Correo Electrónico
DNINFOA - SIA
Bibliotecas
Convocatorias
Identidad U.N.
Publicado
Contribuciones a una teoría de la innovación rural
Contributions to a theory of rural innovation
Contribuções a uma teoria da inovação rural
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/cuad.econ.v39n79.74459Palabras clave:
cambio rural, innovación social, territorios rurales, desarrollo endógeno, construcción de teorías (es)rural change, social innovation, rural territories, endogenous development, theory building (en)
mudança rural, inovação social, territórios rurais, desenvolvimento endógeno, construção de teorias (pt)
Descargas
La importancia de la innovación como clave para el crecimiento económico impulsó una sólida teoría de la innovación de corte neo-schumpeteriano. Esta teoría, sin embargo, es inapropiada para abordar procesos de innovación en áreas rurales rezagadas. Este trabajo presenta bases para construir una Teoría de la Innovación Rural
(TIR) a partir de: 1) definición del objeto, 2) planteamiento de preguntas clave, 3) un modelo de conocimiento, 4) métodos de construcción teórica, 5) capacidad de anticipación, y 6) expectativas y marco ético. La construcción de una TIR como la propuesta constituye un gran aporte al diseño de políticas públicas y estrategias que orienten el cambio rural desde la perspectiva del desarrollo territorial endógeno.The importance of innovation as a key to economic growth prompted a strong neo-Schumpeterian innovation theory. This theory, however, is inappropriate for addressing innovation processes in lagging rural areas. Consequently, from a multidimensional conception, this research work proposes to construct a Rural Innovation Theory from six elements: 1) the definition of the object, 2) the posing of key questions and their relevance, 3) a model of knowledge, 4) construction methods, 5) capacity of anticipation and 6) an ethical framework, with the implications that this entails.) A Rural Innovation Theory as the proposal constitutes a significant contribution to the design of public policies and strategies to orient rural change from the perspective of endogenous territorial development.
A importância da inovação como chave para o crescimento econômico impulsionou uma sólida teoria da inovação de corte neo-schumpeteriano. Esta teoria, no entanto, é inapropriada para abordar processos de inovação em áreas rurais atrasadas. Este trabalho apresenta bases para construir uma Teoria da Inovação Rural (TIR) a partir de: 1) definição do objeto, 2) elaboração de perguntas chave, 3) um modelo de conhecimento, 4) métodos de construção teórica, 5) capacidade de antecipação, e 6) expectativas e marco ético. A construção de uma TIR como a proposta constitui um grande aporte ao projeto de políticas públicas e estratégias que orientem a mudança rural a partir da perspectiva do desenvolvimento territorial endógeno.
Referencias
Agarwal, B. (1983). Diffusion of rural innovations: some analytical issues and the case of wood burning stoves. World Development, 11(4), 359-376.
Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (2006). Joseph Schumpeter lecture appropriate growth policy: A unifying framework. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4(23), 269-314. doi:10.1162/jeea.2006.4.2-3.269
Aligica, P. D. (2005). Scenarios and the growth of knowledge: Notes on the epistemic element in scenario building. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(7), 815-824. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2005.01.001
Álvarez Sousa, A., Rego Veiga, G., Leira López, J., Gomis Rodríguez, A., CaramésValo, R., & Andrade Suárez, M. J. (2008). Innovación turística: perspectivas teóricas y objetos de estudio. ROTUR: Revista de Ocio y Turismo, 1(1), 19-50. doi:10.17979/rotur.2008.1.1.1224
Benavente, J., de Mello, L. & Mulder, N. (2005). Fostering innovation in Chile. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 454, OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/835465402444
Bibby, P., & Shepherd, J. (2004). Developing a new classification of urban and rural areas for policy purposes–the methodology. London: DEFRA
Bock, B. B. (2012). Social innovation and sustainability; how to disentangle the buzzword and its application in the field of agriculture and rural development. Studies in Agricultural Economics (Budapest), 114(2), 57-63. doi: 10.22004/ag.econ.135760
Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies,39(1): 61-74. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320887
Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2010). The spatial evolution of innovation networks. A proximity perspective. En: Boschma R. A. y Martin R. (Eds.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
Burgos, A. & Bocco, G. (2016). Redes de conocimiento en territorios disimiles y contrastantes. En: Rodríguez-González, J.A., Alvarez-Castañón, L.,Tagle, D., &Coronado-Ramírez, J.L. (Eds.), Desarrollo Desde Lo Local y Dinámicas Territoriales. (pp. 61-85). Editorial Fontamara.
