King's College London

Why did you choose that subject?

When I first came to London in 2012, I studied for a master's in development studies at SOAS. Despite having no background in agriculture, I was particularly drawn to a module on agrarian change or the political economy of agriculture. However, it was not just academic interest that drove me. I became fascinated by rural sociology and the dynamics of agrarian social movements, especially the contrast between movements led by peasants versus those led by agricultural wage workers. This fascination, coupled with the significant events that were taking place in Mexico at the time, led me to choose this subject for my doctoral research.

After my master's, I closely followed a significant mobilisation of farm workers in Baja, California, in 2015, which drew 80,000 workers across various farms and represented one of the most significant farm labour movements in Mexico—and possibly North America—in recent decades. This six-week strike marked a pivotal point in labour organisation for the region. Even while working in NGOs between my master's and PhD studies, I remained connected to Mexico's current events, and this event inspired me. It became clear that this topic would allow me to link my academic background with recent developments in Mexico, laying the foundation for my PhD research.

What are the main arguments in your research

In my study, I present two main arguments. First, I highlight the profound influence of restructuring global agricultural production—primarily driven by multinational corporations in partnership with major retailers—on the labour processes in the fields. This international restructuring cycle prompts continuous responses from workers, who organise, protest, and present demands, leading to adjustments by growers and corporations. My focus is on this cycle of workers mobilisation and corporate response, which has significant implications for the field of agricultural studies and international political economy.

Second, these corporations intensify working conditions rather than invest in technology to increase labour productivity. They raise productivity targets and accelerate the pace and intensity of labour without relying on mechanisation, keeping work largely manual but more demanding. This intensification reshapes the labour experience for workers without fundamentally altering the manual nature of their tasks.

Based on these dynamics, I analyse how workers and their organisations respond to intensified working conditions. Specifically, I study how these changes shape their demands and how they frame their struggles in response to increasingly demanding labour conditions.

Could you describe your data collection process? What sources did you rely on and what research methods did you use?

My thesis employs a mixed-methods approach centred on a specific case study in Baja California. While it includes qualitative and quantitative elements, the focus is predominantly qualitative. Even though I utilised official statistics from government sources, the core of my research is based extensively on fieldwork. Over a period of six months (spread across ten months in Mexico), I conducted more than 60 interviews and organised four focus groups with a broad range of participants, including farmworkers, growers, activists, union members, NGO staff, corporate representatives, civil servants, and journalists, providing a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the topic.

Based in an agricultural hub, I incorporated elements of ethnographic observation, such as maintaining a research diary for detailed field notes. While not strictly an ethnography, this approach added depth and context to the data I gathered.

Did you receive any notable support during your PhD journey at King's? How would you describe your experience and was there anyone who really helped you with your work?

Overall, my experience at King's was very positive. I am incredibly grateful for the support of my primary supervisor, Dr Lucia Pradella, and my secondary supervisor, Dr Thomas Purcell, both from European and International Studies (EIS). Dr Pradella's guidance was invaluable, particularly in navigating the complex theoretical aspects of my thesis, which I found challenging. Her expertise and patience made a significant impact on my learning process.

The broader department support was also excellent. Both EIS and SPE encourage PhD students to actively partake in research groups, where we can present our work and receive constructive feedback from faculty. This open, collaborative environment greatly enriched my research experience.

While the overall structure was highly supportive, an increase in funding for fieldwork would be beneficial, especially for students in EIS, where field research is integral. I was fortunate to receive a small fieldwork bursary in 2022, but additional resources in this area would be valuable.

Lastly, the upgrade process was well-structured, and the reviewer's involvement offered ongoing guidance and additional support throughout my research journey.

Were there any challenges you encountered during the process?

One of the significant challenges I faced was the timing of my research after the upgrade in early 2021 during the pandemic. I was ready to begin fieldwork, but travel restrictions were in place, and conditions constantly shifted between Mexico and the UK. At one point, King's College London restricted fieldwork for academic purposes, and some faculty members advised pursuing a desk-based PhD. However, I was determined to conduct fieldwork, which, in hindsight, was the most rewarding part of my research despite the difficulties in writing.

The pandemic was a significant obstacle, making fieldwork much more challenging. Additionally, PhD research often becomes deeply intertwined with personal life, and when challenges arise in one, it affects the other. I eventually needed an extension to complete my dissertation, as life and academic pressures seemed to accumulate simultaneously. This experience highlights the importance of support throughout the PhD process.

After navigating the various challenges, how did you feel upon finally completing your PhD?

It felt gratifying, especially after all the ups and downs. I felt a massive relief once I submitted my thesis, even more so than after the viva, which was a positive and engaging conversation, though tense beforehand. The submission felt like a real accomplishment. The timing was also fortunate, as I could take a break during August, which allowed me to decompress after such an intense period.

Completing the thesis itself felt like a massive relief, more so than the title of ‘doctor’. Currently, I am teaching a lot, working as a Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA), and preparing for a lecturer position next term.

However, I do not see myself pursuing a long-term academic career. While I have enjoyed aspects of my PhD—particularly the fieldwork and teaching—I do not think academia is my long-term path. I have spent several years working in NGOs, and I am considering returning to that sector or perhaps transitioning into roles within international organisations or trade unions. After this experience, I am particularly interested in working with trade unions and organising or researching units within large federations like Unison or Unite. Whether I stay in the UK or return to Mexico, I can see myself contributing to the labour movement, which remains an exciting option for the future.

What advice would you offer to anyone just beginning their PhD journey?

For those just starting their PhD, I would advise taking your time in the first year. Do not rush to produce much work—focus on exploring the literature and drafting to keep your supervisors satisfied, but do not stress. The challenging parts will come later.

Also, I recommend attending conferences early, even if you are nervous. It is a great way to get feedback and practice presenting your research, which can be surprisingly difficult despite knowing your topic.

Lastly, the most challenging part for the Viva is summarising your research clearly and concisely. Once you get past that initial presentation, it becomes much easier, especially when discussing the empirical aspects of your work, as you are the expert on that.