Download SOCIOINTERCULTURAL EVALUATION FOR INVESTMENT

Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
SOCIOINTERCULTURAL EVALUATION FOR INVESTMENT PROJECT SIN
INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES WIXARIKAS
Ernesto Guerra-García, Ph.D.
Universidad Autónoma Indígena de México
drguerragarcia@gmail.com
José G. Vargas-Hernández, M.B.A.; Ph.D.
University Center for Economic and Managerial Sciences, University of Guadalajara
jvargas2006@gmail.com
María Eugenia Meza-Hernández, M.S.
Universidad Autónoma Indígena de México
uaim_mmeza@yahoo.com
Abstract
This paper analyzesaspects of the problemthat occurs inthe social evaluation ofinvestment projectsfor
indigenous communities’Wixarikas(Huichols). A project in thiscontextmakeparticularly complexthe
evaluation.Onthesocio-economic perspectivewith which it is evaluatedcomes into playthe incommensurability
ofsocialand intercultural issuesthat cannot beignored.It is addressedthe questionsthat have arisen inthe
development of thistype of projectand presentsa theoretical framework forthemethodological proposal of
socio-cultural evaluation.
Keywords:Socialevaluationof investment projects, socio-interculturalevaluation, indigenous communities,
Wixarikas.
Resumen
Se analizan aspectos de la problemática que se presenta en la evaluación social de proyectos de inversión
para las comunidadesindígenas wixarikas (huicholes).Los proyectos en este contextohacen particularmente
compleja la evaluación,En la perspectiva socioeconómica con la que se evalúa entra en juegola
inconmensurabilidad de los asuntos de carácter social e intercultural que no se pueden pasar por alto. Se
abordan las interrogantes que han surgidoen la elaboración de este tipo de proyecto y se presenta un marco
teórico para la propuesta metodológica de evaluación socio-intercultural.
Palabras clave: evaluación social de proyectos de inversión, evaluación socio-intercultural,comunidades
indígenas, Wixarikas.
1. Introduction
While developinginvestment projects forthe implementationof alternative energy incommunities
Wixarikas(hichols) in Mexico in 2010, it was found that there were a number of issues todiscuss inthe theory
of social evaluation of investment project swhen they are applied in an indigenous context.These projects aim
to improve the conditions of Wixarikas and other indigenous communities through promoting basic
infrastructure. This basic infrastructure also enables the generation of projects with their own principles and
approaches in line with the cultures and economic logics of the involved ethnic groups, as well as their social
and environmental rationality, especially how they relatewith Mother Earth(Gómez González, Gómez
Calderón and Gómez Calderón, 2008).
InWixarikas communities, the fact of assessing thepossibility of provideelectric
servicethroughalternative energiespresentsin advanceexternalities which can be considered negative to their
culture, as this servicewould involvegreater useof television sets, radios and othermedia whichopen
thepossibility of extendinganacculturatingprocessthat despitethe benefits, negative effects couldbe even
moreundesirable.However,the installation ofall serviceswould result inimproving their means ofagricultural
productionthrough the useof machinery and equipmentthat cannot beused withoutelectricity.But the simple
fact of wanting to help Wixarikas as partof government policymay haveracist implication stoplace thenational
mestizo culturea bovethem.
This is not asimple matter; the sampleis thatdespite the highinterest inthis culture,in recent decades,
the government policyhas not beenable to contribute tosignificantly improve theeconomic and materialwellbeingof this ethnic group(WiegandandFikes, 2004: 54).
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
12
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
Externalities are found in opposed directionsand they should bevalued thembothfrom the
perspectives ofthe indigenous communitiesand thenon-indigenous society.Clearly, it is evident that thenonindigenous culturehas agreaterweightand that decisionswill have aparticular biasinthis direction, butthrough
aseriesof ethical issuesin public policy, theycould be takeninto accountqualificationsof the indigenous worldto
try tobalance theirinterests.For example, unlike the non-indigenous world, forHuicholpeasants both
production andreligionare so closelylinkedwitheconomic and social lifewhich apparentlyshow alack of
interest inthe adoptionand adaptation of technology(TorresContreras,2000:162 -163).
TheHuichol Serrano uses his time not devoted to alternative working techniques in the performance of ritual
acts jointly with his family and other families in the social and production environment production (Torres
Contreras, 2000: 163).
Thisdoes not mean thatWixarikasare isolated fromthe mestizo society. The persistence of their
culture andcommunity canbe explainedthrough processesofidentificationto the world,but the specificityof
their ethnicityis due inpart to thecreativeintegration of whatis not theirculture (Florentine
BeimbordandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009: 13). The complexskeinfor the analysis ofprojects in
thesecontextsbegins withthe consideration thatin the social assessment, mentions Fontaine(1999), externalities
allow to understandthe feasibilityof promoting anon-profitprojectandsocio-interculturalcontext. Externalities
aremulti-wayandshould be analyzedinintra-social, theintra-culturalandinter-cultural(Guerra García,2004).
This research referstointra-societal aspectswhen whatit is analyzedis not unique toone of the
participating culturesinvolvedandis not putinto consideration ininter-cultural relationships.The intra-societal
aspects are all thosecross-cutting issuesinsociety regardlessof the culturesinvolved, such as poverty,
technology and welfarethat concern to allhuman beings.The inter-culturalaffairs, on the other hand,are placed
on thediscussionof the interrelationshipsamong culturessuch as the useof resources, domination, language
shifts and displacements, asymmetries, differences of understanding,among others. Intra-cultural refers tothe
differenceswithintheethnic and cultural groupsand thatdoes not give aclear anduniformidea of what
acommunity or peoplewant.
By introducing thismethodological perspective ofanalysis that it has been called sociointercultural(GuerraGarcía, 2004)in the social assessment, itopensan area of researchto generatemodels that
describethe categoriesto consider inthis type of environment.
To payto the issue isnecessary to takeinto accountthefact thatdecision-makers andintended
beneficiariesof the project arefrom different culturesnecessarilyinvolvesa "poli-relativism", i.e., to consider all
possiblerelative positionson the evaluationat the same time.That is, ifrelativity isunderstood as the
applicationof criteriaand calculationsfrom a determined particular perspectiveaccepting thatthere
arecertainother points ofreference,then, impliesnot only theacceptance of the existenceof other criteria,butthe
development of mechanismsto consider theseotherbenchmarksandother ways of seeingthe world
inherassessmentof a project.