Burgos, A. & Velázquez, A. (2019). A territory-oriented approach to operationilize sustainable management. Global Journal of Human-Social Science 19 (1).
Cañete-Pérez, J. A., García, E. C., & Valverde, F. N. (2017). ¿Desarrollo rural o desarrollo de territorios rurales dinámicos? La contribución a los desequilibrios territoriales por parte de los Programas de Desarrollo en el sur de España, Andalucía1. Anales de Geografía de la Universidad Complutense, 37, 265-295.
Caravaca, I., G. González, & Silva, R. (2005). Innovación, redes, recursos patrimoniales y desarrollo territorial. Revista Eure,31(94): 5-24.
Carpio-Martín,J. (2000). Desarrollo local para un nuevo desarrollo rural. Anales de Geografía de la Universidad Complutense, 20, 85-100.
Charles, D. (2006). Universities as key knowledge infrastructures in regional innovation systems. Innovation: the European Journal of Social Science Research, 19(1), 117-130. doi:10.1080/13511610600608013
Chatterton, P., & Goddard, J. (2000). The response of higher education institutions to regional needs. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 475- 496. doi: 10.1111/1467-3435.00041
Coenen, L. (2007). The role of universities in the regional innovation systems of the North East of England and Scania, Sweden: providing missing links? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25(6), 803- 821. doi:10.1068/c0579
De Jouvenel, H. (2000). A brief methodological guide to scenario building. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 65(1), 37-48. doi:10.1016/S0040-1625(99)00123-7
Delgadillo-Macías, J. (2006). Dimensiones territoriales del desarrollo rural en América Latina. Problemas del Desarrollo, 37(144), 97-120.
Delgadillo-Macías, J. (2008). Desigualdades territoriales en México derivadas del tratado de libre comercio de América del Norte. Eure (Santiago), 34(101), 71-98. doi:10.4067/S0250-71612008000100004
De Souza, P. (2018). The rural and peripheral in regional development: an alternative perspective. Routledge
Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “Mode 2” to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy 29(2), 109-123. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Filatova, T., Polhill, J. G., & van Ewijk, S. (2016). Regime shifts in coupled socio-environmental systems: review of modelling challenges and approaches. Environmental Modelling & Software, 75, 333-347. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.04.003
Freeman, C. (1995). The national system of innovation in historical perspective. Journal of Economics, 19, 5-24.
Gallopín, G. C. (2006). Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 293-303. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.004
Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584-602
Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1994). Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 23-44. doi:10.1257/jep.8.1.23
Guillard, C., & Salazar, M. (2017). La experiencia en encuestas de innovación de algunos países latinoamericanos. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo
Gurrutxaga-Abad, A. (2011). Condiciones y condicionamientos de la innovación social. ARBOR Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura,187(752), 1045-1064. doi:10.3989/arbor.2011.752n6003
Haig, B. D. (2008). An abductive perspective on theory construction. Journal of Theory Construction and Testing, 12(1), 7-10
Halfacree, K. H. (1995). Talking about rurality: social representations of the rural as expressed by residents of six English parishes. Journal of Rural Studies, 11(1), 1-20.doi:10.1016/0743-0167(94)00039-C
Intarakumnerd, P., Chairatana, P., & Tangchitpiboon,T. (2002). National innovation system in less successful developing countries: the case of Thailand. Research Policy, 31(8), 1445-1457. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00074-4
Jiménez Domínguez, R. V., & Rojo Asenjo, O. (2008). Ciencia, tecnología y bioética: una relación de implicaciones mutuas. Acta Bioethica, 14(2), 135-141. doi:10.4067/S1726-569X2008000200002
Johannessen, J. A., Olsen, B., & Olaisen, J. (1999). Aspects of innovation theory based on knowledge-management. International Journal of Information Management, 19(2), 121-139. doi:10.1016/S0268-4012(99)00004-3
Klerkx, L., Aarts, N., & Leeuwis, C. (2010). Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment. Agricultural Systems, 103(6), 390-400. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.012
Knickel, K., & Renting, H. (2000). Methodological and conceptual issues in the study of multifunctionality and rural development. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(4), 512-528. doi:10.1111/1467-9523.00164
Kovács, G., & Spens, K. M. (2005). Abductive reasoning in logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(2), 132-144. doi:10.1108/09600030510590318
Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M., Martens, P., Moll, P., Swilling, M, & Thomas, C. J. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability Science, 7(1), 25-43
Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix, quadruple helix,…, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the knowledgebased economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 25-35.
