Influence of informality in land titles and productive planning in agro-export chains in the Mantaro Valley, Perú
Abstract
The objective was to determine the informality influence of land ownership on the productive planning in the Mantaro Valley agro-export chains. The research has a descriptive-correlational, not experimental, transactional scope. 383 agricultural producers from the Mantaro Valley provinces: Huancayo, Concepcion, Jauja and Chupaca were surveyed. Descriptive statistics as frequency distribution, contingency tables and chi-squared distribution for hypothesis testing were used. The results are, 1) In the land ownership informality, 61 % of producers have title deed and 2 % are in process; 95,7 % know about title deed benefits; 55 % state which lands are their property; 45 % consider they rent part of their lands; 2) In productive planning, 52 % of producers decide what to seed based on the demand and the best market prices, 62 % improve results because of planning, 23 % achieve production targets between 75 % and 100 %, only 19 % improve their expected productivity and 47 % improve lower ranges to 25 %; also 87 % consider that in production planning they should involve agricultural producers and businesses. In conclusion, participation in productive chains doesn’t depend on the lands possession with title deed. Partnership working isn’t depend on the decision to seed, planning, productivity improvements, neither participation in planning processes.
References
1. Avendaño E, Roeland R, Risco M, Martínez A, et al. Conociendo la cadena productiva de tuna y cochinilla en Ayacucho. Ayacucho: Solid Perú; 2008: Disponible en: http://www.solidinternational.ch/wp-content/themes/solid/sources/img/Conociendo-la-cadena-productivade-la-tuna-y-cochinilla-en-Ayacucho1.pdf
2. Benavides M. Asociatividad y Clusters. En: Documento de trabajo: Estudio sobre Cluster y Asociatividad. Lima: MTPE/PROMPYME. Disponible en: http://www.uss.edu.pe/uss/eventos/JovEmp/pdf/ClusterdeCalzado.pdf
3. Gregory JS. Competitividad Agrícola y el desarrollo de cadenas y clústeres de valor en el Perú. Lima; 2011. Disponible en: http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=35839504
4. Gregory JS. Agregando valor a las cadenas de valor. RAE. 2014; 54(1): 67-79.
5. Schein EH. La cultura empresarial y el liderazgo. Barcelona: Plaza & Janes; 1988.
6. Van Muijen JJ, Koopman P, De Witte K, et al. Organizational culture: The focus Questionnaire. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 1999; 8(4): 551-568.
7. Peiró JM. Organizaciones: Nuevas perspectivas psicosociológicas. Barcelona: PPU; 1990.
8. Gómez M. Cultura en las Pymes del sector juguete y auxiliares: Implicaciones para la implantación de sistemas de calidad. [Tesis doctoral]. Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia; 2003.
9. Alonso E. El método del calibrado en la evaluación de la cultura. 8th European Congress of Work and Organizational Psychology. Verona; 1999.
10. Schneider B, Brief AP, Guzzo RA. Creating a climate and culture for sustainable organizational change. Organizational Dynamics. 1996; 24(4): 7-19.
11. Hernández R, Fernández C, Baptista P. Metodología de la investigación. 5ª ed. México D.F.: McGraw-Hill; 2010.
12. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. Censos Nacionales 2007; XI Población y Vivienda. Lima: INEI; 2007.
13. Laguna C. Cadenas productivas, columna vertebral de los clústeres industriales mexicanos. Economía Mexicana, Nueva Época. 2010; 19(1):119-170.