This impliesthat the assessment must bealsoperformedas'multi-criteria', i.e. recognizingthat
treatingcomplex problems such asthose presentedinethno-regionswillneed to considerthe social, cultural,
intercultural
and
intra-culturalun-commensurabilities
present
in
these
situations.
Thisincommensurabilityrefers tothe presence of multiplelegitimate valuesin societyandculture, diverse views
andconflictingthat resultnot only the inneed to involveall the different actors and agents in thedecision
makingprocess,butunderstand the policiesof the State implied tothe effect (Vargas Isaza, 2005).
Theincommensurabilityis associatedwith the multidimensional natureof complexity andthe use of
differentdimensions of socio-intercultural analysis.
Therefore, this paper is aimed to answer the following research questions: How tomake asociointerculturalassessmentofan investment projectin an indigenous community? Or more specifically,what are
thecategoriesto be considered inthese assessments?These issues have beenanalyzed for thecase mentionedand
briefly describedin thisarticle.
2. Evaluation ofinvestment projects
It is understoodas an investment projectto be considered as the formulationof an intervention asa
mean tostudy anexisting problemand analyzingthe feasibility of achievinga desired changeat leastin some
partsof society.The investment projectis onewhereis delineated withclarity anddetail whatis to be achievedand
alsohow to do, allowing to justifythe interventionfrom different pointsof viewto giveor not give solutionto a
problem(Andia
Valencia,2010:28-29).
Before achieving anyactivityareassessed the possibilities and potential forthe project or projects.In anycase,
evenwhen the targetis private, the assessment should be considered a formofsocial research.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
13
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
…applied, systematic, planed and directed, on which is supported a judgment about the merit and value of
different components of a program, in such a way that serve as a basis or guide for making rational and
intelligent decisions between courses of action (Matos Bazó, 2005:23).
3. Evaluation ofinvestment projects
The objectivesof any project evaluation, private or social, are always aimed at developingor improvingliving
conditions. The development ofthe formulation comprisesactivities from the intentionuntil the endand how it
isto beput into operationthe project.
The project evaluation,althoughnot mentioned inmany methodologies, borrows from makingpublicpolicy
criteriaalready establishedor commonlyaccepted. The private evaluationof investment projectsprovides
criteriathatmostlycome frompublicpoliciesalignedwithan individualistic perspectivethey put on asecondary
levelthe involvementmade to the community. The social assessment of investment projects, however, departs
frompublic policyunderliningthe common goodas a priority.
It is to be consideredthat public policiescan be placedin streams and approaches of economic
thought.Classical economicsoftenincludes only thevariables that are monetary and cash, but the latest trend
precisely it includes all aspectsof the social fabricthat could notbestrongly measuredthoughcan be qualified.
Especiallywhen considering theknown effectsas externalitiespreviously thought to beindirect orof minor
importance,but increasingly aretaking on agreater significance. Withoutputting asidetheeconomic and
financialtechnicalities, the fact that manyexternalitiesare hardly difficult to quantifyin generalmakes more
difficult to evaluate.
Evaluation isoneof the moredifficult concepts to address in socio-inter-cultural environments because
is generally notpossible to implementa valid metricvalidand accepted byall stakeholders.In addition, the
aspects that commonlyare considered to have universalvalidityare questionedin the presence ofotherways of
seeing and perceiving theworld. Thenfor this case, to evaluate meansto clarifyany doubtsthat the operationof a
projectmight have beforeitisapplied from thepoli-relativismandmulti-criteriamentioned.
Such type of projectsdo not always representa competition forthe allocation ofscarce resources,where
theguiding principleofthe allocationwould be given byan indicator ofprofitability,but thereare otherequally
validcriteriathat dealwith socio-inter-cultural issueswhere cultural relativismprovidesdifferent viewsthatmay
convergeordiverge.The uncertaintiesthat ariseare due in largepart because of problemsinvolving socio-intercultural informationandthedifficulties forprescribing anddetermining thefinal outcome (Arroyave, 1994).
4. The social economics approach
The crisis ofdevelopment modelshas allowed the visibilityof someancestral waysof understanding the
economyand the emergence ofinnovations that havebeing calledthe third sectoreconomy, solidarity economy,
bartereconomy, popular economy orsocial economy (Bastidas DelgadoandRicher,2001:1). In fact, any
economyissocial. However, when the focus is onprivate,allconsiderationsare set aside of the other
actorsinvolvedin the wholeeconomy (Bastidas DelgadoandRicher,2001:2). The purposeis not to
addamoreendogenous
variablebutpredominantlyrecognizethe
social
dimensionsof
the
economy(Izquierdo,2009:5).
The aimof the social economyis not for profit, it is awelfare-oriented model of groups
andcommunities
(Pujol,
2003:36).
So,analternativeenergy
projectin
these
communitiesensuressustainability,even if the investmentcost is high andapparently did nothavea positive
financial result. Thegood lifeof the community andsocial synergiesgenerationmay be sufficient tojustify a
projectof this type.From this perspective, the Statewould pursuetheaim toimprove conditionsin communities.
In addition, the social economy is diffusedthrougha process of recognitionof thepoorcircumstances in
whichthere is anindigenous community andthe debtfor over500 yearsof Mexican societyhasfor thissector
(Bastidas Delgado and Richer, 2001: 2).
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
14
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
In modern times, where it is increasingly clearresponsibility foreach of thepeople, where cooperation
isbecoming increasingly necessaryand where itis not consideredthatthe individual goodnecessarilyleadsto the
common good, socialapproachis increasinglymost needed,even inprivate projects. In this sense
thesocialeconomyis an alternative approachconsistent with theproposedsocio-inter-cultural assessment.
Precisely for the mentioned case, it is necessary to addressan indigenous economy, understood as one
formofsocialeconomyin LatinAmerica, whichstarts from avision of a plenty fulfillment lifeof human beings
intheir relationshipwith natureand itssearch for the goodof all.
