Un marco para analizar las decisiones sobre el suelo
Palabras clave:
bienes de uso común, decisiones, sistema socioecológico, sueloResumen
El estado del suelo depende de las decisiones que se toman sobre este bien. Es decir, tanto la conservación como su degradación son el resultado de un conjunto de decisiones que generan cambios en él. Sin embargo, no se comprende de manera suficiente su importancia. En este texto se aborda esta cuestión basándose en la teoría de los sistemas socioecológicos, la ciencia del suelo, la bioeconomía y la historia ambiental. A partir de una reflexión conceptual, que surge de la comprensión científica del suelo como un bien de uso común, se examinan tanto las contribuciones como los avances en torno a los aportes de Elinor Ostrom para proponer una adaptación del marco CIS -Combined IAD & SES-. El marco propuesto consta de cuatro componentes principales interconectados: (1) suelo como medio natural, caracterizado por los factores de formación de los suelos, procesos y propiedades del suelo, así como la forma en la que las personas lo perciben o reconocen; (2) los usos del suelo, refiriéndose al propósito o la intención que se aplica sobre los atributos del suelo incluyendo su cobertura; (3) la gobernanza del suelo, integrada por un conjunto de reglas formales e informales que conciernen a los procesos de toma de decisiones relacionados con el suelo por parte de actores estatales y no estatales en todos los niveles de toma de decisiones y, (4) la situación de acción, que representa el espacio virtual para la toma de decisiones y donde convergen los tres componentes anteriores. Esta propuesta, además de cerrar una brecha teórica y metodológica, ofrece un marco de reflexión sobre la necesidad de distinguir entre los distintos procesos de toma de decisión y cuáles tienen mayor impacto sobre el estado del suelo. En este caso, consideramos que son las decisiones de los actores que directamente están interactuando con el suelo.
Citas
Al-Kaisi, M. M., Lal, R., Olson, K. R., & Lowery, B. (2017). Fundamentals and Functions of Soil Environment. En M. M. Al-Kaisi & B. Lowery (Eds.), Soil Health and Intensification of Agroecosytems (pp. 1–23). Academic Press. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128053171000014
Banwart, S. A., Nikolaidis, N. P., Zhu, Y.-G., Peacock, C. L., & Sparks, D. L. (2019). Soil Functions: Connecting Earth’s Critical Zone. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 47(1), 333–359. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-063016-020544
Bartkowski, B., Hansjürgens, B., Möckel, S., & Bartke, S. (2018). Institutional Economics of Agricultural Soil Ecosystem Services. Sustainability, 10(7), 2447. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072447
Basurto, X., Kingsley, G., McQueen, K., Smith, M., & Weible, C. M. (2010). A Systematic Approach to Institutional Analysis: Applying Crawford and Ostrom’s Grammar. Political Research Quarterly, 63(3), 523–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912909334430
Blum, W. (2005). Functions of Soil for Society and the Environment. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 4(3), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-005-2236-x
Blum, W. (2011). Soil Functions. En J. Gliński, J. Horabik, & J. Lipiec (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Agrophysics (pp. 747–748). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3585-1_148
Brüggemeier, F.-J. (2001). Environmental History. En N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 4621–4627). Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/02652-8
Cole, D. H., Epstein, G., & McGinnis, M. (2019). The Utility of Combining the IAD and SES Frameworks. International Journal of the Commons, 13(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.864
Cole, D. H., Epstein, G., & McGinnis, M. (2014). Toward a New Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (NIASES): Combining Elinor Ostrom’s IAD and SES Frameworks (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2490999). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2490999
Cox, J. C., Ostrom, E., Sadiraj, V., & Walker, J. M. (2013). Provision versus Appropriation in Symmetric and Asymmetric Social Dilemmas. Southern Economic Journal, 79(3), 496–512. https://doi.org/10.4284/0038-4038-2012.186
Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Villamayor Tomás, S. (2010). A Review of Design Principles for Community-based Natural Resource Management. Ecology and Society, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03704-150438
Crawford, S. E. S., & Ostrom, E. (1995). A Grammar of Institutions. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082975
De Janvry, A., McCarthy, N., & Sadoulet, E. (1998). Endogenous Provision and Appropriation in the Commons. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(3), 658–664. https://doi.org/10.2307/1244576
Edwards, V. M., & Steins, N. A. (1998). Developing an Analytical Framework for Multiple-Use Commons. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(3), 347–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951692898010003008
Euler, J. (2018). Conceptualizing the Commons: Moving Beyond the Goods-based Definition by Introducing the Social Practices of Commoning as Vital Determinant. Ecological Economics, 143(Supplement C), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.020
FAO, Unidad Regional De Asistencia Técnica, y Plan de Acción Forestal para Guatemala. (1996, enero). Vocabulario referido a género. https://www.fao.org/3/x0220s/x0220s01.htm
Feeny, D., Berkes, F., McCay, B. J., & Acheson, J. M. (1990). The Tragedy of the Commons: Twenty-two years later. Human Ecology, 18(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00889070
Frey, B. S., Benz, M., & Stutzer, A. (2004). Introducing Procedural Utility: Not Only What, but Also How Matters. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) / Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 160(3), 377–401.
Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2005). Beyond outcomes: Measuring procedural utility. Oxford Economic Papers, 57(1), 90–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpi002
Gafsi, M., & Legile, A. (2007). Gestion de l’exploitation agricole: Éléments théoriques et pratiques de gestion. En Exploitations agricoles familiales en Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre: Enjeux, caractéristiques et éléments de gestion (pp. 213–227). Editions Quae. https://www.quae.com/produit/795/9782759212439/exploitations-agricoles-familiales-en-afrique-de-l-ouest-et-du-centre
Gardner, R., Ostrom, E., & Walker, J. M. (1990). The Nature of Common-Pool Resource Problems. Rationality and Society, 2(3), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463190002003005
Hinkel, J., Cox, M. E., Schlüter, M., Binder, C. R., & Falk, T. (2015). A diagnostic procedure for applying the social-ecological systems framework in diverse cases. Ecology and Society, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07023-200132
Ibánez, J. J. (2008). Preservation of European Soils: Natural and Cultural Heritage. (pp. 37–59).
Juerges, N., & Hansjürgens, B. (2018). Soil governance in the transition towards a sustainable bioeconomy – A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 170(Supplement C), 1628–1639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.143
Lal, R. (2018). The ethics of soil conservation in India. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 17(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5958/2455-7145.2018.00001.2
Lambin, E. F., Geist, H. J., & Lepers, E. (2003). Dynamics of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change in Tropical Regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28(1), 205–241. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105459
Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., Coomes, O. T., Dirzo, R., Fischer, G., Folke, C., George, P. S., Homewood, K., Imbernon, J., Leemans, R., Li, X., Moran, E. F., Mortimore, M., Ramakrishnan, P. S., Richards, J. F., … Xu, J. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change, 11(4), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(01)00007-3
McCord, P., Dell’Angelo, J., Baldwin, E., & Evans, T. (2017). Polycentric Transformation in Kenyan Water Governance: A Dynamic Analysis of Institutional and Social-Ecological Change. Policy Studies Journal, 45(4), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12168
McGinnis, M. D. (2011). An Introduction to IAD and the Language of the Ostrom Workshop: A Simple Guide to a Complex Framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00401.x
McGinnis, M. D., & Ostrom, E. (2014). Social-ecological system framework: Initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06387-190230
McKean, M. A. (1996). Common Property: What Is It, What Is It Good For, and What Makes It Work? IFRI Research Program Studies, Forests, Trees and People Programme. Phase II, 33.
Meinzen-Dick, R., & Bakker, M. (1999). Irrigation systems as multiple-use commons: Water use in Kirindi Oya, Sri Lanka. Agriculture and Human Values, 16(3), 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007507918459
Morton, L. W., & Padgitt, S. (2005). Selecting Socio-Economic Metrics for Watershed Management. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 103(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-6855-z
Nandy, A., Mishra, S. N., Haldar, S., Barik, N. K., & Suresh, B. (2024). Is Artisanal Fishers’ Livelihood Secure in Chilika Lagoon: A Spatio-Temporal Analysis in a Combined IAD-SES (CIS) Framework. International Conference of Agricultural Economists. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.344384
North, D. C. (2014). Instituciones, cambio institucional y desempeño económico. Fondo de Cultura Economica.
Oakerson, R. J. (1990). Analyzing the Commons: A Framework. http://hdl.handle.net/10535/498
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (1998). A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585925
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton University Press.
