THE MEXICAN STATE AND THE AGRIBUSINESS MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE GLOBALIZATION ERA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzes the relationship between the State and transnational capital manifested in capitalist agribusiness schemes in Mexican agriculture. It illustrates a model that has privileged one type of development in detriment to other forms of organizing rural agricultural production and labor (Real 1997). Current agricultural development in México is linked directly to the “Green Revolution”, México being prominent as its birthplace. Ironically, the Green Revolution contributed to a massive displacement of rural population to cities as human labor was replaced by machinery (1992). Development of capitalist agriculture in México and Latin America is closely related to the effects of the transnationalization of agroindustry. The importance of agribusiness has expanded in recent decades through a series of events, including the substitution of basic crops for more profitable ones and the contribution to the “new international division of labor” (Sanderson 1990). Recent trilateral transnational political and economic changes are linked to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between México, United States and Canada (Kearney 1995). In the case of agriculture, Palerm and Urquiola (1993) believe the relationship between United States and Mexico to be bimodal. From a perspective of Social Anthropology we provide firsthand information about two areas of agroindustry: production of vegetables for export and production of poultry where participation by different social actors was observed. Agro‐industrial entrepreneurs depend upon agricultural workers who wish to conserve a peasant way of life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".