For example, forthe case ofWixarikasisknown that
…each family member contributes something to the party and also he has the right to be helped to
open his land to plant, to help him clean the fields, to harvest and to help him hunt the deer (Torres,
2000: 162).
This givesasample of a different economicdynamicsof the mestizos.In itselfthe indigenous economylooks:
…to ensure to the indigenous peoples their well-being in all spheres of life, being this philosophical
basis of welfare and lays the groundwork for the implementation of the indigenous economy (Consejo
Indígena de Centroamérica, 2010).
Theindigenouseconomyis composed oftraditional practicesto adapt toa particular environmentwhich consist
ofthefollowing features: a)theproduction that determinesa given landscapeaccording tothe particular form of
territory appropriation of eachtribeworkedwith traditional techniques, b ) distribution, where different
mechanismsoperateto the intermediationas reciprocityand redistributionc) consumption, characterized by the
forms ofmatchingd) work organizationand e) the earth, seen from adifferentworldviewof individual
ownership(Lugo,2007:60).
However, it isnecessary to clarify thatthe indigenous economyhas particular characteristicsaccording
to the indigenous cultureandhasthisrelationshipwithother ethnic groups. Thepre-Columbian elements, which
consist oftraditional practicesto adapt toa particular environment,where there isno money to exchange,
correspond to an economy that canbe calledtraditional(Lugo, 2007: 60),but there are manyelements that have
beencreated fromthe relationshipwith thenon-indigenous world, perhaps the oldesteconomic relationshipof the
latterhasbeen trading.
Trying togeneralize,
Indigenous economies are com posed of a traditional economy with a segment of a market economy which
may be in descending from larger to smaller magnitude, depending on the case in question. Generally, the
segment of the market economy behaves inter-cultural adaptations as goods produced with techniques or
traditional labor organizations to sell them to the market or whose incomes are applicable to reciprocity or
traditional complementarities (Lugo, 2007: 60).
ToLugo(2007:60-61)the traditional economyconsists of thefollowingelements: 1)the production
oftraditional practicesthat determinea landscape, a product of particular formsof land appropriation, 2)
distribution,where different mechanismsoperateother thanthe intermediary of money, which in their
differentlanguages haveto do withreciprocity, mutual aid, barter, communitycollaboration, etc.., 3)
consumption, whichis characterized byfinding waysofmatching, 4) social indigenous organization, which
determines to a greater orlesser extenttheallocation of work, use and theenjoyment of theresources andthe use
ofgoods andservices production and5) Theland asa living beingthatbelongsto itself, so that private propertyis
always a matterof conflict in thelegalframeworkin relation tonon-indigenous population(Lugo, 2007: 60-61).
Barterfor example, isone of the elementsof the traditional economy that is not onlycurrentlyused
bymany indigenous communities,but isre-emerging indifferent nichesof society,for examplein clubs
andinterest groupsin localand international levels andhas being questionedits inefficiency(Tocancipá Falla,
2008: 147). Based onthe above, it can beunderstood whythe idea thatthe indigenous peoplelack power to be
used asleverage fortheir good livingor tolive togetherin a moreharmonious way in Mexican society, requires a
broaderviewthat theprovidingcommon assessmenttools, both private and social.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
15
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
For all the above totake placeit is necessarythe real andtrue recognitionof the social organizationsin
this casethe government,communities andindigenous peoples.Thispublic policy ishighly relevantfor
evaluation insuch type of contexts(Huot andBussiéres, 2006:124)
5. Social evaluation
Asocialinvestment projectseeks to meetsocial objectivesthroughgovernment targetsor alternatives, used by
support programs(Matos, 2005). Most important inthis type of interventionisthat the direct users andsocial
beneficiaries must agree withthe formulationposed, i.e., the project must be generatedin a unidirectionalway,
in this case mestizogovernmenttoan indigenous community,but mustbe multidirectional.
However,regarding thesocialdimension, few evaluationsgo beyondindicators that describethe
satisfaction ofbasic needs andare pendingor without consideringother socio-inter-cultural aspectssuch as intercultural equality, balance within and between generations, the level of social organizationorthe management
capacityof a community orregion,the formationof social networks, social and human capital, the response and
societal organization facing market structures and their change processes(Mazabel-Domínguez, RomeroJacuinde y Hurtado-Cardoso, 2010).
In thepresent caseis noteworthy thatthe indigenous areasinMexico havejuxtapositionsbetween
usesand interestsimplyingthat the soilin the worldviewof their people andeconomicactivities
arepredominantlynon-indigenous(Korsbaek,
2009).
Recent
exampleshave
involvedsome
ethnicstrugglesagainst themining exploitationanduseof certainprivate interestson the usesthat indigenous
peopleswant tomake on thesoil (Saliba, 2011; La Jornada,2011;Zapateando, 2012). So thedifference fromthe
other evaluationsis that the benefits, costs and externalitiesshould be observed fromdifferent
perspectivessimultaneously.That is, ininter-cultural projectsis notsufficient to makethe formulationand
evaluation fromone perspective, but it is necessary to puton the tableall the criteriaand viewpointsof the
participating culturesinvolved.
This showsthat thedifferent etno-regions have conflicts anddisputes regardingthe agenda
thateconomicactorsthat arenotindigenoushave forthe useof what they considertheir land.Thus,in addition
toprivateminingprojects, indigenous aspirationsconfrontothercompanies inconnection with new sources
ofenergy, innovative technologies andmedia, which have also presentedbreaks, joints and
disagreements,subject tofurther study. The problemthat arises isthat on thesocial valuationthere are other
elements which are perceived andthen visibleasa communityharm thatare difficult toquantify orto generatea
weighting inmonetary units.Hence thedevelopment approach ofsuch projectsmust be preferablya qualitative
approach.
6. Externalities
Socialresearch projectsalwaysinvolve a numberof edgesconcerning the managementof externalitiesnot
onlyunresolved,
butare
raisedto
the
extentthey
are
foundin
practice.
Externalitiesoccur whensocialor economicactivitiesof a group ofpeople havean impact onanother oron the
nature andtheimpact is nottaken intoaccount adequatelyby the first group(Jaime and
Tinoco,2006:105).Externalitiesoccur whensocialor economicactivitiesof a group ofpeople havean impact
onanother oron the nature andtheimpact is nottaken intoaccount adequatelyby the first group(James and
Tinoco,2006:105).