Llisterri, J. J., & Pietrobelli, C. (2016). Los sistemas regionales de innovación en América Latina. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID).
Lowe, P., Phillipson, J., Proctor, A., & Gkartzios, M. (2019). Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis. World Development, 116, 28-37. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.12.005
Lundvall, B. Ä., Johnson, B., Andersen, E., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy 31(2), 213–231. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00137-8
Lynham, S. A. (2002). The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 221-241. doi:10.1177/1523422302043002
Mahroum, S., Atterton, J., Ward, N., Williams, A. M., Naylor, R., Hindle, R., & Rowe, F. (2007). Rural Innovation. National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (NESTA), London.
Marsden, T., Murdoch, J., Lowe, P., Munton, R. & Flynn, A. (1993). Constructing the countryside. London: Routledge
Marsden, T. & Sonnino, R. (2008). Rural development and the regional state: Denying multifunctional agriculture in the UK. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(4), 422-431. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.04.001
Max-Neef, M. A. (2005). Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological economics, 53(1), 5-16. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014
Mazzucato, M. (2015). The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. Anthem Press.
Mazzucato, M., & Penna, C. C. (2016). Beyond market failures: The market creating and shaping roles of state investment banks. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 19(4), 305-326. doi:10.1080/17487870.2016.1216416
McCarthy, J. (2005). Rural geography: multifunctional rural geographiesreactionary or radical? Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 773-782. doi:10.1191/0309132505ph584pr
Méndez, R. (2006). La construcción de redes locales y los procesos de innovación como estrategias de desarrollo rural. Problemas del Desarrollo, 37(147), 217-240
Modvar, C., & Gallopín, G. C. (2005). Sustainable development: Epistemological challenges to Science and Technology. Santiago de Chile, CEPAL, Naciones Unidas.
Mojica, F. J. (2006). Concepto y aplicación de la prospectiva estratégica. Revista Med, 14(1), 122-131
Moseley, M. J. (2000). Innovation and rural development: Some lessons from Britain and Western Europe. Planning Practice and Research, 15(1- 2), 95-115. doi:10.1080/713691880
Moulaert, F., & Nussbaumer, J. (2005). The social region. Beyond the territorial dynamics of the learning economy. European Urban and Regional Studies, 12(1), 45-64. doi:10.1177/0969776405048500
Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E., & González, S. (2005). Towards alternative model(s) of local innovation. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1969-1990
Moulaert, F., & Sekia, F. (2003). Territorial innovation models: A critical survey. Regional Studies,37(3), 289–302.doi:10.1080/0034340032000065442
Mytelka, L. K., & Smith, K. (2002). Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co evolving process. Research policy, 31(8-9), 1467-1479. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00076-8
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1977). In search of useful theory of innovation. Research Policy, 6(1), 36-76. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(77)90029-4
Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research?-Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), 48-69. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9523.2011.00553.x
Nicolescu, B. (2002). Manifiesto of transdisciplinarity. State University of New York Press
Novak, J. D. & Cañas, A. J. (2006). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Reporte Técnico IHMC CmapTools, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. Recuperado de http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf
Odora Hoppers, C. A. (2000). The centre-periphery in knowledge production in the twenty-first century. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 30(3), 283-291. doi:10.1080/713657471
OECD. (2005). Oslo manual: guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (3 ed.). Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris
Osburg, T., & Schmidpeter, R. (2013). Social innovation. Solutions for a Sustainable Future. Springer
Paasi, A. (2002). Territory. En: J. Agnew, K. Mitchell, & G. Toal (Eds.), The Companion of Political Geography. doi:10.1002/9780470998946.ch8
Pol, E., & Ville, S. (2009). Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? The Journal of Socio Economics, 38(6), 878-885. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2009.02.011
Ponce-Herrero, G. (2004). ¿Cambio tecnológico o aumento de la competitividad? Las políticas de innovación industrial en la comunidad valenciana. Ería, (63), 91-106.
