Imaginarios de investigación. Reflexiones en torno al análisis de documentos estratégicos en Colombia.

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Scientific and technological development which began during the eighteenth century and that continue to this day, allowed man to subdue and exploit nature in order to meet his biological and cultural needs. During this process, science and research have been seen as a fundamental driving foce for development. However human excesses in the use of technological advances have caused huge environmental problems. Nevertheless, scientific research continues to have an excellent reputation and is one of the great commitments man has to reverse (at this point mitigate) the great environmental imbalance we have caused. This approach has opened the possibility to investigate the environmental from a holistic and systemic vision. This paper analyzes how integrated environmental research is in National Research Policies. In order to do this the National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (NSTIP) and the National Strategic Plan for Environmental Research (NSPER), developed by Colciencias and the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development (MEHTD) respectively are taken as reference. As a result of this comparative analysis, an accentuated conceptual and methodological breaking up between National Research Policies proposed by Colciencias and Plans and Environmental Research Strategies proposed by the Ministry of Environment (MEHTD) was established as the main conclusion.

Keywords:

Investigación

políticas

ambiente

interdisciplinariedad

Colombia

Research

policy

environment

interdisciplinary

Colombia

References

Carvajal, Y. (2010). Interdisciplinariedad: desafío para la educación superior y la investigación. Revista Luna Azul, 31, 156-169.

 Comisión Mundial Sobre el Medio Ambiente y el Desarrollo (1987). Nuestro Futuro Común. Bogotá, Alianza-Colegio Verde de Villa de Leyva.

 Cronin, K. (2010). The “Citizen Scientist”: Reflections on the Public Role of Scientists in Response to Emerging Biotechnologies in New Zealand. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 4, 503-519.

 Guhl, E. (1997). La ciencia y la tecnología en el SINA: dificultades, logros y recomendaciones. Foro Nacional Ambiental, Documento de Políticas Públicas, 13.

 Marmora, L. (1992). La ecología en las relaciones Norte-Sur: el debate sobre el desarrollo sustentable. Comercio exterior, 42(3), 210-215.

 McAfee, K. (2003). Neoliberalism on the molecular scale. Economic and genetic reductionism in biotechnology battles. Geoforum, 34, 203-219.

 Palacio, G. (1994). Democracia y Crisis Ambiental. En Democracia formal y real. Bogotá: Instituto para el Desarrollo de la Democracia Luis Carlos Galán.

 Peres, J., y Auth, M. (2001). Ciência e tecnologia implicações sociais e o papel da educação. Ciência e Educação, 7(1), 15-27.

 Plan Estratégico Nacional de Investigación Ambiental (PENIA). (2007). Ministerio del Medio Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial - Quinaxi.

 Política Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (PN-CTI). (2009). Documento Conpes 3582. Colciencias - Departamento Nacional de Planeación.

 Política Nacional de Investigación Ambiental. (2001). Ministerio del Medio Ambiente - Departamento Nacional de Planeación - Colciencias.

 Rodríguez, M. (2006). Hacia la insostenibilidad ambiental. Un balance de la política ambiental 2002-2006. Actualidad, Discusiones y propuestas, 18, 1-25.

 Wagner, C. (1998). Biotechnology in Mexico: placing science in the service of business. Technology in Society, 20, 61-73.