Butthisdoesnotmeanthattheirdevelopmentislessvaluable.Instead, discussions on the socio-inter-cultural
perspective lead to generatenewconstructs that allowunderstandingthatwhathappensin aconcretesocialreality.
Traditionallythe evaluation ofan investment projectintend to builda starting pointfor determiningthe
compensationsthat would probably be necessaryto grant for counteractingthe negative effectson thenatural or
socialsystems. However, thiscompensatoryand correctivephilosophyis not recommended forprojects in which
participatedifferent cultures, becauseactionsimplyingcompensation and involvinga party couldbe unacceptable
toanother.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
16
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
In the treatmentof externalitiesis important to mentionthat from thesocialapproachis feasible to
calculate the costsof the negative effectand then try topayincorrectiveform is not precisely the
optimal(Fontaine, 2008: 13), i.e.to internalizeexternalitiesis notthe best philosophyin the social assessment,
because when the groups arefrom differentcultures there areinter-culturalsituationsthat mustbe
addressedproactively.
7. Economics and managementof natural resources
The importance ofthis type of projectsincreasesthefinding thatruralindigenous communitieshave been
assignedthe task of beingproviders ofresourcesto urban areasandhave been giventhe responsibility to
preservethe environmental balance(Mozas Moral and Bernal Jurado, 2006: 127).Alsoan added featurewith
this typeofalternative energy projectsin indigenous communitiesis that at the samediscusses
issuesofeconomics and management ofnatural resources.In this regardit should be notedthat interest inthe
sources ofnew and renewableenergy (SNRE) (Fuentes de Energía Nuevas y Renovables, FENR) was due
tothe energy crisisthatincreasinglyis stress sing(RodríguezMurcia, 2008: 88).
Within thisdiscipline isthe green economy, which unlikeconventional economic theory, its objective
is not thepursuit of efficiency, profitability and growth inpurely monetary terms, but to try tosupportthe
sustainability ofcapitalnatural (Domínguez Torreiro, 2004:8). Thereforethis type of projectalsois part of
anaturalresource economicsthat encompasseseverything relatedto 1)the management andvaluationof natural
resources, 2) determiningacceptable levelsof negative externalitiesand 3)the calculationof positive
externalities.
But despitethat awareness ofthe global ecological crisisis an undeniable fact, thecurrenteconomic
systemsdifficult notonly has the evaluation of these projects but also the incorporation of new methods of
energy used to be moresustainable. What isclear is that thehuman dependence onecosystemscan be
seensoclearlyin subsistence economieslinkedto the natural environment, where human communities,including
indigenouscommunities take directly fromthe ecosystems only what they needto live;ofthis,
community’sWixarikashavegreat wisdom.
Recognition of thisfactimplies the assumption thattheeconomic and social developmentwill
dependonthe medium and longterm, not onlytheproper maintenanceof ecological systemsthat sustainand
constitutetheplanet's naturalcapitalbut alsothe respectand attentiongiven to theindigenousculturesfrom
whichthere is too much tolearn (Gómez and de Groot,2007:5-6).Issues related tonatural resources areanalyzed
bothfrom an economic perspectiveand from theinstitutional frameworkwith its rules, duties and obligations,
formal and informal(Domínguez Torreiro, 2004: 6-7).Also shouldbe consideredcertain forms ofrelationship
that eachculture haswith nature.
8. Incorporating theenvironmental dimension inproject analysis
In this typeof projects inrural indigenous communitiesis difficult toignore theenvironmental impact
assessment, which involves the identification,analysis and evaluation ofproject impactsonthe environment,
natural and social, from the poli-relativismandmulti-criteria evenwhentheyarenot necessarilyexpressedin
monetary units. The addition of thiscategoryinvolves consideringa number ofadditional activitiesnot
normallyconsideredand whose executionisrequiredtoday.
To evaluate theenvironmental impactof a project onthe economic environmentit is possibleto note
thatfrom the timeof its constructionand aftercommissioning and implementing,itwillinfluencethe environment
where it will be installedby the effects produced on the existingand futurenatural, human and economic
activities, during itsoperation andto the final stage of abandonment.In particular, theenvironmental evaluation
is togauge thefutureeffects througha processto identify,interpret,predictand disseminatethe project's
potentialeffectsonthe economic andsocio-inter-culturalenvironment in which itwill be locatedand operated
that would bereflected inthe actual and future environmental changes.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
17
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
9. Development orgood living
Another element to considerin evaluatingprojectsin indigenous communitiesis that inLatin Americais
runninga renewalof the critique ofconventional developmentunder a process thatoffers severalspecial features
andit providesanother approach tosocial assessment.
In this new situation points out that while many of the positions on the conventional development, and even
many of the critical currents, they operate within their own knowledge of western modernity, the most recent
Latin America alternatives are beyond those limits (Gudynas y Acosta, 2011: 72).
What is important hereasit isin communities’Wixarikasassessmentis thatthe positions of the'good life'
recovervisionsrooted inthe knowledgeofindigenous peoples'ownknowledge. The positionsof good
livingchallengeto the developmentwith its philosophy ofprogress and thatin practicemeant anadversarial
relationshipwith nature.
Living well is not, then one more alternative development in a long list of options, but is presented as an
alternative to all those positions (Gudynas y Acosta, 2011: 72).
Thegood lifeis a concept ofpublic policy inconstruction,but generallyrecoversthe idea of agood life,
welfare ina broader senseand in the caseof the social economyandsocial assessmentasa general
ruleprovidesthat a communitylives well, without waiting for progressat the cost ofthe devastationof natural
resources. AsmentionedKichwaleaders:
…is a holistic vision of what should be the goal or mission of every human effort, which consist of finding
and creating the material and spiritual conditions for building and maintaining the good life, which is also
defined as harmonious life that in languages such as runa shimi (Quichua) is defined as “alli kausar” or
sumac Kausai (Hidalgo, 2011), 88).
From the aboveit is stressed thatthe evaluation of aproject is differentif itis part ofany
policydevelopmentor withinthe one presentedto the approachof good living.Public policiesare crucialin
guidingthe work ofsocialevaluation.
