PDF (Español)
FLIP
HTML (Español (España))
Authors
Abstract
This article presents the structure of living strategies of the rural organization “Village Foundation Council” located in the Travesías village, municipality of Calarcá, where a study with nine families beneficiary of the process of the agrarian reformation Law 160 of 1994 took place which had as objective the identification of living strategies of the homes and the restrictions which inhibit the success of these strategies. The study was carried out through the characterization of the production systems and the identification of livelihood families display for their survival. The DFID –Department for International Development– Livehood Focus methodology was used to value the human, social, natural, physical and financial capitals by means of the measurement of 17 indicators belonging to five capitals.The results of the study allowed the identification of the ways of livelihood used by this community to adapt to the new dynamics generated by the effects of globalization in the rural sector in peasant economy and particularly because of the coffee growers crisis. It was possible to achieve the identification of strategies that the families implement in order to generate income and better living conditions as well as the interactions that exist between these and social phenomena such as poverty, origin and distribution of incomes, policies for diversification, diversification vs. agriculture, social organization, education and access to markets. The results of the study, shows that the capitals with higher evaluation were the social with a 4.16 average and Physical with a 4.04. average The capitals with lower evaluation were the Social with a 3.09 average and the financial with a 3.29 average . The natural capital is located in a middle range with 3.56.
Keywords:
References
Berdegue, J. y Larrain, B. (1988). Cómo trabajan los campesinos. Cali: CELATER.
Brass, T. (1991). Moral Economist, subalterns, New Social Movements and the (re) emergence of a (post) modernized peasant. Journal of Peasant Studies, 18(2), 214-242.
Corrales Roa, E. (2002). Viabilidad y reconstrucción del sector rural colombiano. Elementos de política para el sector rural propuestas por ONG ambientalistas. (inédito).
Cowan Ros, C. y Schneider, S. (2008). Estrategias Campesinas de Reproducción Social: El caso de las tierras altas Jujeñas, Argentina. Revista Internacional de sociología (Ris), 66(50), 163-185.
DFID - Department for International Development-. (1999). Hojas orientativas sobre los medios de vida sostenibles. Recuperado de http://community.eldis.org/.59c21877/SP-GS1.pdf.
Ellis, F. (1999). La Diversidad de las Estrategias de vida rural en los países en Desarrollo: Evidencias e Implicaciones para las políticas. Red Internacional de Métodos de Investigación de Sistemas de Producción. Recuperado de http://www.rimisp.org/index.php/index.php.
_________. (2000). Rural livelihoods and diversity in development countries. Nueva York, US: Oxford University Press.
Federación Nacional de Cafeteros -Federacafé-. (1993-1997). Encuesta Nacional Cafetera. Bogotá: Autor.
Flora, C., Flora J. y Fey, S. (2004). Rural communities: legacy and change. USA: Westview Press.
Fonseca, L.A. (2003). Colombia: Escenario social, económico e institucional de la actual crisis cafetera. Oficina CEPAL en Colombia. (inédito).
Gliessman, S.R. (1998). Agroecology: Ecological Processes in Sustainable Agriculture. Chelsea, MI, US: Ann Arbor Pres.
Gobernación del Quindío. (2009). Informe Agropecuario año 2009. Evaluaciones Agropecuarias Departamento del Quindío. Armenia, Quindío: Autor.
Instituto Colombiano de la Reforma Agraria - Ministerio de Agricultura de Colombia. (1996). Resolución 041 del 24 de Septiembre de 1996 de la oficina de Formalización y Legislación Agraria. Bogotá: Autor.
Lehmann, D. (1986). Two Paths of Agrarian Capitalism, or a Critic of Chayanovian Marxism. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 28, 601-627. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500014122.
Miranda, A.B. (2003). Capital social, institucionalidad y territorios el caso de Centroamérica. 2a edición. IICA: Nicaragua y Costa Rica.
Mora-Delgado, J. (2008). Persistencia, conocimiento local y estrategias de vida en sociedades campesinas. Revista de Estudios Sociales, Universidad de los Andes, 122-133. Recuperado de http://res.uniandes.edu.co/view.php/430/view.php.
Pretty, J. (995). Regenerating Agriculture: Policies and Practice for Sustentability and Self- Reliance. London: Earthscan Publications.
Petersen, P. (2003). Evaluando la sustentabilidad: estudios de caso sobre impactos de innovaciones agroecológicas en la agricultura familiar de diferentes países latinoamericanos. LEISA, Revista de Agroecología - ocho estudios de caso, Edición Especial, 64-67.
Rosset, P. (1999). The Multiple Functions and Benefits of small Farms Agriculture: In The Context Global Trade of Negotiations. Food First Policy, 4. Oakland: The Institute for Food and Development Policy.
Stoin, D. y Donovan, J. (2010). Articulación del mundo campesino con el mercado - Integración de Enfoques de Medios de Vida y Cadena Productiva. VI Semana Científica del Catie, 14-16. Recuperado de http://orton.catie.ac.cr/repdoc/A0292E/PDF/2.PDF.
Downloads
