changes in gender relations (which tend to favor women) and greater awareness of women’s subordination to men.
     The other important trend in LAC, especially in the indigenous/ peasant sector of agriculture, is the incorporation of women as the main producer (Preibisch et al., 2002). This “feminization of agriculture” is occurring in some countries more than in others and is directly tied to the increase in the migration of men, the search for jobs off the farm and the diminishing viability of traditional/peasant agriculture under neoliberalism (Chiriboga et al., 1996; Preibisch et al., 2002). For example, Mexico, the country with the largest migration of men to the United States, is also one of those in which the feminization of agriculture is most evident (Robles, 2000).
     The incorporation of the indigenous/peasant sector in the production of non-traditional export crops has also resulted from an intensification of the role of women in agriculture (Deere, 2005). Guatemala and Chile are the two countries where this incorporation was most successful, even if it was ephemeral (Murray, 2003). Here too there is a debate on the impact of that greater participation on women. On the one hand, studies by Dary (1991) and Blumberg (1994) conclude that the incorporation of peasant women into the production of agroexport crops had a negative impact on women because it reduced the time available for their own independent activities, reduced their power to bargain within the family and increased their dependence on men. On the other hand, the studies by Katz (2003), Hamilton et al. (2001) and Hamilton and Fischer (2003) conclude that women (in Guatemala) gained more decision-making power over productive activities.
     Whether as wage workers in the agricultural sector or as producers directly, there is no doubt but that the role of women in agriculture in LAC has been expanding. This feminization of agriculture is linked to the decline of agriculture as the main economic activity of peasant families and to the greater absence of men due to migration or wage work away from the farm. As traditional agriculture becomes ever less viable, production is turning more to food security for the family and women are taking on a more important role (Deere, 2005).

1.7 Performance of Production Systems

This subchapter presents an evaluation of the three main systems of production in the region: traditional/indigenous, conventional/productivist and agroecological. This evaluation includes an assessment of the performance of these systems in terms of several indicators, such as productivity, sustainability and quality of food. In addition, this subchapter
includes an assessment of the environmental, social, economic and health impacts of the three systems.
1.7.1 Productivity
Productivity is defined as an average quantity of output divided by a measure of the quantity of input. The economic concept of agricultural productivity is an evaluation of the production of a crop (i.e., yield) and its market value, so that one can estimate its profitability (i.e., profit). Agricultural economists often use a partial measure of productivity based on an area of land and/or labor. Nonetheless, for many farmers in Latin America and the Caribbean especially

those who produce for family consumption, or those who have systems using low levels of external inputs, the concept of productivity is much broader. For these producers, a productive farm is that which provides the largest amount of resources needed for the survival of the producer and his or her family. This may include foods, fuel, fiber and medicinal plants, among others. Unfortunately, there are very few studies that consider these factors; most existing statistics report only productivity per unit of land and per unit of labor.

Traditional/indigenous system. What is frequently known as agricultura campesina or peasant agriculture and which in this evaluation we call the traditional/indigenous system, consists of several traditional systems that predominate in many rural areas of Latin America and the Caribbean (Ortega 1986), but which are being threatened by neoliberal policies (Davis et al., 2001; Deere, 2005) among other factors. These systems, in their traditional form, have been refined over many generations and much accumulated knowledge. The marginalization and displacement of producers from their ancestral lands contributes to their being characterized as having low or moderate productivity. Nonetheless, there are traditional systems that have high productivity, in some cases higher than the conventional/ productivist system (Altieri, 1999). For example, in the 1950s Sanders (1957) estimated that maize production in the chinampas, a traditional system in Mexico, yielded 3.5 to 6.3 tonnes per hectare. That same year, the yield of maize in the United States was 2.6 tonnes per hectare and it was not until 1965 that it reached 4 tonnes per ha (USDA, 1972, as cited in Altieri, 1999). In the 1990s the average yield of maize in LAC was only 2.56 tonnes per hectare and the countries with the highest yields were Argentina and Chile, with 4.35 and 8.49 tonnes per hectare respectively (Morris and López-Pereira, 1999). In the Amazon, traditional systems such as that of the Kayapó have yields that surpass colonos’ yields by 200% and the yields of livestock production by 175% (Hecht, 1984).     

      One characteristic of the traditional systems is their high agrobiodiversity (Toledo, 2007). Multicrop systems and agroforestry systems are common in this type of agriculture (Clauson, 1985; Thrupp, 1998). In LAC, most of the subsistence crops are produced in multicrop situations. For example, it is estimated that 40% of the cassava, 60% of the maize and 80% of the beans are produced in combination with other crops (Francis, 1986). This is an important factor when comparing yields because these comparisons are normally by crop, which means that often the yield of other crops grown on the same plot is not taken into account. The multicrop systems developed by traditional and/or indigenous producers are 20 to 60% more productive (in terms of harvestable product) than monoculture systems (Beets, 1982). For example, in Mexico, 1.7 ha planted in maize in monoculture is needed to produce the same amount of food as one hectare planted in maize, squash and bean produces (Gliessman, 1998). In Brazil, multicrops of maize and bean have a 28% advantage over monocultures; under more arid conditions the multicrops of sorghum and cowpea produce 25 to 58% more than the monocultures (Altieri, 1999). The literature that shows the advantages of multicrops on yield