10. Wixarikas indigenous communities
Forthe Huichol culture, also called Wixarika, bewisemeans knowingthe nature(Iturrioz, cited by Juránková,
2007: 150).For this culturethe mestizo worldisanalter worldcoexistingwith hismythical(Durín, 2005: 91).
Spirituality and religiosity influences the mode of being of the Huichol, in the way of seeing the world, in
their view (Juránková, 2007: 151).
The word'Huichol' derives from 'hueitzolme', a territorial area currently locatedinNayarit, itslanguage
belongs to thedialecttotoramefrom the familysouthernUto-Aztecan(WiegandandFikes, 2004: 5152).TheWixarikasinhabit the regionHuicot comprising approximatelytwo hundred and fifty
thousandhectaresshared by thestates ofNayarit, Durango, Jalisco andZacatecas.This areais located in
theSierraMadre Occidentalin abroad bandcalledthe BigNayar, but the weight that the desertlocated
inSanLuisPotosihas for themis crucial totheir culture (Porras Carrillo, 2006: 34).
In fact,the pilgrimagethat according tothe obligations imposedbythe Huicholculture shouldmake the huichol to
the desert ofSanLuis Potosiis one of thekey eventsin his lifeand one of thehighlights andattractions of
thisindigenous people(PorrasCarrillo, 2006:34)..
This type ofmigration ontheWixarikasallows in a greaterperspectiveto understandthe dynamicsof
their culture intheir intensiveinteraction with'the other'(Florentine BeimbornandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009:
15).It is generally apoor regionwith unpaved roads andsidewalks,electricityis very scarce and lowsince the
problemsof
access
to
thisterritorymakes
difficult
the
installation
ofservices
and
communications(Barrera,2002:45).
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
18
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
The altitudesofvariegatedterrainof mountains,plateaus, cliffs and canyonsare locatedfrom400 to3,000 meters
abovesea level, containing within ita varietyof ecological niches, with a wealth biotic ofuntold wealth(Guízar
Vazquez, 2009: 171).
In addition to the Wixarikasinhabit thisregionotherethnic groups besidesmestizos: the Coras,
theTepehuanos, theTepecanos and the Mexicaneros which congregatein total56, 614indigenous people
(Guízar Vasquez, 2009: 171).The townWixarika has settledagriculturalactivitiesfromat least900 years
ago(Tetreault andLucioLopez,2011:170),traditionally are living inthree communities, San Sebastián, Santa
Catarinaand SanAndrés, who along with TuxpanandGuadalupe de Ocotánare thefivepoliticalterritorial
unitswereformedfrom the time ofthe Spanish Crown inthe eighteenth century (Wiegand andFikes, 2004: 51).
According to the latestCensus ofPopulationand Housing of the National Statistics, Geography and
Informatics (Censo de Población y Vivienda del Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática,
INEGI), 44, 788Huicholspeakerslivein these regionswith an agegreater thanfive years, of which 22, 129are
men and22, 659women (INEGI, 2010).According toINEGI(2011)the Huichol languageis inplace 22speakers
in number of speakersbeforethe Chontaland afterthe Chatino, but it is one of the groupswitha higher
percentage ofmonolingualsin Mexico (Juránková, 2007: 149).
The productive organization ofthe groups in thisethno-regionhas focused onprimary activities ofthe
agriculturalnature; the breedingof cattle,bothWixarikasasother ethnic groupsis the mostrelevant
activity.Rainfedagricultureand forestryhave alsogained importancein recentyears (Guízar Vasquez, 2009:
177). However,the above are nottheonly economic activities. The migration processis alsostrongly linked toits
economy.An interesting fact isthat there are severaltypes of migrationsin addition to thereligious: The
seasonal, shelter andthe handcraft.
Theseasonalis whenthe Huicholgo to workas laborersand employees outsideof the mountainsin the
dry season. Many of them move from onejob to anotherwithout havingthe opportunity to returnregularlyto the
mountains.The secondtype of migrationoccurs becauseeventuallyhave toflee the violencetowardsthe coast
wherethere aregroups that have beendefinitively established,bothindigenouspeoplesasmestizo’s
townships.Handcraftmigrationisthe third type ofmigrationhas to dowiththe heightthattoday aretakingthe craft
marketsacross the country, a number ofpassesWixarikas spent full seasonson trading tourand for some thisis
already a formoflife (Florentine BeimbornandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009: 15-16).
For the specific caseof land usein theNayar,theWixarikashave sustainedfighting.
Among theWixarikasthere is a subtleand complexregionaldivision of labor, based not only
onspecialized productionasagricultural and manufactured goods, but also ina particular wayto grow,produce
andmanufacture productsfor eachgroup.This division of labor is wrappeditself inaclasshierarchyand of a
group,
as
well
as
relativeterritoriality,
prompting
constantdisagreementsand
conflictsinvolvinganimositiesbetweenall groups involved, and even within eachgroup:Coras against
Wixaritari, Tepehuanos againstCoras,etc.(Guízar Vasquez, 2009: 172).
Prolongedintraand inter-culturalconflictis cruderagainst colonizationfrom the mestizo rancherswho
have had thesupportof the state toadvance the ethnophagic process resulting from the asymmetriesamong the
indigenous and non-indigenousgroups. The fact isthat the territoryWixarika hasbeen claimedmore
insistentlyevery daysince thecolonial timesand today.That claimis madein more sophisticated waysbythe
mestizo group, the current struggleis not onlyin the juxtapositionof mining regions withthesacred areas,but
themestizo groupuses education, religion and technology, amongothers,to penetrate andchangetheir
world.These andother considerationssocio-inter-culturalof theWixarikas life cannot beneglected inthe
evaluation ofan investment project.
