coffee Police Community advocates, diverse Montan rights by the indigenous involves Launched governance Police. good promote to tt uhrte conal,a nterrcn iamn n reto three of [ arrest before charges and robbery disarming year on recent agents full their police in state a as accountable, [ waited authorities police state community PRD) the of Habana Revolution, legitimacy and center-left and the Democratic existence of the the candidate recognizing the of as elected Party (newly governor the government, tityvlneradnnpria euiyfreicue 1 participants, 612 [ includes municipalities force six security across reaching non-partisan and volunteer strictly aldt oprt,a ntecs fMrula hr ebr ffive of the for members respect where of lack Marquelia, mayor’s of the [ protest case Police to hall Community the town in the occupied as villages cooperate, to failed ofotn uhrtra uiia n tt uhrte [ authorities state and [ than municipal rather in sidestepping states authoritarian programs, programs, federal confronting other with economic primarily dealt of in organizations governance as accountable they and Guerrero for decades, for campaigned organizations regional form organiza- have to economic together of come have both leaders and tions Local dispersed where authorities. often municipal security how unrepresentative a shows public set it it failed, effective does had isolated only accountable, authorities Not state survived. of and and municipal – terms level process regional in self-governance the precedent to indigenous up alternative scaled consolidated as has a out that of stand police case community rare Guerrero’s a practice, in mean would autonomy 540 oeetivle h rnfraino ertral-ae om of forms territorially-based of transformation the police community involves Guerrrero’s of features distinctive movement most the of one contrast, h otntbeeprec nwihsbuiia edr aetogether came leaders submunicipal which in experience notable most The ntecneto eiosogigpltcldbt vrwa indigenous what over debate political ongoing Mexico’s of context the In 02.We h R otoldtesaegvrmn,opposition government, state the controlled PRI the When 2002]. , sub 06.Cmuiyplc nohrrgoso h tt lohold also state the of regions other in police Community 2006]. , mncpllaescnatcletvl,efcieybypassing effectively collectively, act can leaders -municipal n neeuiecmiteo i einlleaders. regional six of committee executive an and ] Habana avdaadHbn elsSantos los de Habana and Saavedra 2004]. , Bartra oriaoaRgoa eAutoridades de Regional Coordinadora Rojas 30 ntrso eain ihtestate the with relations of terms In 96 00.I eea,these general, In 2000]. 1996, , Guerrero 05.TeCmuiyPlc not Police Community The 2005]. , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL 29 2006]. , oemncplleaders municipal Some ˜ einsCommunity region’s a umndlCarmen del Guzman Fox 2004]. , 96.In 1996]. , Ocampo 28 This Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ate aeol sdaddvddu.We hygtt oe,te r all are they power, to get they Independent When ‘political Guerrero’s us. that of divided same.’ People, and leader the Ma’paa used a Indigenous only of and have case parties Mixteco the the rights in of indigenous as Organization Grassroots claim, seen. conflicts often be electoral activists to municipal remains in governance died early sub-municipal the activists first in the PRD imagine for to of [ difficult halls dozens been town have when of would majority 1990s, outcome the This 2005. won in PRD time the direct and a competition, as party officials. serves government that state force and civic municipal both armed to region-wide counterweight a form to governance COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ al o tt oenetrcgiino e raaa indigenous breakaway to ( effort Ranch’ new unsuccessful Democratic Democracia New far la ‘the so de of of the municipality is new recognition cases the notable launch government most of One state municipalities. for calls hc oehrwt non fot o u-uiia eortzto – democratization [ sub-municipal trend for a efforts constitute to ongoing appears with together 1996. – since which municipality Chilixtlahuaca the form to Rodrı right communities Mixteco their to twenty for addition, Mixteco, called In campaigned are have Amuzgo). villages two the and municipalities Nahua of three (most PRI-controlled with municipality multi-ethnic different own their three launch to ‘belong’ ( nieosmncplte edt aedcsostruhparticipatory through new decisions for make call He to to As together inter- tend come assemblies. of that terms municipalities villages in The indigenous challenges resolution. new conflict with village democracy participatory up’ ‘scaled poigves’Tergoa edrhpto ntets fblnigthe balancing of task the villages, on different the took the . of leadership . . interests and regional The ignored, views.’ opposing be not must Gutie osj ePelsIndı Pueblos de Consejo ttemncpllvl oto h tt’ uiiaiisnwexperience now municipalities state’s the of most level, municipal the At rsrtdefrst eortz u-uiia oenet edi unto turn in lead governments sub-municipal democratize to efforts Frustrated nieoscvcmvmnst eetaiedcnrlzto combine decentralization decentralize to movements civic Indigenous ge oso oct tlatsxohrcssi otesenGuerrero, southeastern in cases other six least at cite to on goes ´guez ´ 03 76]. 2003: oga h neet fteeegn rgoa omnt’[.. the [ [i.e., communities’. community’ ‘real the ‘regional of as those emerging possible with the clash only not of did was replication interests movement] CPI the the words, the as other within would long In decision-making efforts theirs. not political community was their of that that community fact a the some profit to and movement, strongly regional directly reacted the clashed of delegates center nature municipal egalitarian hitherto [new] the a with choosing of necessity the but rrez 97.Ytwehrtecag ntepryi oe ilaffect will power in party the in change the whether Yet 1997]. , 31 .Bgnigi 95 prxmtl hrycmuiisthat communities thirty approximately 1995, in Beginning ). br’ td fGerr’ nieosPols Council Peoples’ Indigenous Guerrero’s of study ´bert’s ´ genas Rodrı rCI ouet,‘h iwo n person one of view ‘the documents, CPI) or , ´ guez comisario 01 2004]. 2001, , csa eitrbetween mediator a as acts acoNuevo Rancho He ´ bert 541 , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 rgm hne per ob ne a hogotrrlGuerrero. rural Garcı throughout Carlos activist way self-governance. democracy local municipal under to local right to be the According demanding to increasingly are appears Communities change’ ‘regime done. representa- than political said territorial easier of is structures tion autonomous new of construction h rga o efMngdDvlpet(PADS): Development Self-Managed for Program the which within community the [ to of achieved’ access be redefinition as to symbolic such has ‘a leaders than criteria consensus church rather promote regional objective with consensus working account to by by and into center infrastructure, municipal taking communications proposed vote, new delegates majority persuading their by choose rivalries to inter-village buffered activists Democracy 542 nsieo h ayetra n nenlcalne,asub-municipal a challenges, internal and external many the of spite In akteclueadcpct htpomncplavctspooefor propose advocates pro-municipal 4 they that . of . capacity the . and Nevertheless challenges culture protection. the the secu- environmental lack public face and services, fund-raising, to public rity, welfare, comm- governance with social exercise freedom, development: the community to have degree consensus, they certain practice, unity a In exercise . . they . self-governance facto, of de municipal authorities, the between community distance the political and and geographic the not. of Because other the locality, authorities, same municipal the the in by operate the recognized commissioners as the one two to status . sometimes . same . that competitive the name increasingly point have are authority delegates elections the centers]. municipal [Their] areas, commissioners. municipal rural the to In possible and does delegates. not the assemblies, cities it’s where representative the neighborhoods, have [in areas] large rural in neighborhoods [in only municipal villages Paradoxically, their the their the by by or for assemblies, is in locality and elected, tendency main be dominant to the the delegates practice, of in Nevertheless, commissioner appointed president]. are the delegates by the and [either elected are commissioners the Legally, etCucl,tw oni etns dioyCucl of Councils recognized are Advisory representation meetings, their for council Develop- spaces Municipal The town in participation Commissioners. There Councils, their . . . for bit opening of ment by bit incipient role growing, municipal an representation been has is community delegates the the and of commissioners what the recognition the help. on Guerrero, ‘solicit’ to In hall depend town the to to go they authorities proposes, government community lead th ee fgvrmn.Saltw,ptraitcattdsoften attitudes paternalistic Small-town, government. of level He ´ bert 03 2.I te od,the words, other In 82]. 2003: , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL aJime ´a nz of ´nez, Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 aeofie u htdyorlae a htt et nhshue’Atra After house.’ his in death to to shot able was be not leader would our We leader day voters. PRI that ‘‘extra’’ ‘‘elected’’ But the of office. that hundreds so take with one protest, As elections, to little. had going mean ‘We were elections it, Local put of attraction. leader tourist advantage local local a taking the as from pollutes waterfalls villages local center the indigenous town downstream The cattle preventing livestock. from river, without lands. communities indigenous them communal the leaving own protect rustlers, not their did on police firewood municipal like The collecting left from we’re people and indigenous best the have they that [ so piglets’ us their used have ‘They language: eotdyihbtdb naiat’fehmmre ftehg eesof levels high 1970s. the of the memories is in participation fresh conflict civic inhabitants’ and agrarian by incipient, still inhibited is reportedly Hidalgo in democracy Municipal Hidalgo COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ r lce yrsdnso h oaiyo nana ai,termandate their cause.’ basis, ‘for annual can residents they an and by level, on municipal removed locality the at be the needs community of for advocating residents includes by 2001 subdelegates in In and elected law delegates centers. are new Municipal a town self-governance. passing village the succeeded, recovered sub-municipal of that of campaign issue their control the and to their raised again, on organizations to governance hold civic thanks to and social able arenas various were other 1998, they land, in the of power Though amounts peasants. local large landless losing of up thousands ranchers the ended by and this ranchers invaded governor In lost been the debate. between had they negotiations lands public 1983–84 whose but of of result self-governing, the subject as were right the communities been sub-municipal has 1970s, relations officially power are community leaders Sub-municipal sub-delegates. and ‘judges’). delegates as as their known designating (known of tradition leaders the retained village region Huasteca the in communities aeo cxciln h 2Nhacmuiisacutfr7%o the of 70% for account communities Nahua 22 while the population, the Acaxochitlan, In rights. of indigenous and case democratization for movements recent Mexico’s ohlclgvrmn n h oa rnhso eea agencies. federal organization civic of local branches the of local ‘ leader – the Peoples’ a Indigenous ‘Help and quotes account government Bellinghausen’s local both oiisdsorgsmncplaccountability. municipal discourages politics h uiia oiealwpiaelgest u ibrwieprohibiting while timber cut to loggers private allow police municipal The ncnrs oms te tts iag’ a htrgltsmunicipal- regulates that law Hidalgo’s states, other most to contrast In ua oennei uho iag a e oeprec h mat of impacts the experience to yet has Hidalgo of much in governance Rural ohi h a n nofiildsore huhteei tl uegap huge a still is there deeds. though and discourse, official words in between and law the in both Bellinghausen mestizo aiusi h oncne otnet monopolize to continue center town the in caciques 2006a]. , ieeMculTlapaleguiani Mechual Aitepe 33 32 npatc,hwvr ayindigenous many however, practice, In 34 ngnrl oee,Hdlostate Hidalgo however, general, In 35 nteNahuatl the in ’ 543 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 l ie h ih ocos hi w omo government.’ of form own their choose at to have people so right ‘the do the states: to times which right Constitution, all Mexican their the claimed of They 39 Article municipalities. under launched autonomous Zapatistas own the their rebellion, the of after Beginning 38 year bet- systems. one governance is almost 1994, municipal distinction December Zapatista key in the first and The official cleavages. the main ween four along dividing regimes, oehr tcigbik nteetyaso h onhl ni h state the until hall town [ the negotiate to of independent promise come entryways its an had with the but villages complied in 26 group, government from bricks small people stacking a indigenous together, 1,500 as charge that protesters in reported official the journalist state The dismissed had back. security money mayor not their were The of demanded that corruption. they projects and for for to out, villagers him and carried from investigate works, contributions public to financial promised received congress on even state deliver him’ the mayor on PRI town killed the the call over that took demand center criminal people to indigenous hall 1500 true town Hidalgo Huazalingo, no In the villagers. be the from knows: to bosses everyone appears that PRI secret [ ‘there the and on killed, light [non-indigenous] was shed to leader investigation civic local haa a diverse has Chiapas below. from Chiapas and above contention, from of both point pressure major under a governments become municipal has to with funds any tool In municipal loyalists. potential charge for protect powerful accounting to to capacity case, a the as capacity with well as them government’s dissidents, such potential provides discipline state whether fraud The with determine mayors to weapons. outgoing difficult not political is is are that it agency file charges officials, an of to elected hands congress from the in state autonomous is the oversight accounting leading government municipalities, state [ cases 84 ten Hidalgo’s in accounts the charges the of in irregularities 48 found accounts of 2002 the of review government’s also but entitled, contributions. were they own it which to as villagers’ to insofar villagers the resources unusual of government was tendency only case growing not this a involved allocation, of resource evidence over as mayors seen challenge be could account this 544 n diosifre h aait oiin hc ne pemphasizing up ended which the position, and Zapatista government the leaders the informed rights indigenous advisors between Mexican independent and negotiations of group political diverse A 1996 Zapatistas. the in issues Bellinghausen ako uiia conaiiysmtmspooe aspoetby protest mass provoked sometimes accountability municipal of Lack bs fmncplfnsi omni iag.Freape h state the example, For Hidalgo. in common is funds municipal of Abuse uiia eortzto n u-uiia uooywr priority were autonomy sub-municipal and democratization Municipal 2006a]. , aah n Chavez and Camacho efacto de uiia n u-uiia governance sub-municipal and municipal ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL 2003; , Camacho Camacho 03.Because 2003]. , 36 05.While 2005]. , mestizo Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 asceadtedsatigo ayo h uooosZapatista autonomous the of Acteal many 1997 of infamous dismantling the the municipalities. including and Zedillo followed, massacre then-President crackdown Andre San Nevertheless, the insurgency from earlier. away backed cited accountable quickly to obstacles self-governance key the of local many addressed measures proposed These the governance, of view, level intermediate alternative new Regions. main a Multi-Ethnic the of Autonomous creation over the governance promoted municipal which of transforming the COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ hl locetn h osblt fatnmu einlassociations regional autonomous of authorities: municipality possibility and sub-municipal the both creating between regime, also sub-municipal Mexico’s Andre transform while to San proposed the explicitly called Culture were and what of text final teghnidgnu atcpto nteamnsrto fdifferent to of government. and they of administration them, that levels the to so and in assigned arenas resources, participation funds of indigenous public transfer the strengthen gradual administer and can orderly themselves coordinate the resources, and out and develop indigenous carry efforts manage, as their to actions optimize capacity their themselves to their among actions increasing associate regional and thereby together out come expressed indigenous carry to already able to majority rights be with will with subjects law, as by municipalities character their the in population, and communities The law municipal decision. the their violate impeach approve that to practices with for their able responsible or Municipalities are be they parties. will when authorities political population of indigenous majority participation the requiring and respective popular elected be assembly, their validated, will service, agents by legally Municipal community be removed councils. will open of and institutions systems consultation and and their traditional practices normative including their their their to of and according elect recognized, right laws, to be the will communities authorities population, municipal and indigenous peoples majority indigenous with municipalities In ehnsssol eecuae opri h atcpto of participation the permit to encouraged be indigenous should Mechanisms president. municipal the by designated ssycostumbres y usos 39 pueblos n omnte neetrlpoess without processes, electoral in communities and n h tt ogessol epc and respect should congress state the and , pueblos 37 pueblos ntescinseict haa,the Chiapas, to specific section the In 38 sAcrs oenetcounter- government A Accords. ´s h prpit uhrte will authorities appropriate The . sAcrso nieosRights Indigenous on Accords ´s n omnte,adnot and communities, and 545 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 utrsettoewod o.’Ti eiincnre h non- the confirmed decision This not.’’ [ August, movement’ do Zapatista in you the who vote, this of to want option announced those who confrontation those council respect respect we The that way bodies. must respect ‘The same the electoral to ‘‘in organization, promise that the requesting rights their municipal of fulfilled 2003 human work Councils] the the independent Government in [Good Notably, an . than . . others. rather Zapatista to on parallel authorities, institutions according rule legitimate government as their as elections, local impose them operate Zapatista to accept overlap who attempting that and those They appears rule it municipalities communities. primarily far, Zapatista So conventional authorities. organized with by Government territorially ‘Good regional elected institutionalized more Councils,’ the into transformed turn epnet h oenetrpeso facmuiypoeto the article). on this protest of community mentioned beginning a movement resistance the Atenco of the their by at repression (led City declared government Mexico in of Marcos declared periphery the Alert’ Subcomandante ‘Red to EZLN an when of response part 2006, as indefinitely, May suspended operations of as uncertain [ institutions eetn hf nteitra aac fpwrfo iiint military to civilian Zapatista from power the of balance on five internal [ as the of leaders impasse down this Zapatista in as interpreted shift observer suspended crack longtime a close remained reflecting one not least governments At local later. did months their but government communities, the expectation, 546 a rmuiu xml ftemlil ik ntecano authoritarian of chain the in links but extreme multiple Chiapas. an the in was of authorities, rule municipal example federal pro-government unique and reward by from state out far from to carried support was with massacre efforts strategy, leaders, and Acteal ‘remunicipalization’ [ the 1998 of that allies own In fact local its part forces. strengthen pursued to as pro-autonomy government intended isolate state seen the to of 1999, widely and allocation but supporters was construction, government infrastructure services to poverty lead of government did name doubt government’s the the no in the period, funding reduction this in federal During the Increased battlegrounds presidency. in efforts. became the counter-insurgency governorship lost governments the in it of municipal which loss authorities official in PRI’s elections municipal the after 2000 before period same official and the municipal in rebellion of notable Zapatista contending especially the was participation among This activities. the cleavage counter-insurgency main involves second regimes the municipalities, h uueo aait iiintrioilgvrac tutrsbecame structures governance territorial civilian Zapatista of future The governance autonomous their reorganized then movement Zapatista The eae oti rtcevg nCips ewe fca n Zapatista and official between Chiapas, in cleavage first this to Related Gonza ´ Ross e Casanova lez 2006]. , 2003; , ev n Burguete and Leyva 40 Martı ncnrs oMro’ apparent Marcos’s to contrast In ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL ´ nez 03.I 05te eein were they 2005 In 2003]. , SIPAZ otcmn] The forthcoming]. , 2004]. , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 yidgnu einlsl-oenneiiitvsta ae akt the to back dated that political initiatives of [ self-governance degree driven 1980s high regional was space’ a of indigenous renegotiation of ‘regional by a spite calls Mattiace in what local Margaritas, pluralism including of [ of municipality, arenas space polarization Ocosingo and create huge layers to multiple the efforts complex, in the self-governance detail community in explains Leyva COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ h oeo n ftetw oniost rts uiia corruption municipal protest to councilors town burned the and hostage of mayor local one the a [ of held elites’ by citizens evidenced home local of as by the thousands weakened, more which since in driven has uprising hold but This process intolerance a monopoly. religious case, political well-known to most in of the attributed villagers is abuse Chamula outlying widely over Juan of San conflicts residents of of stop municipality expulsion the not mass did The power authority. municipal political local of ‘indianization’ nteNrhr eini h 90 [ 1990s the in region repeated Northern was pattern This the centers. municipal in the Burguete then agencies, [e.g., Torres the 1960s reclaimed the by and control indigenous Burguete largely under come had municipalities rcie oee,a es ntehgln ein omnte consistently communities region, In leaders. highland agents. own local the their their in name designate least to at power however, the practice, State authorities institutions. municipal governance gives actually-existing of law web diverse the and regime raiain ofr einwd oriaigCletv [ Collective Coordinating social region-wide with a together form came divided and to which was inclusionary councils, organizations municipality a more ‘micro-regional’ of large pluralistic a transformation The into into the experiment. led a institutional strategy reportedly 2000, participatory development year Margaritas the regional Las own in in clientelistic governorship their the mayor with lost PRD PRI new micro-regions, the After into structure. governing organized were Margaritas oaaa oe eebne rmmryn e rmotietevillage, [ the expulsion outside from of men indigenous threat marrying Frontera in under from in banned only municipality were the not women in and Comalapa, community persist, non-indigenous a rights In women’s communities. on restrictions extreme flclpltclatoiyddnthpe ni fe h aait rebellion. Zapatista the after until happen not did authority political local of oe’Zptsawmntesle eonz ulcyta hi own their that ‘family slowly. the publicly implemented as been known recognize has is themselves law’ what women’s votes, women ‘revolutionary two Zapatista have often vote.’ husbands practice in Castillo Henrı h hr ancevg sbtentefra-ea uiia governance municipal formal-legal the between is cleavage main third The ncnrs,i agrmncplte,sc sOoig,te‘indianization’ the Ocosingo, as such municipalities, larger in contrast, In omly oe nCipshv h ih ovt nlcleetos But elections. local in vote to right the have Chiapas in women Formally, ´ quez 2004]. , Mattiace 2004]. , Leyva 01 03.Mr eety itntvleswti Las within valleys distinct recently, More 2003]. 2001, , 01,20b 07.I h uiiaiyo Las of municipality the In 2007]. 2001b, 2001a, , 41 Mariscal ncnrs oohrrgoso haa,highland Chiapas, of regions other to contrast In otcmn] nieospol first people Indigenous forthcoming]. , 2006]. , Bobrow-Strain 07.Ytthe Yet 2007]. , 43 nlvsof Enclaves Rodrı efacto de ´ guez 547 42 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 548 hwhwrrlctzn r otsigpritn uhrtra rule, authoritarian persistent contesting are here reviewed citizens of states handful four rural sub- a the recognize of only how signifi- formally experiences changes, they be the show legal which Yet to to of autonomy. degree appears decade municipal the between frameworks a increased contrast states legal comparing the Mexican Yet on and change. Based practices and cant. actual continuity in of mix changes turn precise bodies. in the two about which first the and governments, between municipalities, power state of from balance from the autonomy as regulated autonomy government, gain of sought between to levels municipalities relations different fought relations across state–society bodies power cut Contested sub-municipal that changing villages. struggles in power outlying involved trends and transition broad centers regime municipal the sub-municipal ongoing documenting Mexico’s by mapped has article This CONCLUSIONS ytmo oennei lal i rniin’i h es fmvn none in moving of sense sub-municipal the state’s in another. the transition,’ or ‘in that be direction clearly conclude to is to governance continues of premature regimes. state system governance be the sub-municipal would and of it patchwork state, Therefore diverse the a throughout by flux characterized in remains politics a os’ ucin vrtigi efacto.’ the de here is ‘because it, everything force. puts by politics function, or municipal law, doesn’t Chiapas of of law rule observer the close through a conflicts negotiation, As such through whether more Power determine resolved only can downwards. are but research power conflictive, comparative remain redistributing systematic villages more and be centers may party’s municipal ruling between mayors former relations the back of to weakening the capacity and politics electoral competitive today’. residents ten Chenalho Pedro every San as Herna such freed, suspects. municipalities, were highland other massacre main Acteal with the the of for along two responsible presidency and claimed the armed, leaders lost remain human troops PRI paramilitary forces of the of paramilitary since frequency governorship, down number the the gone and Though overall have reduced. to the appears been but violations not rights 2001, has Chiapas Several in in strategies. dismantled stationed conflict are were low-intensity regions posts and experiencing large military occupation simultaneously as military while insofar state’s governments, case, the local extreme parallel an by clearly governed is Chiapas transition, ako oesseai miia aapeet ealdgeneralizations detailed prevents data empirical systematic more of Lack e ttesm ie na nraignme fmncplte,more municipalities, of number increasing an in time, same the at Yet political in governments municipal rural Mexican of context the In ne atlo[06 oe hti some in that notes [2006] Castillo ´ndez ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL 44 ,‘hr soeslirfor soldier one is ‘there ´, nsmay municipal summary, In Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 matwt agbeipcso h esnlscrt ftosnsof thousands this offered of recently security Placido, Cirino personal leaders, in the region-wide CRAC’s [cited the assessment local on scaled-up, of impacts and combines One The families. tangible leaders (CRAC) word. with community last Authorities impact elected the Community have to of civilians accountability policing Chiapas, Network Zapatista in the community Regional to governments contrast In with local innovations. significant parallel experience most being the of of decade-long one represents spite Guerrero’s in months regimes, uprising. for civic 2006 unprecedented on and prolonged hung massive Oaxaca’s governor a by by as the challenged revealed when insofar as with