Ostrom, E., & Crawford, S. (2005). Classifying Rules. En Understanding Institutional Diversity (1a ed., pp. 175–185). Princeton University Press.
Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resource Problems. En Rules, Games, and Common-pool Resources (pp. 3–22). University of Michigan Press.
Richter, D. deB., Bacon, A. R., Mobley, M. L., Richardson, C. J., Andrews, S. S., West, L., Wills, S., Billings, S., Cambardella, C. A., Cavallaro, N., DeMeester, J. E., Franzluebbers, A. J., Grandy, A. S., Grunwald, S., Gruver, J., Hartshorn, A. S., Janzen, H., Kramer, M. G., Ladha, J. K., … Zobeck, T. M. (2011). Human–Soil Relations are Changing Rapidly: Proposals from SSSA’s Cross-Divisional Soil Change Working Group. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 75(6), 2079–2084. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2011.0124
Rodríguez Robayo, K. J., & Merino Pérez, L. (2017). Contextualizing context in the analysis of payment for ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 23, 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.12.006
Sarker, A., & Itoh, T. (2003). The Nature of the Governance of Japanese Irrigation Common-Pool Resources. Society & Natural Resources, 16(2), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920309200
Sarker, A., Ross, H., & Shrestha, K. K. (2008). Interdependence of Common-Pool Resources: Lessons from a Set of Nested Catchments in Australia. Human Ecology, 36(6), 821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-008-9206-1
Schlüter, A., & Theesfeld, I. (2010). The grammar of institutions: The challenge of distinguishing between strategies, norms, and rules. Rationality and Society, 22(4), 445–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463110377299
Sheehan, J., & Kanas, O. (2008). Carbon property rights in soil. 20. https://www.prres.org/uploads/780/1667/Sheehan_Carbon_Property_Rights_In_Soil.pdf
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Behavioral Decision Theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 28(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.28.020177.000245
Staerklé, C. (2015). Political Psychology. En J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 427–433). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24079-8
Steins, N. A., & Edwards, V. M. (1999). Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources. Agriculture and Human Values, 16(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007591401621
Suri Salvatierra, K. (2023, agosto). Pensar la arquitectura y el urbanismo desde la teoría feminista (Nivel Introductorio) [Curso]. PUEC-UNAM.
Swidler, E.-M. (2009). The Social Production of Soil. Soil Science, 174(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1097/SS.0b013e318194274d
Sylvan, D. A., Goel, A., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1990). Analyzing Political Decision Making from an Information-Processing Perspective: JESSE. American Journal of Political Science, 34(1), 74–123. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111512
Vermeulen, S., Bossio, D., Lehmann, J., Luu, P., Paustian, K., Webb, C., Augé, F., Bacudo, I., Baedeker, T., Havemann, T., Jones, C., King, R., Reddy, M., Sunga, I., Von Unger, M., & Warnken, M. (2019). A global agenda for collective action on soil carbon. Nature Sustainability, 2(1), 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0212-z
Vivien, F.-D., Nieddu, M., Befort, N., Debref, R., & Giampietro, M. (2019). The Hijacking of the Bioeconomy. Ecological Economics, 159, 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.027
Wagg, C., Bender, S. F., Widmer, F., & Van Der Heijden, M. G. A. (2014). Soil biodiversity and soil community composition determine ecosystem multifunctionality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(14), 5266–5270. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320054111
Wakild, E. (2014). The Challenge of Scale in Environmental History: A Small Meditation on a Large Matter [Application/pdf]. 11 Pages. https://doi.org/10.5282/RCC/6530
Walker, O., Heady, E., Tweeten, L., & Pesek, J. (1960). Application of game theory models to decisions on farm practices and resource use. Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station Research Bulletin, 33(488). https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/researchbulletin/vol33/iss488/1
Whaley, L., & Weatherhead, E. (2014). An Integrated Approach to Analyzing (Adaptive) Comanagement Using the “Politicized” IAD Framework. Ecology and Society, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06177-190110
Winiwarter, V. (2014). Environmental History of Soils. En M. Agnoletti & S. Neri Serneri (Eds.), The Basic Environmental History (pp. 79–119). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09180-8_3
Yaalon, D. H. (2007). Human-induced Ecosystem and Landscape Processes Always Involve Soil Change. BioScience, 57(11), 918–919. https://doi.org/10.1641/B571102
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Francisco Almonacid Buenrostro
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