11. Proposal for socio-inter-cultural evaluation
In thiscomplexitydescribed,the proposal for socio-inter-cultural evaluationlies in structuring the categories
ofanalysis according tothemacro-spheresand micro-spheresin the corresponding categoriesto specific
casesa)intra-societal, b) intra-culturalissuesand c)cross-cultural issues. Figure1 showsa diagramreferringto the
above:
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
19
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
Figure 1. Schema for socio-intercultural analysis
DIMENSIONS
INTRA-SOCIAL
INTRA-CULTURAL
MACRO-SPHERA
Political, social, economics SOCIO-INTER-CULTURAL
MICRO-ESPHERA
Gender, class y ethnicity
Source: Authors'construction
INTER-CULTURAL
A. Evaluation fromthemacrospheres
Toevaluate a projectaspresented isnecessary to takeinto account thepolitical, socialand economic macrospheres. In the caseof communitiesWixarikasmaximumcriteriacome froma) trendsin public policy, whether
the development orthe good life, which in turnimplywhat the Statewants to do withthe poor andthe
marginalized,thatin mostcasesconvergeto generatethe necessary synergieson the most needy; b) worldwideand
nationallyenvironmentaltrendsthat encouragealternative technologiesand avoid thosethat add toglobal
warmingc) inter-culturalism, which the Statewishes to dowith ethnic groupsthat make up thenation, that is, to
what extent and how theyare targetedefforts towardsindigenous peoples.
Perhaps thesetrendsin public policyare the most importantconsiderationinevaluating anyinvestment
project.
B. Evaluation fromthe micro-spheres
Since the talk is related tospecific projects,the evaluation must considerthe manifestations of thevarious
stakeholders, local governments, and theWixarikapeople here in this caseandmestizo societythat is located
inthe vicinityand possiblymay also receiveexternalitiesof the projects.Inthis case it isimportant to consider
otheraspects ofthe specificity of theparticipating community, which can also guide thefinal decision, for
example thedemographic makeupinWixarika isrelevant.
C. The evaluationfrom theintra-social
This categoryincludes the analysis of costs, benefitsand externalities thathavemore to do withthe affairsof
society regardlessof cultures andethnic groupsinvolved. In this case,the sustainable uses ofthe
technologies,policies to addresspovertyregardless ofethnic groupyou belong tothe population in thisState,
amongothers,belong to theintra-socialevaluation. The useof alternative energyin the communitiesavoid
usingharmfulenergies, here the problem lies inevaluating the potentialenvironmentalcost or benefit. This
isbecause thecontaminationis consideredanegative externality generatedby the processes ofproduction and
consumption, in this case of electrical energy(Reyes Gil, Galván Rico & Aguilar Serra, 2005: 436).
On the other hand, the inclusion of theinterests of futuregenerationsbringsto rural indigenous
communitiesopportunities forcertain incentivesfromglobal policiesfor mitigation andadaptation to climate
changethroughthe mechanisms of cleandevelopmentofenergy(Pinto Silbato, 2004: 123).Ifto this problemis
addedtheMexicangovernment's
responsibilitytohave
entered
theKyoto
Treaty,the
evaluationbecomesimmeasurableand the resulttendsdefinitelyto the installationof the bestsolar power plants,
regardless of whether there arecash flowsto recoverthemonetaryinvestment.
That is,the financial investmentis minimal compared to: a) the fight against the damaging effectsof
climate change,b) the opportunity for developmentof rural and indigenous communitiesand c) compensation
to indigenous communitiesbythe historical factof the Spanish domain first mestizo domainlaterfor more
thanfive hundred years.
The presence ofcuttingsustainableprojectsis one of the intra-societalaspectsthat makecomplexthis
assessment, since the value of usingalternative energy ismore significant, regardless of the cultures
involved.So thatinthe era we liveprojectsof this typecould have adifferentiatingfeaturefrom othersocial
assessments.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
20
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
D. The evaluationfrom theintra-cultural
In practice it resultsthat the indigenous communitiesare nota uniform whole, for while somepeople refuse
tohave the benefitsof alternative energybecausethey seecertain dangersof acculturation,others preferto applyin
thehousehold andproduction that would give thema better way oflife.That is,not allWixarikasmanifested
inconsensus onintervention projects.
Inthe case ofmestizosis,noteveryone agreeswithWixarikahelp a community, especially if there are
others-indigenousor
not
-which
also
requirebenefits.
Therefore,the adoptionof technology inthe ruralindigenousarea isa challenge, defining the most suitable
methodologyin relation touser involvementrequiresmore socio-intercultural researchWixarikas.
The technology usedby farmersWixarikasis normallyintegrated into itssocio-cultural structure and
dynamicsand it isfromtheir perception of theenvironmentthat they developaculturally specifictechnical
system, so thatany technological innovationdisruptstheir lifethe way they seethe world and theyvalues
(Berrueta Soriano, Limón Aguirre, Fernández Zayas & Soto Pinto, 2003: 95).This raisesmany
questionsthatareultimatelylinked
toexternalities.How
doesorcould
disruptthe
useof
alternative
energytoculturaltechnical systemof the Wixarikas?Howthis technologywould changetheir lifestyle, their way
of seeing the world andtheir values?Doesthis technology allow astrong presence ofthe inhabitantsand
theircultural values?
When the electric energy gets to thecommunity, some people who thoughtthey wouldemigrate
andnot dobecausesatisfierscouldpossiblybe enoughforpeople to stay, possibly altering theirmigratory tradition.
Another effect is thatby the time ofgettingthe electricpoweralso they reachthemass mediatodisruptcultural
values.Preliminary assessmentbetween costsand benefits is noteasy to determine. Thearrival of energyis also
linkedwith the use ofmedia andtheseprocessesof acculturationincreases.Howwouldthese processesbe? How
much it is valued thedisplacement of alanguagein a cultureand society? These are questions thatcannot be
solvedsimply.
E. Theevaluation fromthe inter-cultural
The evaluationof inter-cultural projectsmust be understoodin contextby relating it tothe contextualized
political strategies. Inter-culturalismcan’t be thoughtfroman instrumental logic, which favors theextension
oruniversalization of a trans-culturalmodelwithsupposed goodintentions.Neithercan passthe same criteria
usedin different contexts.Asmentionedby Diez(2004:195):
The constructionof a projectrefersto socio-historicallysituated processes and practicesthat
shape andare configuredin a field ofdispute,in whichthere are correlations of
variablesbetween differentforces of actors with differentand frequentlyconflicting, interests.