crisis, faced coalitions, – when political still power resistance anti-democratic in politics popular remain elite to level widespread backing national level local–state Yet national require elites opposition. these governors political the national to or of purview government matters the the from allies in far respective often either their by – and primarily governments elites driven state local are in citizens, transitions rural these between that struggles – power conclusion third a suggesting states Guerrero. behind, other far and In lags Chiapas Hidalgo. democratization in and level local as Oaxaca change, towards state Tlaxcala, change regime of and regime states municipal national sub-municipal the in of predated as process – process uneven transitions society. this Mexico’s to state alongside states, the unfolding some are represent they In they not, transition. are Where they where directly. and society most – village state governed determine represent the leaders that to and sub-municipal institutions autonomous, the represented and a are democratic are For these regime. population, they rural invisible, how the their generally of govern though share to distinct, large a right constitute the governance for lives their risking of communities. point own the to sometimes COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ okn costeuee adcp frrlMxc’ sub-municipal Mexico’s rural of landscape uneven the across Looking states, within and between both vary transitions sub-municipal These long-term a undergoing still is regime this that is conclusion second The sub-municipal of systems Mexico’s that is here conclusion first The hncmsotaed ehv omv owr ihu akn too talking without forward move and to our burrows have his we to making ahead, goes to out about animal come have comes We brag that adversary. then because to and political gophers, like your like scares don’t documents that work I because official louder, have we speak what us actions Our practice. . send . in . anniversaries. it political have bureaucrats have police we community racism The least The of because peoples. at recognition indigenous legal but us against given recognition, not legal have They have recognition. don’t we Now Bermejillo 2006]: , 549 Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 550 uiia eietasto sta none ubr fgrassroots they and line, democratization. of the autonomy local on local of lives numbers their significance made putting the have By uncounted demonstrate priorities. peasants their sub- that of and one ongoing workers democratization Mexico’s is rural most of of transition significance most is movements the the regime Yet of action authorities. question local municipal the collective truly to in answer for grounded direct are capacity autonomous municipal they these where by whose of driven sustainable be support will counterweights, change that the regional rule, of majority without toward legitimacy shift or to the with to in managed levels, have grounded regional they are because to authorities. out they exceptions stand up also These because scale they institution-building Chiapas. rule, only and alternative majority not certifiable Oaxaca the cam- Guerrero, notable than defensive in are common here though more cited resistance, their initiatives much micro- of broader provide are name therefore for the paigns the can in foundations of bodies documents governance official holders institutional informal local sign of the more These to legitimacy literally them communities. of the are empowers vulnerability question that leaders political ‘seal’ to Sub-municipal frequent opponents movements. a territorial for social recognized, – difficult relevance officially representation primary Their very voice. Their their to it for budgets. limited vehicles makes their not be of base is can significance size they their the that that or is is mandate question The formal what?’ councils. their ‘so seats development the holding sub- to perhaps agricultural answer and regional and projects, local works government-controlled keeping laborers them public to in hold modest largely landless and out limited leaders carrying make is village of order, it select governance to primarily Sub-municipal does able accountable? are up difference farmers What peasant made subsistence government. communities level when village of significance fadwe h aac fpwri ua ra ewe tt n oit is society and state between areas rural in power of balance the when and If the assess to how of puzzle the involves conclusion final and fourth The tjsiei hr shne,bcueweeteei ugr hr is there hunger, is there where because hunger, subordination. great is really and there we’re dependence with if if deal matter to won’t justice have it at market, also internal we the But and CRAC. production justice: provides that institution aeytkntoses n,cmuiyscrt o 0Tlapaneco, 60 for security have we community we which one, and and in advanced struggle steps: have new Mixteco two a we don’t about learned, taken we dream have autonomy to barely but we continue word practice years to ten the in going In it are use . . doing . to that We’re it prohibited regime. call this even scares it’s it region because my In much. mestizo omnte,adto ehv rae an created have we two, and communities, ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 LCL OENETI H EIA COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ 6Sm fteiesi hsscinwr icse nFx[2002]. Fox in discussed were section this in ideas the of Some 16 5TeIsiuinlRvltoayPryo R ( PRI or Party Revolutionary Institutional The 15 4Setepooo laiaoin Altamirano of photo the See http:// 14 focus the see hence approved, 1990, are municipalities in new founded for demands Jara,’ local of ‘Heriberto fraction small Municipales a Only Servicios 13 de Centro the On and 12 and ‘community’ Federalism for both Institute means government’s the ‘pueblo’ see municipalities, term Mexican on the background For discourse 11 political Mexican in that Note 10 esnlealcmuiain airSalinas, Javier communication, email Personal 9 oeta hr a itepaatpoetaantterfrso h osiuinsagrarian constitution’s the of reforms the against protest peasant little was there that Note 8 7 oeta h aoiyo ua rdcr nMxc,ee eoetercn ceeainof acceleration recent refer the to before even governance Mexico, municipal in producers Mexican rural in of specialists majority the few that the Note of 6 one is [1999] Olmedo 5 nprso ua fia o xml,wa pert efrso utmr ueadtherefore and rule customary of forms be to appear what example, for Africa, rural of parts In 4 ti aet a httenweomu ieaueo eetaiainrtisadsic urban distinct a retains decentralization on literature enormous now the that [1990]. say Fox to see safe democratization, is rural It about information 3 background For 2 [2007]. Coelho Schattan and Cornwall and 2004], [2002, Cornwall see spaces,’ ‘invited On 1 oiia oe nMxc o uho h wnit century. twentieth the of much for Mexico in power political eursteapoa ftesaecnrs,apoa sulkl ncssweetetown the where party. cases same in the unlikely by municipalities ruled is new is approval of territory congress, subordinate creation ‘lose’ state the would the Because that of autonomy. center sub-municipal approval of the issue requires the on here http://www.iglom.iteso.mx/ at www.cesemheribertojara.org.mx/ Government Local Mexican the on and Researchers http://www.e-local.gob.mx/wb2/INAFED/INAF_Inicio of Network at Development Municipal ‘people.’ owloeteicesdcranyascae ihidvda adtte.Friiiloverviews initial the For titles. members of land many impacts individual led the with members’ accountability associated of their certainty leadership increased of that the lack promised welcome and [ to were distribution resolved leaders land be national unequal internally would because land. problems part arable agrarian in of specific time, half the one approximately at for provisions account they 123]. and arable 114, 1970s, [1982: the and CEPAL of 1930s see 56% the details, for For accounting hectares. levels, Ejidos rainfed subsistence 56% standardized at included in 16% peasants, land were another than 86.6% and of less population, reinterpretation produced producer sub-subsistence total members a at the ejido on Of of based subsistence. 63% Mexico, for categories, rural enough Chayanovian of through analysis data class census rigorous 1975 most the to According oilieult,hv ogbeen long have inequality, state’. social the of level ‘fourth the to explicitly om ftpdw oenneta n pcmeigwt ertra om fcitizenship- of forms territorial state-regulated with rule, competing indirect up colonial [ end of representation that legacies based governance be top-down to of out forms turn often representation societal nLtnAeia e aeo 20] o n oul[95,FxadAad [1996], Santı Aranda participation and and and Selee Fox decentralization see On generally, [1995], more [1997]. Moguel Mexico Tendler and in and the Fox issues [2001] most, [2005], Rowland municipalities than Cameron [2002], rural village see of Pallares studies the America, development to For Latin [2007]. closer in Tsai the is see on government, that focus and village government Chinese specifically Crook rural that vast see studies of whose overviews, recent level barangay Panchayats, For comparative a India’s [2005]. broad Larson of on For and democratization research Ribot here. of and justice body [1998] done Manor the be of cannot exception experience partial the with Mohan bias, and Hickey and debates recent [2001] On Kothari 2007]. and 1996, Cooke [1994a, see Fox reforms, [2004]. others, participation such among in official see, participation and over Mexico, autonomy rural of degrees in varying programs of analyses empirical comparative For r oenetrgltdarra eomcmuiis otwr rae