Possas, M. L., Salles-Filho, S., & da Silveira, J. (1996). An evolutionary approach to technological innovation in agriculture: some preliminary remarks. Research Policy, 25(6), 933-945. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(96)00884-0
Ray, C. (1999). Endogenous development in the era of reflexive modernity. Journal of Rural Studies,15(3), 257-267. doi:10.1016/S0743-0167(98)00072-2
Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(3), 219-235
Röling, N. (2009). Pathways for impact: scientists’ different perspectives on agricultural innovation. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 7(2), 83-94. doi:10.3763/ijas.2009.0043
Roth, S. (Ed.) (2009a) Non-technological and non-economic innovations: contributions to the theory of a robust innovation. Switzerland, Peter Lang A.G
Roth, S. (2009b). New for whom? Initial images from the social dimension of innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 4(4), 231-252.
Rowley, J., Baregheh, A., & Sambrook, S. (2011). Towards an innovationtype mapping tool. Management Decision, 49(1), 73-86. doi:10.1108/00251741111094446
Saad, M., Zawdie, G., & Malairaja, C. (2008). The triple helix strategy for universities in developing countries: the experiences in Malaysia and Algeria. Science & Public Policy,35(6), 431-443. doi:10.3152/030234208X323316
Saunders, M., Gray, D., Tosey, P., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Concepts and theory building. En: L. Anderson, J. Gold, J. Stewart & R. Thorpe (Eds.), A guide to professional doctorates in business and management. (pp. 35-56). London, Sage. doi:10.4135/9781473921412.n3
Schejtman, A. & Berdegué, J. (2004). Desarrollo territorial rural. Debates y Temas Rurales, 1, 7-53
Scholz, R. W., & Steiner, G. (2015). The real type and ideal type of transdisciplinary processes: part I—theoretical foundations. Sustainability Science, 10(4), 527-544
Shucksmith, M. (2000). Endogenous development, social capital and social inclusion: Perspectives from LEADER in the UK. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(2), 208-218. doi:10.1111/1467-9523.00143
Solleiro, J. L., & Castañón, R. (2005). Competitiveness and innovation systems: the challenges for Mexico’s insertion in the global context. Technovation, 25(9), 1059-1070. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.005
Spector, L. U. (1968). Ensayo sobre una nueva clasificación de población rural y urbana en México. Estudios Demográficos y Urbanos, 2(1), 1-18. doi:10.24201/edu.v2i01.59
Torre, A. (2014). Proximity relations at the heart of territorial development processes: from clusters, spatial conflicts and temporary geographical proximity to territorial governance. Regional Development and Proximity Relations, 94
Torres Peña, R., Vera Cabezas, O., & Torres Mora, R. M. (2017). Estrategia para acelerar el cambio hacia un hospital sin papel. Revista INFODIR, 14(26), 28-40.
Tudor, M. (2009). Human capital and rural multifunctionality-a territorial overview Romanias’s case. Rural Areas and Development, 6, 1-6
Van der Ploeg, J.D., & Roep, D. (2003). Multifunctionality and rural development: the actual situation in Europe. En: G. van Huylenbroeck, & G. Durand. (Eds.), Multifunctional Agriculture. A New Paradigm for European Agriculture and Rural Development (pp. 37–54). England, Hampshire
Vázquez-Barquero, A. (2007). Desarrollo endógeno. Teorías y políticas de desarrollo territorial. Investigaciones Regionales (11) 183-210.
Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 361-385. doi:10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00019-9
Ward, N., & Brown, D. L. (2009). Placing the rural in regional development. Regional Studies, 43(10), 1237-1244. doi:10.1080/00343400903234696
Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 516-531. doi:10.2307/258556
Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385- 390. doi:10.2307/2393789
Wilson, G. A. (2008). From ‘weak’ to ‘strong’ multifunctionality: conceptualising farm-level multifunctional transitional pathways. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(3), 367-383. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.12.010
Wilson, G. A. (2009). Multifunctional ‘quality’ and rural community resilience. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(3), 364- 381. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00391.x
Woods, M. (2011). Rural. London: Routledge.