Intheevaluation processes are present, the formations, structures and resistances, relationships of
social inequality andthe struggleto transform them. Thus, in this form,public policy
aimedatexpandingruralindigenousenergyis not always desirablebecause of thedynamic processes
ofacculturation that generallyhavethe inter-cultural relations. Butif it is acceptedthis policy asessential
tosurvival andgood lifeof communities,at leastitshould be notedthe adoption ofrenewableenergy solutions, as
wellthe potential benefitswould not beoutweighed bythe negative externalitiesthat would make the investment
an unsustainableprojectfrom theglobal point of view(Pinto Silbato,2004:123).
Here it is necessary to evaluatethe externalities thatexistbetween cultureswhen the
projectenhancesinter-cultural relations.Acculturation effectsmust be analyzed, especially those ofnonindigenoussocietyoverWixarikas, loss of cultural values, such as language, customs and in general the
influence on theirworldview. But how toassessexternalitieswhen the criteriaare incommensurable? For
example, in evaluating anyinvestment project, the evaluatorhas to observethe possibility ofsoil contamination.
The problemis that,for the cultureWixarikaland is sacredand should not bedisrupted. To calculatean
optimal point, in this case meansthat the indigenous people give up theirprinciples andhave to yield
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
21
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
tomestizo´scriteria: To disrupta little bit theearth to the"level ofacceptance."In summary, thesolution
becomesimpossible.Letothers decide forthem is neitherfairnor just, so it ismorepreciselyat a crossroads.
11. In conclusion
It is concludehere that it isnecessary to openresearchin line withthe socio-inter-cultural assessmentin
the indigenous context, to address in more deptheach of theraised externalities.Socio-interculturalevaluationof investment projectsis aresearch methodologythatis part ofthe implementationof public
policies, which extends beyondtheapplication of quantitative techniquescentered on financial interest
intheprivate perspective.
In the way of transversal and cross analysis of macroand micro-spheresis proposedto study
certainaspects of intra-societal, intra-culturaland inter-culturalcharacterized features ofmulticultural
societies.As explained, the analysis ofmacro-spheres departs fromprecepts of thesocialeconomyand
considersthe specific aspects ofthe indigenous economyin whichtheoriesare contrastedwith thedevelopment of
the emergingproposalsof living.In this methodology, it is clear thatfinancialtechnicalmattersare reducedto
theneed for furtherqualitativeanalysisof externalities.
The complexityof the evaluationis increasedwhen the projectsin question are relatedtoalternative
energiesthat falldown and framed intoecological economicsof natural resources, where the idea of
sustainabilityin itselfmarksa significant difference intheways of conductevaluationinsocial investmentprojects.
In short, fromthe perspective ofsocio-inter-culturaleconomy, alternativeenergy projectsin
communities’Wixarikascould notbe expected to paymonetaryinvestmentfor a generationofmostly peasants,
since their economic statuswould not allow it. However,the investment is justifiedbecause itwould
promotesocial and economic developmentofthe community, butalsoif it isdonethrough the
useofrenewableenergy thatwould generatepositive externalitiesto the worldand the futureof humanity.The
lattervalue isfully justifyingthe project.
References
Aguilera Vidal, R. and Palacios Sepúlveda, F. (2005). “La evaluación de los proyectos de inversión para la
toma de decisiones”, en Economía y Administración, núm. 64, Chile: Universidad de Concepción.
Andia Valencia, W. (2010). “Proyectos de inversión, un enfoque diferente de análisis”, en Industrial Data,
vol. 13, núm. 1, Perú: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos.
Arroyave Loaiza, Gilma (1994), “Análisis de sensibilidad de los proyectos de inversión en salud”, en Salud
Pública de México, vol. 36, núm. 003, México: Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública.
Bastidas Delgado, O. and Richer, M. (2001). “Economía social y economía solidaria: intento de definición”,
en Cayapa, vol. 1, núm. 001, Mérida: CIRIEC-Venezuela.
Barrera, R. O. (2002). “Consideraciones geomorfológicas sobre la Sierra Madre Occidental en el norte de
Jalisco, México”, en Investigaciones Geográficas, núm. 048, México: Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México.
Berrueta Soriano, Víctor M, Limón Aguirre, Fernando, Fernández Zayas, José L. y Soto Pinto, María L.
(2003), “Participación campesina en el diseño y construcción un secador solar para café”, en
Agrociencia vol. 37, núm. 001, México: Colegio de Posgraduados.
Consejo Indígena de Centroamérica (2010).Economía indígena. Documento en línea en:
www.cicaregional.org/leer.php/9621715, fecha de consulta: 19 de octubre de 2010.
Diez, M. L. (2004). “Reflexiones en torno a la interculturalidad”, en Cuadernos de Antropología Social, núm.
19, Argentina: Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Domínguez Torreiro, M. (2004). “El papel de la fisiocracia en nuestros días: una reflexión sobre el análisis
económico de los recursos naturales y el medio ambiente”, en Revista Galega de Economía, vol. 13,
núm. 001-002, España: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.
Durín, S. (2005). “Sacrificio de res y competencia por el espacio entre los wixaritari (huicholes)”, en
Alteridades, vol. 15, núm. 029, México: UAM-Ixtapalapa.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
22
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
Florentine Beimborn, M. and Romandía Peñaflor, A. (2009). “Emigración y continuidad cultural de los
wixaritari. Breve reflexión sobre una relación ambigua”, en Liminar, Estudios Sociales y
Humanísticos, vol. VII, núm. 2, México: Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas.
Fontaine, E. (2008). “La evaluación privada y social de proyectos: el rol del Estado”, en Panorama
socioeconómico, vol. 26, núm. 036, Talca: Universidad de Talca.
Fontaine, E. (1999). Evaluación social de proyectos, Editorial Alfa Omega, México, pp. 471.
Gómez, B. E and de Groot, R. (2007). “Capital natural y funciones de los ecosistemas: explorando las bases
ecológicas de la economía”, en Ecosistemas, vol. XVI, núm. 003, España: Asociación Española de
Ecología Terrestre.
Gómez González, G., Gómez Calderón, E. X. and Gómez Calderón, Y. (2008). “Perspectiva de los
agronegocios en el desarrollo indígena: caso Querétaro”, en Ra Ximahi, vol. 4, núm. 003, México:
UAIM.