between created were most communities; reform agrarian government-regulated are ntePiipns e sel n sat[04.O conaiiydnmc in dynamics accountability On [2004]. Iszatt and Estella see Philippines, the in ejido Ribot 2004]. , eom,seCreisadMhe[98 n adl [1996]. Randall and [1998] Myhre and Cornelius see reforms, aJornada La sub NOTES sbitnepoues–ta s semi-proletarian. is, that – producers -subsistence aur 94 swl sBrut [1998]. Burguete as well as 1994, January 4 , atd eouinr Institucional Revolucionaro Partido aJornada La Fox 94]Nt lota nmany in that also Note 1994b] , ndlRı del ´n orsodn,2 a 2006. May 22 correspondent, o[2006]. ´o exercised ) ejidos 551 , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 9Tesaegvrmn perdtlrn tfis,btqikybcm nuprie For unsupportive. became quickly but first, at tolerant appeared 2007], [2005, government Johnson state [2003a], Santos The los 29 de Habana [2006], Rueda Cruz see details, For 28 0I a usAcatla Luis San In 30 in mayors female of percentage the while that noting worth is it however, context, For 21 0Itrvlaeln oflcsi aaahv oghsoyo rvkn loyconflicts. bloody provoking of history long a have Oaxaca Melo. in Fernando conflicts with 2006 land April Inter-village 10 communication, 20 email Personal 19 Lo 18 7Temncplt nlds8 ilgsadtepplto ubr vr2,0,o hc 68% which of 20,000, over numbers population the and villages 87 [2004]. includes municipality Tlachinollan The in data 27 demographic See 26 Orga ‘Ley See 25 4O ureosrrlsca raiain,seBrr 19,20] eov 20] Espinosa [2001], Dehouve 2000], [1996, Bartra see organizations, social rural Guerrero’s On 24 democratization, local on funds social municipal of and impacts Kearney the see of governance, discussion community further indigenous For in migrants 23 of roles changing the On 22 6A n uooosmncpllae u t ‘indigenous it: put leader municipal autonomous one public of As decades two 36 with practitioner development rural a http://www.e- Cisneros, at Juan from 76, is and account 75 This Articles Hidalgo,’ 35 de Estado del Municipal [1990]. Organica Schryer ‘Ley the see See account, comprehensive 34 2006. a April For 6 communication, 33 email Personal 32 do maa’phaa ‘the that note who leaders local quotes also He [2006b]. Bellinghausen in Cited 31 7SeAn See 17 552 aedahtrasaantarltv,adol re hmi epnet asprotest mass a to response in them had freed who only someone and jailing for relative, police a detailed community against jailed [ a police threats state For death [2001].] the made others. DeHouve case see one among region, in the example, [2004], of Tlachinollan part in and governance municipal [2003] of ethnography Rowland [2005], Rojas Rodrı see struggle, democratic local this Nsuyfudta ny35 fMxc’ uiiaiisaegvre ywmn n of one women, by governed recent [ are A America municipalities Mexico. Latin Mexico’s throughout in of low rates 3.5% also lowest only is the that it found low, study very UN is municipalities indigenous Oaxaca’s edr ntepyolpooe test cuytetw ali rts,t eedthe defend to protest, in hall town the occupy [ to service others community unpaid provoked of payroll principle the on leaders either in authorities federal of responsibility [e.g., the conflicts stress these exacerbating experts or ignoring agrarian and Historians 2006. May 15 Melo, Fernando specialist development municipal Ramı Assies, see states, other with Herna o-pns paigad6%i lieae[ illiterate is 65% and speaking non-Spanish www.pads.com.mx at Development). Social for Programme 2004. (Self-Management PADS NGO See training grassroots a Social, hwtegvrmn htwt rwtotrsucs[rmtesae ecnpromote can we state] justice, the administer [from to how resources to government is goal without the main to The or . demonstrate . . to] with zone [and the that in development problems sustainable urgent government most the the with deal show to able be to authorities journal the in articles of series the see Guerrero, in governance local Autogestio of study detailed He the [1998], during Damian Mexico rural rural Mexico’s in in Bank 2000]. and projects World Fox [1997, Bank the see Fox World on Oaxaca, see context of of 1990s, broader role state For the process. the addresses policy in also municipal municipalities study rural This of [1996]. sample Aranda representative a on based [1994]. Camacho Robles and [2004] Besserer etradNOeprec nHdlo(neves eioCt,ArladAgs,2001). August, and April City, Mexico (interviews, Hidalgo in experience NGO and sector local.gob.mx/wb2/ELOCAL/ELOC_Ley_Organica_Municipal_del_Estado_de_Hidalgo. building are we because revenge ‘as the wives that deplore and also sisters They face.’’ daughters, power.’ ‘‘dirty popular their means raped it because have ‘‘tlapanecos,’’ soldiers called be to like not Habana pzadRbe aah 20]adproa mi omncto ihOaxacan with communication email personal and [2005] Camacho Robles and ´pez ne aar 19] eod 20]adVela and [2002] Recondo [1999], Navarro ´ndez ˜ y Mun aya 2002]. , ´ n ulse ntesaecptlb h rgaad Autogestio de Programa the by capital state the in published , nc e uiii ir e saod ureo’At.18 0B accessible 203B. 198, Arts. Guerrero,’ de Estado del Libre Municipio del ´nica ˜ z 20] Dı [2005], oz, n h eiino h uiia uhrte optsm omnt police community some put to authorities municipal the of decision the ´n, br 20] ono 20]adYwrk 20] o h eut fa of results the For [2005]. Yaworsky and [2005] Johnson [2003], ´bert a ots[02,EUA[05,Foe rz[2002], Cruz Flores [2005], EDUCA [2002], Montes ´az rzSvlaadVnuaPatin Ventura and Sevilla ´rez Anzar ge arr [2005]. Cabrera ´guez aaad o Santos los de Habana 2005]. , Tlachinollan Dennis ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL suz[00,20b.Fracomparison a For 2000b]. [2000a, ´squez 1987]. , 04 1.Fragne nlssof analysis gender a For 21]. 2004: , pueblos ˜ 2003b]. , [2006]. o n ii oit named society civil and npr lDesarrollo el para ´n Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 4Proa omncto,AaeiBrut,1 pi 0 2006. 10, April 10 Burguete, Araceli communication, [2004]. Personal Project Media 44 Chilo Chiapas of municipalities See north-central in 43 process this of study region, detailed this a in For elections formal 42 On 2006. Zapatista April ( 10 of Burguete, Liberation Araceli view National communication, Personal of of Army 41 point Zapatista the the is from EZLN hostilities, The government 40 of descriptions detailed For 39 elnhue,Hran 06,‘euca indı ‘Denuncian 2006c, Hermann, polı Bellinghausen, partidos ‘‘Los 2006b, Hermann, Bellinghausen, emjlo uei,20,‘oe e VCnrs ainlIndı Nacional Congreso IV del ‘Voces 2006, Eugenio, Bermejillo, orwSri,Arn 2007, Aaron, Bobrow-Strain, LCL OENETI H EIA COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ ata rad e.,2000, (ed.), Armando Bartra, ata rad,1996, Armando, Bartra, ugeeClyMyr rcl,19,‘oe oa autonomı y local ‘Poder 1998, Araceli, Mayor, y Cal Burguete 8SeHerna See 38 the while Oaxaca, in experiences rights indigenous with associated was position former The 37 ny Mun Anaya elnhue,Hran 06,‘ubo ausd Acaxochitla de nahuas ‘Pueblos 2006a, Hermann, Bellinghausen, alcaldı de 3.53% solo mujeres ‘Presiden 2005, Judith, Nelda Anzar, Mun Anaya sis ilm usRamı Luis Willem, Assies, Nacional otx fbodrrca n ls oflc,seBbo-tan[2007]. Bobrow-Strain see conflict, class and racial broader of context [2000]. Sonnleitner and Viquiera see communique the see leaders, municipal [2004] ihsrfrs nldn h einn fteFxamnsrto,seHerna see administration, Fox the of Andre beginning post-San the including of reforms, overview rights broad a For [1999]. rmtdtefraino uooosMliEhi ein nteraeso nunein influence of which areas ANIPA, region. their Tojola’bal the in the formation, Regions as Multi-Ethnic political such Autonomous non-Zapatista Chiapas, of a formation with the associated promoted was position latter Castillo aedcsoso eeomn n h adt fteratoiis ctdin [cited authorities’ their of can mandate that themselves the communities the and be development it that on and people, decisions the of make voice the account into taking 0,May. 109, Jornada continu Grande Jornada Mexico,’ in Reform Studies Constitutional Ethnic of Politics the and Rights odnadDra,N:Dk nvriyPress. University Duke NC: Durham, and London n em a e ar(eds.), Haar der Van Chiapas Gemma Marı and in municipales,’ luchas y comunitarias nieosPols ihsi aaa Mexico,’ Oaxaca, in Rights Peoples’ Indigenous dtra Era. Editorial in Oaxaca and Chiapas Mexico: in Rights Peoples’ Indigenous Perspective,’ and Comparative Diversity Cultural of No.4. Vol.23, October, Jornada ˜ ´ ˜ [n.d.]. , z ljnr,20,‘h mrec n eeomn ftePltc fRecognition of Politics the of Development and Emergence ‘The 2005, Alejandro, oz, naislados,’ an z ljnr,20,‘xliigtePltc fRcgiino tncDvriyand Diversity Ethnic of Recognition of Politics the ‘Explaining 2004, Alejandro, oz, ,Me 8April. 18 , 4April. 24 , eioCt:UiesddAuto Universidad City: Mexico , 1August. 31 , ). ne n ea[98 08]as ie nLo in cited also 80–86] [1998: Vera and ´ndez xc,DF:Sinfiltro. ´xico, o.,No.1. Vol.1, , ureoboc.Cmeio,cuaao urilrse aCosta la en guerrilleros y ciudadanos Campesinos, bronco. Guerrero aJornada La rzSvlaadMarı and Sevilla ´rez Cro niaeEeis adwes oe,adVoec nChiapas in Violence and Power, Landowners, Enemies: Intimate ora fLtnAeia Studies American Latin of Journal ´ ia e u:Utopı sur: del nicas 6February. 