Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Review Articles

Vol. 22 No. 1 (2021): Vol. XXII No. 1 First Semester January - June 2021

Territorial development and solidarity economy: analysis from the concept of development, the environment and the incorporation of the communities in a strategy of territorial development

DOI
https://doi.org/10.22267/rtend.202102.163
Submitted
December 29, 2020
Published
2021-01-01

Abstract

This article proposes a framework of analysis to articulate territorial development with the solidarity economy. It is considered that territorial development has a close relationship with the idea of economic growth, but also allows for the exploration of alternative positions. Consequently, the solidarity economy is the alternative view that is analyzed to offer to territorial development another approach different from the market economy. For this purpose, methodologically, an analysis of academic publications is made from three dimensions: the idea of development, the environment and communities. At the same time, the main approaches to both territorial development and the solidarity economy are analyzed in order to explore their meeting points. It is found that the solidarity economy has a framework of analysis that allows to guide territorial development strategies from an alternative perspective to the market economy. It is concluded that territorial development is a framework of analysis under construction and therefore can be nourished by the contributions of the solidarity economy. The article is part of a research project funded by the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia.

References

  1. (1) Albuquerque, F. (2004). El enfoque del desarrollo económico local. Cuaderno de capacitación No. 1. Serie: Desarrollo Económico Local y Empleabilidad Programa AREA - OIT en Argentina - Italia Lavoro. Organización Internacional del Trabajo.
  2. (2) Avant, D., & Westerwinter, O. (2016). The New Power Politics: Networks and Transnational Security Governance. Oxford, Universty Press.
  3. (3) Bidet, E., Eum, H., & Ryu, J. (2018). Diversity of Social Enterprise Models in South Korea. Revista Voluntas, 29, 1261-1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-018-9951-8
  4. (4) Bosworth, G., Annibal, I., Carroll, T., Price, L., Sellick, J., & Shepherd, J. (2016). Empowering Local Action through Neo-Endogenous Development; The Case of LEADER in England. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(3), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12089
  5. (5) Bucheli, M. (2006). Curas campesinos y laicos como gerentes del desarrollo. La construcción de un modelo de desarrollo emergente en Colombia. Universidad Javeriana.
  6. (6) Capello, R. (2018). Cohesion Policies and the Creation of a European Identity: The Role of Territorial Identity. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(3), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12611
  7. (7) Chaves, R. y Monzón, J. (2018). La economía social ante los paradigmas económicos emergentes: innovación social, economía colaborativa, economía circular, responsabilidad social empresarial, economía del bien común, empresa social y economía solidaria. CIRIEC-España, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, (93), 5-50. https://doi.org/10.7203/CIRIEC-E.93.12901
  8. (8) Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe [CEPAL]. (2019). Planificación para el desarrollo territorial sostenible en América Latina y el Caribe. CEPAL.
  9. (9) Coraggio, J. (2011). Economía social y solidaria. El trabajo antes que el capital. FLACSO y Universidad Politécnica Salesiana. Ediciones Abeya-Yala. http://www.dhls.hegoa.ehu.eus/uploads/resources/5448/resource_files/Coraggio_ESS_Trabajo_antes_que_capital.pdf
  10. (10) Daly, H. (1990). Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 2(1), 1-6.
  11. (11) Dax, T., Strahl, W., Kirwan, J., & Maye, D. (2016). The Leader programme 2007–2013: Enabling or disabling social innovation and neo-endogenous development? Insights from Austria and Ireland. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776413490425
  12. (12) Esparcia, J., Escribano, J., & Serrano, J. (2015). From development to power relations and territorial governance: Increasing the leadership role of LEADER Local Action Groups in Spain. Journal of Rural Studies, 42, 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.09.005
  13. (13) Fainstein, S. & DeFilippis, J. (2016). Readings in Planning Theory (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
  14. (14) Felber, C. (2016). La economía del bien común. Un modelo económico que supera la dicotomía entre capitalismo y comunismo para maximizar el bienestar de nuestra sociedad. Editorial Paidós.
  15. (15) Friedmann, J., & Weaver, C. (1981). Territorio y función: La evolución de la planificación regional. Instituto de estudios de administración local.
  16. (16) Gaiger, L. (2004). Sentidos e Experiências da Economia Solidária no Brasil. Editora da UFRGS.
  17. (17) Guerra, P. (2003). Economía de la Solidaridad: Construcción de un camino a veinte años de las primeras elaboraciones. https://emes.net/content/uploads/publications/Guerra_Historia_E_S_031.pdf
  18. (18) Harvey, D. (2006). Notas hacia una teoría del Desarrollo Geográfico Desigual. GeoBaireS. Cuadernos de Geografía. http://sgpwe.izt.uam.mx/files/users/uami/mcheca/teoria_geografica/LECTURA_26bis.pdf
  19. (19) Harvery, D. (2018). Justifica, Naturaleza y Geografía de la diferencia. IAEN-Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales del Ecuador. https://www.traficantes.net/sites/default/files/pdfs/PC18_Harvey_web.pdf
  20. (20) Hibbard, M., & Frank, K. (2019). Notes for a Substantive Theory of Rural Planning: Evidence from the US Experience. Planning Theory and Practice. 20(3), 339-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2019.1627572
  21. (21) Lagendijk, A., & Oinas, P. (2017). Proximity, distance and diversity: Issues on economic interaction and local development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315245768
  22. (22) Modrego, F. & Berdegue, J. (2015). A Large-Scale Mapping of Territorial Development Dynamics in Latin America. World Development, 73, 11-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.12.015
  23. (23) Mundler, P., & Laughrea, S. (2016). The contributions of short food supply chains to territorial development: A study of three Quebec territories. Journal of Rural Studies, 45, 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.04.001
  24. (24) Parnreiter, C. (2018). Geografía Económica: una introducción contemporánea. DAAD y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
  25. (25) Polanyi, K. (1975). La Gran Transformación. Juan Pablos Editor.
  26. (26) Razeto, L. (1999). La economía de la solidaridad: concepto, realidad y proyecto. Revista Persona y Sociedad, 13(2). http://base.socioeco.org/docs/razeto_la_economia_de_solidaridad_06.pdf
  27. (27) Razeto, L. (2001). De la Economía Popular a la Economía de Solidaridad en un Proyecto de Desarrollo Alternativo (2.ªed.). Ediciones PET.
  28. (28) Sandoval, M., Robertsdotter, A., & Paredes, M. (2017). Space, Power, and Locality: the Contemporary Use of Territorio in Latin American Geography. Journal of Latin American Geography, 16(1), 43-67. http://muse.jhu.edu/article/653098
  29. (29) Stiglitz, J. (2020). Capitalismo Progresista: La respuesta a la era del malestar. Editorial Taurus.
  30. (30) Vázquez, A. (2009). Desarrollo local, una estrategia para tiempos de crisis. Apuntes Del Cenes, 28(47), 117-132. https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/cenes/article/view/83

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.