Gudynas, E. y Acosta, A. (2011), “La renovación de la crítica al desarrollo y el buen vivir como alternativa”,
en Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, vol. 16, núm. 53, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.
Guerra García, E. (2004), “La sociointerculturalidad y la educación indígena”, en Sandoval Forero, E. y
Baeza, M. A. (coord..), Cuestión étnica, culturas, construcción de identidades, México: UAIM,
ALAS, El Caracol.
Guízar Vázquez, F. (2009). “Wixaritari (huicholes) y mestizos: análisis heurístico sobre un conflicto
intergrupal”, en Indiana, núm. 26, Berlin: Instituto Ibero- Americano de Berlín.
Hidalgo F., F. (2011). “Buen vivir, Sumak Kawsay: Aporte contrahegemónico del proceso andino”, en Utopía
y Praxis Latinoamericana, vol. 16, núm. 53, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.
Huot, G. and Bissiéres, D. (2006). “El grupo (Chantier) de economía social y los sectores de la economía
social en Québec”, en Cayapa, vol. 6, núm.011, Mérida: CIRIEC: Venezuela.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI) (2011).Características culturales de la
población.
Documento
en
línea
en:
http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/sisept/default.aspx?t=mlen10&c=27643&s=est, fecha de consulta:
12 de julio de 2012.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI) (2010).Lenguas indígenas en México y
hablantes
(de
5
años
y
más)
al
2010.
Documento
en
línea
en:
http://cuentame.inegi.org.mx/hipertexto/todas_lenguas.htm, fecha de consulta: 12 de julio de 2012.
Izquierdo Server, R. (2009). “Responsabilidad social de las empresas, crisis y economía social”, en CIRIECEspaña, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, núm. 65, España: Centro Internacional
de Investigación e Información sobre la Economía, Pública, Social y Cooperativa.
Jaime, A. y Tinoco López, R. O. (2006), “Métodos de valuación de externalidades ambientales provocadas
por obras de ingeniería”, en Ingeniería e investigación y tecnología, vol. VII, núm. 002, UNAM,
México.
Juránková, M. (2007). “El perfil comunicativo de los huicholes que viven en la ciudad”, en Comunicación y
Sociedad, núm. 007, México: Universidad de Guadalajara.
Korsbaek, Leif (2009), “Los peligros de la comunidad indígena y sus defensas”, en Ra Ximahi, vol. 5, núm.
003, México: UAIM.
La Jornada (2011). “Minera canadiense pone en riesgo a pueblos indígenas”, en La Jornada, 11 de marzo,
México.
Lugo, D. (2007). “Economía indígena y estrategias de reproducción en el grupo indígena Warao”, en Cayapa,
vol. 7, núm. 013, Mérida: Centro Internacional de Investigación e Información sobre la Economía
Pública, Social y Cooperativa.
Matos Basó, R. (2005). “Enfoques de evaluación de programas sociales: análisis comparativo”, en Revista de
Ciencias Sociales (Ve), año/vol. XI, núm. 002, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.
Mazabel-Domínguez, D. G, Romero-Jacuinde, M. y Hurtado-Cardoso, M. (2010). “La evaluación social de la
sustentabilidad en la agricultura de riego”, en Ra Ximhai, vol. 6, núm. 2, México: UAIM.
Mozas Moral, A. y Bernal Jurado, E. (2006). “Desarrollo territorial y economía social”, en CIREC-España
Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, núm. 055, Valencia: CIRIEC-España, Revista
de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa.
Pinto Silbato, F. (2004). “Energías renovables y desarrollo sostenible en zonas rurales de Colombia. El caso
de la Vereda Carrizal en Sutamarchán”, en Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, núm. 053, Bogotá:
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.
Porras Carrillo, E. (2006). “Algunos aspectos de las relaciones entre el desierto y los huicholes”, en
Culturales, vol. II, núm. 003, México: Universidad Autónoma de Baja California.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
23
Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012
Pujol, J. (2003).”La economía social en Cataluña”,en CIRIEC- España Revista de Economía Pública, Social y
Cooperativa, núm. 047, Valencia: Centro Internacional de Investigación Inform. Sobre la Economía
Pública, Social y Cooperativa.
Reyes Gil, Rosa E., Galván Rico, Luís E. y Aguilar Serra, Mauricio (2005), “El precio de la contaminación
como herramienta económica e instrumento de política ambiental”, en Interciencia, vol. 30, núm.
007, Venezuela: Asociación Interciencia.
Rodríguez-Murcia, H. (2008). “Desarrollo de la energía solar en Colombia y sus perspectivas”, en Revista de
Ingeniería, núm. 28, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
Saliba, F. (2011). “En México, los indígenas huicholes no quieren las minas de oro y plata”, en Le monde, 30
de diciembre, París Francia.
Torres Contreras, J. J. (2000), “Tierras magras y políticas equivocadas en el sistema productivo huichol, caso
Santa Catarina, municipio de Mezquitic, Jalisco”, en Espiral, vol. 7, núm. 019, México: Universidad
de Guadalajara.
Tetreault, D. V. and Lucio López, C. F. (2011). “Jalisco: pueblos indígenas y regiones de alto valor
biológico”, en Espiral, vol. XVIII, núm. 51, México: Universidad de Guadalajara.
Tocancipá Falla, J. (2008), “El trueque, tradición, resistencia y fortalecimiento de la economía indígena en el
Cauca”, en Revista de Estudios Sociales, núm. 31, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.
Vargas Isaza, O. L. (2005). “La evaluación multicriterio social y su aporte a la conservación de bosques”, en
Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía – Medellin, vol. 58, núm. 1, Colombia: Universidad
Nacional de Colombia.
Wiegand, P. and Fikes, J. (2004). “Sensacionalismo y etnografía, el caso delos huicholes de Jalisco”, en
Relaciones, vol. 25, núm. 098, México: Colegio de Michoacán.
Zapateando (2012), “Indígenas marchan para la libertad de Patishtán y contra minas y presas”, en
Zapateando,
27
de
marzo.
Documento
en
línea
en:
http://zapateando.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/indigenas-marchan-para-la-libertad-de-patishtan-ycontra-minas-y-presas-accion-urgente-por-la-libertad-de-alberto-patishtan/, fecha de consulta 15 de
mayo de 2012.
„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007
24