26 , REFERENCES sa www.laneta.apc.org/enlacecivil. at ´s saisdsuao:Tasomcoe uae en rurales Transformaciones disputados: Espacios nm erpltn Xochimilco/Ecosur. – Metropolitana ´noma adlCre etr Patin Ventura Carmen del ´a aEgnaRysRms en oulViveros Moguel Reyna Ramos, Reyes Eugenia ´a gnsitnod utre aMarquesa,’ La quitarles de intento ´genas sAcrspltclcnit vrindigenous over conflicts political Accords ´s ´ tcsn o uns oodividen,’’ solo buenos; son no ´ticos scmeia nGuerrero en campesinas as ultno ai mrcnResearch American Latin of Bulletin pzMnadnadRbleoMilla Rebolledo and Monjardin ´pez aindı ´a Eje ´gena,’ ai mrcnadCaribbean and American Latin ´ o.7 No.3. Vol.37, , ct aait eLiberacio de Zapatista rcito gn nCips Rebeliones Chiapas: en ´gena a nMxc:Unifem,’ Mexico: en ´as n 0an 40 ´n: jrsa[aJornada] [La Ojarasca ˜ ,20,‘Autonomy 2006, o, ne Castillo, ´ndez nadSitala and ´n ˜ sd uhsy luchas de os eioCity: Mexico , Rodrı ,i the in ´, ´ tal et 553 guez ´n, La La La ´ n , . , , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 aah,Cro,adSli hvz 03 Dtca anomalı ‘Detectan 2003, Chavez, Silvia and Carlos, Camacho, demandara Hidalgo de Congreso ‘El 2003, Carlos, Camacho, ugeeClyMyr rcl,adJieTre uqee otcmn,‘Remunicipalizacion forthcoming, Burquete, Torres Jaime and Araceli, Mayor, y Cal Burguete ula,Mry,20,‘a uee aaa,sndrcoavtre Ozolotepec,’ en votar a derecho sin casadas, mujeres ‘Las 2002, Mireya, Cuellar, EA,1982, CEPAL, aeo,Jh . 05 MncplDmcaiaini ua ai mrc:Methodological America: Latin Rural in Democratisation ‘Municipal 2005, D., John Cameron, aah,Cro,20,‘Indı 2005, Carlos, Camacho, ugeeClyMyr rcl,20,‘haa:Neo uiiispr satrmunicipios espantar para municipios Nuevos ‘Chiapas: 2004, Araceli, Mayor, y Cal Burguete 554 atn agrt,20,‘aparticipacio ‘La 2005, Margarita, Dalton, OAO 2001, CONAPO, ok,Bl,adUaKtai 2001, Kothari, Uma and Bill, Cooke, 2004, Project, Media Chiapas ens hlp 1987, Philip, Dennis, eov,Danie Dehouve, ro,RcadC,adJmsMnr 1998, Manor, James and C., and 2007, Richard Crook, (eds.), Power Coelho of Schattan Vera Issues and on Andrea, Cornwall, Reflections Transformation? for ‘Spaces 2004, Andrea, Cornwall, 1998, (eds.), Myhre Ilustrado, David Correo and El Wayne, Chilapa,’ Cornelius, en obras de incumplimento ‘Acusan 2003, Principales, de Consejo onal nra 02 Mkn pcs hnigPae:StaigPriiaini Develop- in Participation Situating Places: Changing Spaces, ‘Making 2002, Andrea, 1999, Cornwall, (eds.), Eisenstadt Todd and Hindley Jane Wayne, Cornelius, Dı rzRea ls,20,‘itm eSgrddPbiaIndı Publica Seguridad de ‘Sistema 2006, Elisa, Rueda, Cruz a ots aso 02 Cmotmet lcoa nlsmncpo indı municipios los en electoral ‘Comportamiento 2002, Fausto, Montes, ´az polı (eds.), nSnig lPnr un Pinar: El Santiago en uooosUiest fMexico. of University Autonomous Lascasianas Jornadas Ordo Rolando nihsfo Ecuador,’ from Insights 4mncpo hidalguenses,’ municipios 84 Jornada extremo,’ en pobres municipios indı los y Estado autono iy dtra iulAglPorru Angel Miguel Editorial City: otmrsade an diez a (eds.), EDUCA costumbres in costumbres,’ y usos July. gomexicano agro iy ISSEioilMge ne Porru Angel Miguel CIESAS/Editorial City: Centroamericanos. A.C. Alternativa, ifrnei atcpto nDvlpet’i aulHce n ie oa (eds.), Mohan Giles and Hickey Samuel Transformation? in to Tyranny Development,’ From in Participation: Participation in Difference Jornada La iie atcpto nNwDmcai Arenas Democratic New in Participation Citizen ment,’ Studies. US-Mexican Mexico Studies. US-Mexican in for Democratization Center Diego, San California of University CA: ihEgihsubtitles] English with Press. 9219, nAieHe Me Aline in 1992–1998,’ fia atcpto,Acutblt n Performance and Accountability Participation, Africa: ´ ´ xico tico ms’i oav Aı Rosalva in ´mos,’ aremunicipalizacio La D okn Paper Working IDS eioCt:IsiuoFdrlEetrlCnr France Electoral/Centro Federal Instituto City: Mexico , eioCt:CIESAS. City: Mexico , 5December. 15 , l,2001, `le, 3October. 13 , Economı ´n nie emarginacio de Indices ˜ eioCt:SgoXXI. Siglo City: Mexico , zCfets(ed.), Cifuentes ez ´ ea ntepsdlPN eidgnso eaia identidad e legalidad neoindigenismo, PAN: del tiempos en genas nevlaeCniti Oaxaca in Conflict Intervillage ´ apsn giutr mrsra [tipologı empresarial agricultura y campesina a o e eooiinolegal reconocimiento del ˜os naod geopolı de Ensayo haa ei Project. Media Chiapas , eioCt:Isiuod netgcoe Jurı Investigaciones de Instituto City: Mexico , ultno ai mrcnResearch American Latin of Bulletin mn n ai eod (eds.), Recondo David and ´mond empoderamiento gnsd iag cpnalcaldı ocupan Hidalgo de ´genas W r qa:ZptsaWmnSek’[pns n Tzeltal and [Spanish Speak,’ Women Zapatista Equal: are ‘We ´ d Herna ´da Isiueo eeomn tde,Sse nvriy No.170. University) Sussex Studies, Development of (Institute aJla A nvriyo aionaSnDeo etrfor Center Diego, San California of University CA: Jolla, La , nCips nr apz acnrisreca apolı la contrainsurgencia, la paz, la entre Chiapas, en n aJornada La aJornada La atcpto:TeNwTyranny? New The Participation: nlssitricpiai e ovno19d aOT IX OIT. la de 169 Convenio del interdisciplinario Analisis ´ ´ a/CIESAS. npolı ´n ,2000 n, ne,Srl a n ai eeaSer (eds.), Sierra Teresa Maria and Paz Sarela ´ndez, eorc n eetaiaini ot saadWest and Asia South in Decentralisation and Democracy izvcsade an diez a voces Diez ´ iaindı tica 7December. 27 , tc elsmjrse o uiiislaao de llamados municipios los en mujeres las de ´tica ctd, nXcilLya n rcl Burguete Araceli and Leyva, Xochitl in acotado,’ eioCt:CneoNcoa ePoblacio de Nacional Consejo City: Mexico , ´ 1December. 31 , a. h rnfraino ua Mexico Rural of Transformation The ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL ´ e rnwc,N:RtesUniversity Rutgers NY: Brunswick, New , odn Verso. London: , ea o uiiistlapanecos municipios Los gena: odn e Press. Zed London: aaa evco aauaEducacio una para Servicios Oaxaca: , abig:CmrdeUniversity. Cambridge Cambridge: , pcsfrCag?TePltc of Politics The Change? for Spaces gn ouiai, nJose in Comunitaria,’ ´gena ize-lads amayorı la ex-alcaldes, diez a ´ a ncetspu cuentas en ´as o:Rflxoe or o ssy usos los sobre Reflexiones ˜os: a ie ba pu obras piden ´a: iea el eorcaen democracia la de Dilemas o.4 No.3. Vol.24, , sd suisMxcnsy Mexicanos Estudios de ´s untoa oiisand Politics Subnational odn e Press. Zed London: , ´ epoutrsdel productores de a ´ gnsd Oaxaca, de ´genas lcsd 8d los de 48 de blicas dcs National ´dicas, aJornada La ´ blicas,’ aJolla, La , Mexico , ´ Mexico , Emilio ´ iaylo y tica ade ´a ,16 ´n. La ´n El Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 LCL OENETI H EIA COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ aaa ial 03,‘iunrtnds6fninro eGerr u uevsbnorsen obras supervisaban que Guerrero de funcionarios 6 retenidos ‘Siguen 2003b, Misael, Habana, aaa ial 03,‘Policı 2003a, Misael, Habana, aaa ial 02 Oognlbra oa o policı los a total libertad ‘Otorgan 2002, Misael, Habana, umndlCre,Jose Carmen, del Guzman Gutie o,Jnta,20,‘o uo euo epre de reflujos y flujos ‘Los 2000, Jonathan, Fox, o,Jnta,19,‘h ol akadSca aia:Cnetn h ocp nPractice,’ in Concept the Contesting Capital: Social and Bank World ‘The 1997, Jonathan, Fox, 1998, Gisela, Damian, Espinosa 2005, EDUCA/Trasparencia, o,Jnta,19,‘o osCvlSceyTikn h oiia osrcino Social of Construction Political The Thicken? Society Civil Does ‘How 1996, Jonathan, Fox, Cook, Lorena Maria in Economy,’ Peasant New Mexico’s of Politics ’The 1994b, Jonathan, Fox, in Institute Indigenous National the of Role The Poorest: the ‘Targeting 1994a, Jonathan, Fox, 2004, (eds.), Iszatt Nina and Marisol, Estrella, ureo Jesu Guerrero, Gonza o,Jnta,adJloMge,19,‘lrls n niPvryPlc nMxc:The Mexico: in Policy Anti-Poverty and ‘Pluralism 1995, Moguel, Julio and Jonathan, Fox, 1996, Aranda, Josefina and Jonathan, Fox, 2007, Jonathan, Fox, relacio ‘La 2002, Jonathan, Fox, o,Jnta,adLi Herna Luis and Jonathan, Fox, 2005, EDUCA. o,Jnta e.,1990, (ed.), Jonathan Fox, indı pueblos los de electoral ‘Sistema 2002, Cipriano, Cruz, Flores a Luı San Jornada Guerrero,’ uiia eAczua ureo’E oroIlustrado, Correo El Guerrero,’ Alcozauca, de municipal ora fItrainlDevelopment International of Journal municipio aia nRrlMexico,’ Rural in Capital Mexico in Change Studies. (eds.), Regime U.S./Mexican Molinar and Juan Relations and State-Society Middlebrook J. Kevin Studies. U.S./Mexican Fox for Jonathan Center and UCSD, Craig CA: Ann Jolla, Cornelius, Wayne in (eds.), Program,’ Solidarity National Mexico’s efi el Jornada la de Perfil xeineo etOpsto uiia oenet, nVcoi Rodrı Victoria in Governments,’ Municipal (eds.), Opposition Ward Left Series. of Monograph Contemporary Experience Studies US-Mexican for Center Diego, Program San Funds California, Municipal of Oaxaca’s in Participation Community Press. University Me el en Municipales No.1. Fondos Vol.9, los de experiencia La cuentas: Ediciones. Jornada socioecono (eds.), Castillo Pedro Me en Mundial luuru,N:Uiest fNwMxc Press. Mexico New of University NM: Albuquerque, mrc n h Philippines the and America France Electoral/Centro (eds.), Federal Recondo Instituto David and Hemond Philippines the in Democracy Auto Universidad Mexico: legal reconocimiento oeet,NO n oa Government,’ Local and NGOs Movements, re,Mrbl 1997, Maribel, ´rrez, lzCsnv,Pbo 03 Lscrclszptsa.Rdsd eitni autonomı y resistencia de Redes zapatistas. caracoles ‘Los 2003, Pablo, Casanova, ´lez rnfrigSaeSceyRltosi eio h ainlSldrt Strategy Solidarity National The Mexico: in Relations State-Society Transforming sAcatla ´s November. 2 , ´ aaa eio EDUCA/Trasparencia. Mexico: Oaxaca, , ´ ,20,‘einnindı ‘Retienen 2006, s, ia elsrlcoe eioEtdsUnidos Mexico-Estados relaciones las de micas aJornada La izvcsade an diez a voces Diez poiinGvrmn nMxc:Ps xeine n uueOpportunities Future and Experiences Past Mexico: in Government Opposition xc, nAeadoAvrzBe Alvarez Alejandro in ´xico,’ ´n,’ conaiiyPltc:PwradViei ua Mexico Rural in Voice and Power Politics: Accountability aJornada La 6September. 26 , aaa evco aauaEducacio una para Servicios Oaxaca: , a uvsfotrsdlsgoXI iesoe utrls polı culturales, Dimensiones XXI: siglo del fronteras nuevas Las ilni nGuerrero en Violencia 4February. 