Woods, M. (2012). New directions in rural studies? Journal of Rural Studies, 28(1), 1–4. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.12.002
Young, O. R., Berkhout, F., Gallopin, G. C., Janssen, M. A., Ostrom, E., & van der Leeuw, S. (2006). The globalization of socio-ecological systems: an agenda for scientific research. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 304-316. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.004
Cómo citar
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Descargar cita
CrossRef Cited-by
1. Ana Rita Godinho Ferreira Pereira, Bernadete de Lourdes Bittencourt. (2024). An Ecosystem of Social Innovation? Analysis of the Role of the Actors Who Make Up 4h in the Aveiro Region, Portugal. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(12), p.e010185. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n12-023.
2. Sonia Sansone. (2023). L'innovazione come motore dello sviluppo rurale: un nuovo modello concettuale. TERRITORIO, (101), p.165. https://doi.org/10.3280/TR2022-101019.
3. Marcos Carchano, Inmaculada Carrasco, Sebastián Castillo, M. Carmen García-Cortijo. (2021). The Social Economy as a Factor of Economic Development and Resilience of Population in Rural Areas. A Study of Mediating Effects in Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). Sustainability, 13(10), p.5544. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105544.
4. Izadora Alves Soares, Antonio Carlos Pereira de Menezes Filho, Matheus Vinicius Abadia Ventura. (2023). Biofábricas no cenário atual agrícola brasileiro: revisão. Brazilian Journal of Science, 2(1), p.16. https://doi.org/10.14295/bjs.v2i1.246.
5. Verónica Sigcha-Pacheco, Diego Vintimilla-León, Jonnathan Morocho-García. (2020). Los morlacos y las redes sociales. , p.33. https://doi.org/10.7476/9789978105771.0003.
6. Raúl Gerardo Ruíz Domínguez, Francisco Angel Becerra Lois, Roberto Carmelo Pons García. (2022). Evaluación de la percepción del impacto de proyectos de desarrollo local de tipo económico implementados en el territorio de Cienfuegos. Estudio de caso. . Cuadernos de Economía, 41(86), p.277. https://doi.org/10.15446/cuad.econ.v41n86.86361.
7. José Alberto Solis-Navarrete, Saray Bucio-Mendoza, Jaime Paneque-Gálvez. (2021). What is not social innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, p.121190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121190.
8. Ana L. Burgos, Octavio T. Barrera-Perales. (2024). Attitude toward innovation and its implications for rural community development in Mexican peasant organizations. Community Development, 55(5), p.689. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2023.2255997.
9. Hafiz Waqas Kamran, Abdurrahman Adamu Pantamee, Ataul Karim Patwary, Tauqir Ahmad Ghauri, Pham Dinh Long, Duong Quynh Nga. (2021). RETRACTED ARTICLE: Measuring the association of environmental, corporate, financial, and social CSR: evidence from fuzzy TOPSIS nexus in emerging economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(9), p.10749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11336-4.
10. Gliceria Gómez-Ceballos, Juan Pablo Vázquez-Loaiza, Dora Priscilla Herrera-Torres, Ana Julia Vega-Luna. (2021). Popular and Solidarity Economy: Policies and Realities in the Local Context—The Case of the Agricultural Productive Associations of El Valle, Ecuador. Sustainability, 13(23), p.13469. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313469.
11. Octavio T. Barrera-Perales, Ana L. Burgos. (2023). Conceptual distinction between agricultural innovation and rural innovation: implications for scientific research and public policy. Innovation and Development, 13(3), p.471. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2022.2049534.
12. Diana Escandon-Barbosa, Agustin Ramirez, Jairo Salas-Paramo. (2022). The Effect of Cultural Orientations on Country Innovation Performance: Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Revisited?. Sustainability, 14(10), p.5851. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105851.
Dimensions
PlumX
- Citations
- CrossRef - Citation Indexes: 11
- Scopus - Citation Indexes: 15
- Usage
- SciELO - Full Text Views: 835
- SciELO - Abstract Views: 125
- Captures
- Mendeley - Readers: 64
- Mendeley - Readers: 42
Visitas a la página del resumen del artículo
Descargas
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2020 Cuadernos de EconomíaCuadernos de Economía a través de la División de Bibliotecas de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia promueve y garantiza el acceso abierto de todos sus contenidos. Los artículos publicados por la revista se encuentran disponibles globalmente con acceso abierto y licenciados bajo los términos de Creative Commons Atribución-No_Comercial-Sin_Derivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), lo que implica lo siguiente:
