[DSRP Evidence](https://dsrpevidence.org/) # Systems Thinking for Policymaking: The Case of Indigenous Women's Rights in Mexico ## Details **Authors** Maymon P **Year** 2017 **Publisher** Cornell Policy Review **Kind of work** article **Discipline** Public Policy **Kind of engagement** applications [Read it](https://www.cornellpolicyreview.com/indigenouswomensrightsinmexico/) ## In authors' words ### Abstract [No abstract published; opening paragraphs plus the article's DSRP passage, retrieved verbatim] On January 1, 1994, thousands of indigenous men and women in the southern state of Chiapas, Mexico, who identified themselves as the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN), declared war on the Mexican government. The Zapatistas considered themselves the product of 500 years of struggle against Spanish colonization, North American imperialism, and Mexican authoritarianism. Their motto was: "Today, we say enough." It was no accident that the uprising took place the same day the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into force, either. The Zapatistas were rebelling against the free market model enshrined in NAFTA and the national policies that promoted economic liberalization for Mexico, including the privatization of community-owned lands. Indigenous communities tend to live in the most marginalized and remote regions of Mexico. They are known for their high levels of poverty and lack of access to public services, such as health care and education. In 2012, the National Council for Evaluation of Social Development Policy (CONEVAL) estimated that 78.6 percent of people who speak an indigenous language live in poverty compared to 43 percent of people who do not speak an indigenous language. The Zapatista struggle was a direct result of these conditions, bringing worldwide attention to the problems of Mexico's indigenous population. Their uprising was part of a historic struggle for land rights, human rights, political autonomy, cultural recognition, and the rights to self-determination, autonomy, and self-governance. Indigenous peoples in Mexico have historically fought to preserve their own traditional forms of organization and local governance. Since the uprising of 1994, the Mexican government has made political concessions, starting with the San Andres Accords of 1996, which granted indigenous peoples a political voice in local governments. The greatest concession, however, came on August 14, 2001, when the Mexican government reformed Article 2 of the Constitution of Mexico, recognizing indigenous peoples' rights to self-determination, autonomy, and self-governance. [...] First, the 'Distinction Rule' states that any idea or thing can be distinguished from other ideas or things. Second, the 'Systems Rule' stipulates that any idea or thing can be split into parts or lumped into a whole. Third, the 'Relationship Rule' says that any idea or thing can relate to other things or ideas. Fourth, the 'Perspective Rule' postulates that any thing or idea can be the point or the view of a perspective. These four rules do not operate linearly, but simultaneously. This article uses DSRP structural analysis to show that failing to 1) make advanced and clear distinctions, 2) identify the parts of a complex system, 3) understand the relationships underlying the system, and 4) adopt different perspectives before the implementation of public policy and legislation can lead to unintended consequences that are harmful for some social groups. ### What they set out to do (purpose) A Cornell Policy Review piece using DSRP structural analysis on the 2001 reform of Article 2 of Mexico's constitution, which recognized indigenous peoples' rights to self-determination, autonomy, and self-governance. ### What they found (results) Failing to make clear distinctions, identify the parts of a complex system, understand its relationships, and adopt different perspectives before implementing policy leads to unintended consequences that harm some social groups. ## Commentary ### In short A student application of DSRP, from the Cornell Policy Review systems thinking special issues. **Patterns it shows** D, S, R, P **How to cite this** Maymon P (2017). Systems Thinking for Policymaking: The Case of Indigenous Women's Rights in Mexico. Cornell Policy Review.