14 , uei,e l,20,‘ehzndsoetdddlpresidente del deshonestidad ‘Rechazan 2002, al., et Aurelio, ´ h hleg fRrlDmcaiain esetvsfo Latin from Perspectives Democratisation: Rural of Challenge The ldrcoal informacio la a derecho El nm erpltn Xochimilco. – Metropolitana ´noma aCmntra opcio Comunitaria, ´a ol Development World nrecı ´n odn rn asPublishers. Cass Frank London: , Organizacio ne,19,‘eiosDfcl eorc:Grassroots Democracy: Difficult ‘Mexico’s 1992, ´ndez, aia nttt o oua Democracy. Popular for Institute Manila: , 3December. 13 , o:Rflxoe or o ssycsube izan diez a costumbres y usos los sobre Reflexiones ˜os: gnsapolicı a ´genas poaetel participacio la entre ´proca iea el eorcae Me en democracia la de Dilemas o.,No.7. Vol.9, , eetaiainadRrlDvlpeti Mexico: in Development Rural and Decentralization sd suisMxcnsyCentroamericanos. y Mexicanos Estudios de ´s ´ ua uh cı lucha y rural n eioCt:L ond Ediciones. Jornada La City: Mexico , Alternatives a eGuerrero,’ de ´as o.4 No.6. Vol.24, , ne ureoat l einseguridad,’ de ola ante Guerrero en ´n jrNraKan eeioMnhn and Manchon, Federico Klahn, Norma ´jar sao oilsyabetlsdlBanco del ambientales y sociales ´stamos eodGo oenne Participatory Governance: Good Beyond h oiiso cnmcRestructuring: Economic of Politics The ´ :Lsrcro nnirsqelea al llegan que financieros recursos Los n: aJla A CD etrfor Center UCSD, CA: Jolla, La , a ouiaisd aMontan la de comunitarios ´as o.7 No.2. Vol.17, , aJornada La xc rural,’ ´xico nAtraia A.C. Alternativa, ´n ´ ncuaaayl rendicio la y ciudadana ´n iae lNred Guerrero de Norte el en vica eioCt:UNAM/La City: Mexico , gnsd aaa’i Aline in Oaxaca,’ de ´genas Reforma aJla A University CA: Jolla, La , 2November. 12 , Polı ´ xico June. 2 , ´ xod Oxford Oxford: , iayGobierno y tica ge n Peter and ´guez eioCity: Mexico , ´ o del ˜os ia y ticas nde ´n 555 ,La ´a,’ ˜ La a, , , , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ev,Xo Leyva, Xo Leyva, iky aul n ie oa es) 2004, (eds.), Mohan Giles and Samuel, Hickey, ere,Mcal n eeioBsee,20,‘aaa uiia oennein Governance Municipal Xo ‘Oaxacan Leyva, 2004, Besserer, Federico and Michael, Kearney, Herna ono,Jnie,2005, Jennifer, Johnson, Herna He ono,Jnie,20,‘eeuaigMres ergltn rm:Etaea oiigand Policing Extralegal Crime: Re-regulating Markets, ‘Deregulating 2007, Jennifer, Johnson, ev,Xo Leyva, aaa ial 03,‘csna dld a Luı San de edil al ‘Acusan 2003c, Misael, Habana, 556 Herna Herna Henrı Lo Lo aaa ial n eu avda 03 Etea lGben eGerr nfuncionario un a Ruı Guerrero Victor de Misael, Gobierno Habana, el ‘Entregan 2003, Saavedra, Jesus and comunitaria’, Misael, policia la Habana, a deconoce Marquelia de ‘Edil 2004, Misael, Habana, Lo adnd,Cnoi,adPtii Artı Patricia and Centolia, Maldonado, pzMnadn din,adDleMarı Dulce and Adriana, Monjardin, ´pez pzMnadn din,1986, Adriana, Monjardin, ´pez 2005, Camacho, Robles Sergio and Jorge, ´pez, br,Mri,20,‘omnlItrs n oiia eiinMkn na Emerging an in Decision-Making Political and Interest ‘Communal 2003, Martin, ´bert, excepcio Era. Editorial etrfrCmaaieImgainSuis&Cne o ..MxcnStudies. U.S./Mexican for Center (eds.), & Rivera-Salgado Studies Immigration Gaspar Comparative States for and United Center the Fox in Jonathan Migrants Mexican in Context,’ Transnational Can Press. Zed London: (eds.), Mexico Hindley Jane in and Democratization Eisenstadt and Todd Cornelius, Wayne in Oaxaca,’ h ea tt nMxc, nSsi asn(ed.), Sassen Subjects Saskia in and Mexico,’ in State Penal the Mexico,’ Rural Chicago. of Contemporary University Department, in Mobilization Porru Angel Miguel Editorial ok Routledge. York: (ed.), Washbrook artr Acapulco-Pinotepa,’ carretera o ihs’peetda h ai mrcnSuisAscain a un uroRico, Puerto Juan, San Association, Studies American Latin the at March. presented Rights,’ for Jornada La (ed.), Movements Vol.24. Coy Change, Indigenous and Patrick Conflict and Movements, in Ireland Movement,’ Northern Indigenous Mexican o indı los oenethttp://ksg.knowledgeplex.org/cache/documents/2508.pdf Government Mexico,’ polı eeio8da nu municipio,’ un en dias 8 retenido December. 17 il XXII/IIS. Siglo nvriyo aiona a ig,Cne o oprtv mirto tde Center & Gaspar Studies Immigration and Comparative Fox Studies. for Center U.S./Mexican Jonathan Diego, for in San California, Front,’ of Binational University Indigenous (eds.), Oaxacan Rivera-Salgado the in Participation Zapatistas,’ qe,Ei,20,‘Indı 2004, Elio, ´quez, ne aar,Li,19,‘efrigEhi dniyadRcntttn oiisin Ramo Politics and Luis, Reconstituting Navarro, and ´ndez Identity Ethnic ‘Reaffirming 1999, Luis, Navarro, ´ndez ne atlo oav Aı Rosalva Castillo, ´ndez Aı Rosalva Castillo, ´ndez ˜ ´ ioyl polı la y tico adas,’ cil 07 ‘ 2007, ´chitl, cil n rcl ugee otcmn,eds, forthcoming, Burguete, Araceli and ´chitl, cil 01,‘a atrddscneo nlsCan las en ‘autoridades-concejo’ ‘Las 2001b, ´chitl, cil 01,‘einl omnladOgnztoa rnfrain nLas in Transformations Organizational and Communal ‘Regional, 2001a, ´chitl, ´ nqecml aregal,’ la cumpla que ´n ea ntepsdlPN eidgnso eaia identidad e legalidad neoindigenismo, PAN: del tiempos en genas oenetInvtr ewr,HradUiest,Jh .KneySho of School Kennedy F. John University, Harvard Network, Innovators Government , ai mrcnPerspectives American Latin 0August. 10 , Chiapas odnadNwYr:Routledge. York: New and London , ´ iae imo econtrainsurgencia de tiempos en tica ua haa e er fe h aait Uprising Zapatista the after Years Ten Chiapas Rural nieim,Indianismo Indigenismo, o7 http://www.ezln.org/revistachiapas/No7/ch7monjardin.html No.7, , zadJesu and ´z gnsd a unCauaicninl aadlsı del casa la incendian Chamula Juan San de ´genas AporaigCtznhp eore,Dsore n Political and Discourses Resources, Citizenship, ‘Appropriating nieosMxcnMgat nteUie States United the in Migrants Mexican Indigenous d,Srl a n ai eeaSer es) 2004, (eds.), Sierra Teresa Maria and Paz Sarela ´da, d,20,‘nieosPolso eioadterStruggles their and Mexico of Peoples ‘Indigenous 2006, ´da, ´ a/CIESAS. alcaprlsautmets n utopı Una ayuntamientos: los por lucha La aJornada La nVr es) 1998, (eds.), Vera ´n aJla A etrfrUS/eia Studies. U.S./Mexican for Center CA: Jolla, La , ´ udro e Sur del Cuadernos avda 04 Cmsro continu ‘Comisarios 2004, Saavedra, s aJornada La a 04 ‘NwW r wk’:WmnsPolitical Women’s Awake’’: Are We ‘‘‘Now 2004, ´a, aRbleoMla,19,‘o uiiisauto municipios ‘Los 1999, Millan, Rebolledo ´a aJla A nvriyo aiona a Diego, San California, of University CA: Jolla, La , o.8 No.1. Vol.28, , 2February. 12 , atcpto:Fo yan oTransformation? to Tyranny From Participation: n ‘tncCtznhp’i haa, nSarah in Chiapas,’ in Citizenship’’ ‘‘Ethnic and sAcatla ´s 9December. 19 , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL mtra:JI eerhi Social in Research JAI, Amsterdam: , AtoiisUino ogcoSector, Zoogocho of Union ‘Authorities eihrn h lbl t pcs Scales Spaces, Its Global: the Deciphering nulse h hss Sociology thesis, PhD Unpublished , o.,No.16. Vol.7, , cedsd a Andre San de Acuerdos aremunicipalizacio La nd avra recursos,’ malversar de ´n eioCt:CIESAS. City: Mexico , ˜ dsd aSlaLcnoa La Lacandona: Selva la de adas osnu Decision-Making, Consensus aJornada La ´ untoa Politics Subnational ne lqe ela de bloqueo el an odnadNew and London , ´ ´ niomunicipal,’ ´ndico viable a nCips Lo Chiapas: en n ´ aJla CA: Jolla, La , s eioCity: Mexico , eioCity: Mexico , ,4September. aJornada La lEtd y Estado El Indigenous Mexico: , ´nomos , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 atae hna,2003, Shannan, Mattiace, AS 04 ‘Sistematizacio 2004, PADS, Rau Olmedo, Rodrı Rodrı Rodrı atae hna,20,‘eeoitn ein fSae oooa tncIett nLas in Identity Ethnic Tojolobal Space: of Regions ‘Renegotiating 2001, Shannan, Mattiace, Martı analizara ‘Comalapa: 2006, Angeles, Mariscal, ols ego 04 MgainadRtr nteSer Jua Sierra Rodrı the in Return and ‘Migration 2004, Sergio, Robles, 2006, PRODH, Pare Mun eod,Dvd 02 Uo otmrs rcsseetrlsyautonomı y electorales procesos costumbres, y ‘Usos 2002, David, Recondo, 2002, Amalia, Pallares, su a derrote crimen el que Torreblanca ‘Rechaza 2006, Habana, Misael and Sergio Ocampo, io,Jse n n asn(d.,2005, (eds.), Larson Ann and Jesse, Ribot, eio lef,20,‘uee o o uvsccqe nl einMixe?,’ region la 2004, en Jesse, caciques nuevos Ribot, los son ‘Quienes 2006, Aldelfo, Regino, 1996, (ed.), Laura Randall, LCL OENETI H EIA COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ ,Lia 90 TeCalneo ua eortsto nMexico,’ in Democratisation Rural of Challenge ‘The 1990, Luisa, ´, ˜ ogeso netgdrsd oiroLcle eio’2 etme,http:// September, 23 Mexico,’ en Local Gobierno de Investigadores www.iglom.iteso.mx/HTML/encuentros/congresol/pm2/rolmedo.html of Congress City. Praxis. Rurales/Editorial Estudios de Mexicana e Estado del agrts Chiapas’, Margaritas, nvriyo aiona a ig,Cne o oprtv mirto tde Center & Studies Immigration Comparative Studies. for Center U.S./Mexican Diego, for San California, of University (eds.), Rivera-Salgado G. Mexico Chiapas, iddn eom uiia:Memoria Municipal: Reforma mesa_redonda.htm# y Ciudadana gobierno,’ November. 28 rsne tteTidCnrs fthe of Congress Third Me the at presented eii Santı Leticia construccio la hacia the of Congress Second the at presented paper Me Chica,’ de Locales Costa Gobiernos la de Investigadores de oriente el estatal,’ Jornada acoNeol eorca ureo’i al ei roz-aioadEm Zapata Emma and ge Arcozzi-Masino Sesia Paola (eds.), in Martelo Guerrero,’ Democracia, la Nuevo Rancho America Latin and Asia Africa, Decentralization March. (ed.), Leon de Chiapas Lourdes in Oaxaca,’ observacio de Informe Pro,’ A. www.centroprodh.org.mx ‘Miguel Humanos Derechos de Centro Studies Century Twentieth Late the deliberacio nentoa etrfrShlr,LtnAeiaProgramme/A America Latin Scholars, for Center International z la 05 ‘Vacı 2005, Alma, oz, nz unCro,20,‘a utsd unGben:Autonomı Gobierno: Buen de Juntas ‘Las 2003, Carlos, Juan ´nez, ge,Cro,20,‘xeinismncplsd participacio de municipales ‘Experiencias 2006, Carlos, ´guez, ‘Remunicipalizacio 2004, Carlos, ´guez, ‘Remunicipalizacio 2001, Carlos, ´guez, ge arr,Vrnc,20,‘lldrzofmnn nznsindı zonas en femenino liderazgo ‘El 2005, Veronica, Cabrera, ´guez ´ ´ eo o coe oilsfet ldsrol rural desarrollo al frente sociales actores Los nero, io lGben oa e uuo uv Disen Nuevo futuro: del local Gobierno El xico: o.4 No.6. Vol.24, , ´ April. 1 , eio iulAglPorru Angel Miguel Mexico: , haa lDı al Chiapas ,19,‘lcat re eetd eGben nTacl, rsne t‘First at presented Tlaxcala,’ en Gobierno de y estado de orden cuarto ‘El 1999, l, ´ eioCity. Mexico , aJornada La npu Aec:Etd edrcoal eia 0d aod 2006,’ de mayo de 10 medida, la a derecho de Estado ‘Atenco: ndlRı del ´n ´ rnfrainsdlcmomxcn:Uamrd ed o suisde estudios los desde mirada Una mexicano: campo del Transformaciones lc ngbenslclsmexicanos locales gobiernos en blica ahntn C ol eore Institute. Resources World DC: Washington, , luuru:Uiest fNwMexico. New of University Albuquerque: , atn o eorc:TePltc fCoc nNtrlResource Natural in Choice of Politics The Democracy: for Waiting nd n eorcatrioild rxmdd’i nrwSle and Selee, Andrew in proximidad,’ de territorial democracia una de ´n rmPaatSrglst ninRssac:TeEudra ne in Andes Ecuadorian The Resistance: Indian to Struggles Peasant From olglipd opoa luod eussdlrm 33,’ ramo del recursos de uso el comprobar impide legal ´o ´ ai mrcnPerspectives American Latin o(eds.), ´o 2April. 22 , oSewt w ys esn ciimadIda uooyin Autonomy Indian and Activism Peasant Eyes: Two with See To a eomn eiosArra Reform Agrarian Mexico’s Reforming o39 7October. 17 No.379, , nd 0epreca eGben uiia, in Municipal,’ Gobierno de experiencias 10 de ´n nieosMxcnMgat nteUie States United the in Migrants Mexican Indigenous omn K nvriyo kaoaPress. Oklahoma of University OK: Norman, , odn rn asPublishers. Cass Frank London: , eorcayciudadanı y Democracia eetaiaino aua eore:Eprecsin Experiences Resources: Natural of Decentralisation ´ otmrs ee oiinoidoe aaay Oaxaca en indio movimiento y leyes Costumbres, a-CIESAS. n oiinoindı movimiento ´n, nyrssecae lMe el en resistencia y ´n e eIvsiaoe eGbensLclsde Locales Gobiernos de Investigadores de Red nsituacio ´n ´ io oiro oae,dmcai reforma y democracia locales, Gobiernos xico: aur,http://www.pads.com.mx/PADS- January, , o.8 No.1. Vol.28, , nd uee aaa o fueren con casadas mujeres de ´n odlMncpoMexicano Municipio del ˜o ahntn C odo Wilson Woodrow DC: Washington, , Vl5,Mxc iy Asociacio City: Mexico (Vol.5), , gn uvspdrslclsen locales poderes nuevos y ´gena ´ :Participacio a: rok Y .E Sharpe. E. M. NY: Armonk, , nydeliberacio y ´n ´ rz’i oahnFxand Fox Jonathan in ´rez,’ gora. ora fDevelopment of Journal xc rfno’paper profundo,’ ´xico aygbraiia no gobernabilidad y ´a n e 0d mayo, de 10 a 3 del ´n, gns lcs del caso El ´genas: ´ iddn y ciudadana n aindı ´a aJla CA: Jolla, La , eioCity: Mexico , aJornada La ne Mexico: en ´n Participacio aJornada La Mexico , gn en ´gena ˜ e de Red os,’ 557 ,3 La ´ ´n n , Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 ee,Ade,adLtcaSantı Leticia and Andrew, Selee, 1990, Frans, Schryer, avda Jesu Saavedra, IA,20,‘lcin nCips h Won?,’ Who Chiapas: in ‘Elections 2004, SIPAZ, lcioln 2004, Tlachinollan, 1997, Judith, Tendler, rsaeca 03 Rcro e ao2 3qecrepne o uiiisd Oaxaca de municipios los 2007, a corresponden Lily, que Tsai, 33 y 28 Ramo del ‘Recursos 2003, Trasparencia, u,Jn 94 Te‘ouia eouinraIsiuinl h uvrino Native of Subversion The Institucional’ Revolucionaria ‘Comunidad ‘The 1994, Jan, Rus, Rodrı 558 Ruı Ruı Rodrı oln,Aio,20,‘ouaina eemnn fDcnrlzto ucms Illustrations Outcomes: Decentralization of Determinant a as ‘Population 2001, Alison, Rowland, Rodrı Ruı 1997, Jeffrey, Rubin, the of Consideration A Mexico: in Insecurity Public to Responses ‘Local 2003, Alison, Rowland, Ruı os on 06 ARpr rmteRdAet aaitsa rtclCrossroads,’ Critical at Zapatistas Alert: Red the from Report Guerrero,’ ‘A de municipios 2006, seis en John, delincuencia de Ross, 95% hasta ‘Reducen priistas,’ de 2005, abusos Rosa, resistirse por Rojas, 1999 desde zozobra en Suljaa,’ de ‘Amuzgos 2004, Rosa, Rojas, Rodrı zArzl,Vco,adMse aaa 04 Ei priı ‘Edil 2004, Habana, Misael and Victor, Arrazola, ´z zArzl,Vco,adRs oa,20,‘iptndsguo aalcaldı la grupos dos ‘Disputan 2005, Rojas, Rosa and Victor, Arrazola, ´z zArzl,Vco,20a ‘Juchita 2006a, Victor, Arrazola, ´z zArzl,Vco,20b ‘ 2006b, Victor, Arrazola, ´z nvriyPress. University iddn deliberacio y ciudadana nrg erecursos,’ de entrega nvriyPress. University www.sipaz.org rvso nChina in Provision 2003,’ el en 2004’ mayo 2003- June. de junio ‘Tlachinollan,’ vrdyFrso tt omto:Rvlto n h eoito fMdr uein Rule Modern of Negotiation the (eds.), and Nugent Revolution Daniel Formation: and State Joseph Mexico Gilbrt of in Forms 1936–1968,’ Everyday Chiapas, Highland in Government atnItys;a eo muertos,’ 4 menos al Intuyoso; Martin odo isnItrainlCne o coas ai mrc Programme/A America Latin Scholars, for Center International Wilson Woodrow n alcaldı una a zn ecnit’–uaootnddpltc aal a admcai nl selva la Garcı en Rodolfo democracia in la y Chiapas,’ D.C., paz Washington, la Association, Studies para American politica Latin the oportunidad September. at una presented paper – fronteriza?,’ conflicto’ de ‘zona rmSalMncplte nMxc n Bolivia,’ and Mexico in Municipalities Small from Oaxaca,’ Gestio y Gobierno Premio Fundacio Mexico: en innovadoras oii ouiai nteMnaaadCsaCiao ureo’pprpeetda the at presented paper Guerrero,’ of Chica Dallas. Costa Association, and Studies Montana American Latin the in Comunitaria Policia uhtn Mexico Juchitan, Counterpunch Jornada La xeine n uueOpportunities Future and Experiences Mexico,’ Chiapas, de fronteriza Jornada Jornada ge atlo us 01 MrvlaTnjp:U uv uiii nlsmree ela de margenes los en municipio nuevo Un Tenejapa: ‘Maravilla 2001, Luis, Castillo, ´guez ge atlo us 04 Mcoeinsyparticipacio y ‘Microregiones 2004, Luis, Castillo, ´guez ge atlo us n.d., Luis, Castillo, ´guez ge,Vcoi n ee ad es) 1995, (eds.), Ward, Peter and Victoria ´guez, odnadDra,N:Dk nvriyPress. University Duke NC: Durham, and London , nFord. ´n 5February. 15 , 7September. 27 , ´ aJornada La ,adMse aaa 04 Eie erdsa eGerr dmxeie la exigen Edomex y Guerrero de perredistas ‘Ediles 2004, Habana, Misael and s, 3August. 13 , ae Oaxaca,’ en ´a oaCero, Hora uy31. July , conaiiywtotDmcay oiaiyGop n ulcGoods Public and Groups Solidarity Democracy: without Accountability odnadDra,N:Dk nvriyPress. University Duke NC: Durham, and London , eioIfre etod eehsHmnsd aMontana la de Humanos Derechos de Centro Informe, Decimo tnct n ls oflc nRrlMexico Rural in Conflict Class and Ethnicity abig:CmrdeUiest Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: , odGvrmn nteTropics the in Government Good eetrn h eie tnct,Rdcls n eorc in Democracy and Radicalism Ethnicity, Regime: the Decentering eray21. February , aJornada La ´ ulmnoEpca de Especial Suplemento npu Ognzcoe oilsygbensmncplse aselva- la en municipales gobiernos y sociales ‘Organizaciones Declaracio ndlRı del ´n aJornada La adlCsil (ed.), Castillo del ´a ´ lc ngbenslclsmexicanos locales gobiernos en blica ISS nulse manuscript. unpublished CIESAS, , 9March. 19 , n 0gledsa netrigea aalcaldı la a ingresar intentar al golpeados 20 ´n: o(d.,2006, (eds.), ´o ´ eguerra de n luuru:Uiest fNwMxc Press. Mexico New of University Albuquerque: , 8September. 28 , aJornada La lp eCmnot www.tlachinollan.org, Comonfort, de Tlapa , ORA FPAATSTUDIES PEASANT OF JOURNAL poiinGvrmn nMxc:Past Mexico: in Government Opposition IA Reports SIPAZ aHora La eorcayciudadanı y Democracia eccqe,l aprehensio la caciques, de 1January. 31 , ´ ol Development World Local n saaeiaal addt e o azteca sol del candidate la a asesina ´sta Gestio atmr,M:TeJhsHopkins Johns The MD: Baltimore, , ncuaaae a Margaritas, Las en ciudadana ´n ´ 8,1 March. 10 486, , oa raia experiencias creativa: local n eio F CIDE/INAFED/ DF: Mexico, , o.,N.,December, No.4, Vol.9, , rneo,N:Princeton NJ: Princeton, , aoaxaquen ´a ahntn DC: Washington, , o.9 No.8. Vol.29, , ´ :Participacio a: nd ie en mixes de ´n ´ gora. ˜ eSan de a ´a,’ La La ´ n Downloaded By: [Fox, Jonathan] At: 03:44 31 December 2007 iuea unPdo n ilbl onete,2000, Sonnleitner, Willibald and Pedro, Juan Viquiera, Vela Vela aosy ila,20,‘tteWi fteSae elbrls n Nongovernmental and Neoliberalism State: the of Whim the ‘At 2005, William, Yaworsky, More Institutions: Sector Public Vela and Society ‘Civil 2004, Krishna, Anirudh and Norman, Uphoff, COUNTRYSIDE MEXICAN THE IN GOVERNMENT ‘LOCAL’ suz Marı ´squez, Marı ´squez, suz Marı ´squez, oprtv mirto tde etrfrUS/eia Studies. U.S./Mexican for Center & Studies States Immigration United Comparative (eds.), Rivera-Salgado the Gaspar and in Fox Jonathan in Oaxaca,’ raiain nGeeo Mexico,’ Guerero, in Organizations [1991–1998] Chiapas IFE. de Altos Los en elecciones Relationship,’ Zero-Sum a than ea eonto fUo otmrsi h lcino nieosAtoiis’in America Authorities,’ Latin Indigenous in (eds.), State of Hoekama the A. Election of and Reform the Haar and in de Peoples Costumbres Indigenous van Gemma y Assies, Usos Willem of Recognition Legal Oaxaca aaa nttt lcoa eOaxaca. de Electoral Instituto Oaxaca: , aCitn,20b Foteso uiia oenblt nOxc,Mxc:The Mexico: Oaxaca, in Governability Municipal of ‘Frontiers 2000b, Cristina, ´a aCitn,2000a, Cristina, ´a aCitn,20,‘irn omnte,Gne,adPltclPwrin Power Political and Gender, Communities, ‘Migrant 2004, Cristina, ´a aJla A nvriyo aiona a ig,Cne for Center Diego, San California, of University CA: Jolla, La , lnmrmet:Lseecoe o ssycsube en costumbres y usos por elecciones Las nombramiento: El ulcAmnsrto n Development and Administration Public eia tde/suisMexicanos Studies/Estudios Mexican eioCt:CEA/oei eMexico/ de CIESAS/Colegio City: Mexico , eorcae ira indı tierras en Democracia nieosMxcnMigrants Mexican Indigenous mtra:TeaThesis. Thela Amsterdam: , h hleg fDiversity: of Challenge The o.4 No.4. Vol.24, , o.1 No.2. Vol.21, , ´ ea:Las genas: 559