IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/col/000152/020122.html

Desarrollo sostenible y el cultivo agroindustrial de la palma de aceite en Norte de Santander, Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Dennys Jazmín Manzano López
  • Eder Alexander Botello S�nchez
  • Mario de Jes�s Zambrano Miranda

Abstract

El cultivo agroindustrial de palma de aceite ha sido considerado en diversas partes del mundo y por varios gobiernos nacionales y regionales de Colombia como una apuesta productiva de desarrollo y competitividad. No obstante, su promoción, resultados y efectos deben ser cotejados a la luz de la nueva agenda de los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) 2030, y con ello encaminar sus principales beneficios en función del desarrollo sostenible. Con fundamento en lo anterior, la presente investigación tiene como objetivo estimar el nivel de desarrollo sostenible del cultivo agroindustrial de palma de aceite en Norte de Santander. Para ello, en primer lugar, a partir de las cuatro dimensiones del desarrollo sostenible se caracterizan las Unidades de Producción Agrícola (UPA) palmicultoras del departamento; y en segundo lugar, mediante el Índice Multidimensional de Desarrollo Sostenible (IMDS) se estima el nivel de desarrollo sostenible de cada UPA. Los resultados sugieren que la actividad no parece ofrecer condiciones que promuevan un desarrollo con crecimiento económico próspero, que sea socialmente incluyente y ambientalmente sostenible en el marco de la buena gobernanza; es decir, la actividad no promueve integralmente el desarrollo sostenible para los palmicultores de Norte de Santander.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennys Jazmín Manzano López & Eder Alexander Botello S�nchez & Mario de Jes�s Zambrano Miranda, 2021. "Desarrollo sostenible y el cultivo agroindustrial de la palma de aceite en Norte de Santander, Colombia," Apuntes del Cenes, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, vol. 40(72), pages 233-270.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000152:020122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/cenes/article/view/12609
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wackernagel, Mathis & Rees, William E., 1997. "Perceptual and structural barriers to investing in natural capital: Economics from an ecological footprint perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, January.
    2. Aylin Patricia Pertuz Martínez & Álvaro Enrique Santamaría Santamaría Escobar, 2014. "La palmicultura colombiana: Sostenibilidad económica, social y ambiental," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 15(1), pages 173-186.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alcott, Blake, 2008. "The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lower environmental impact," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 770-786, February.
    2. Karen Turner, 2006. "Additional precision provided by region-specific data: The identification of fuel-use and pollution-generation coefficients in the Jersey economy," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 347-364.
    3. Arup Roy & Ranjan DasGupta, 2024. "Economic Development, Energy Consumption, and Environmental Deterioration: A Non-Linear Evidence from India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 22(3), pages 721-747, September.
    4. Martin C. Whitby & W. Neil Adger, 1997. "Natural And Reproducible Capital And The Sustainability Of Land Use In The Uk: A Reply," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1‐3), pages 454-458, January.
    5. Korhonen, Jouni & Snakin, Juha-Pekka, 2005. "Analysing the evolution of industrial ecosystems: concepts and application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 169-186, January.
    6. Suranjan Sinha & Surajit Chakraborty & Shatrajit Goswami, 2017. "Ecological footprint: an indicator of environmental sustainability of a surface coal mine," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 807-824, June.
    7. Prudence Dato, 2018. "Investment in Energy Efficiency, Adoption of Renewable Energy and Household Behavior: Evidence from OECD Countries," The Energy Journal, , vol. 39(3), pages 213-244, May.
    8. Lu, Yanhua & Yan, Lijuan & Li, Jie & Liang, Yunliang & Yang, Chuanjie & Li, Guang & Wu, Jiangqi & Xu, Hua, 2024. "Spatiotemporal evolution of county level ecological security based on an emergy ecological footprint model: The case of Dingxi, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 490(C).
    9. Xin Yang & Fan Zhang & Cheng Luo & Anlu Zhang, 2019. "Farmland Ecological Compensation Zoning and Horizontal Fiscal Payment Mechanism in Wuhan Agglomeration, China, From the Perspective of Ecological Footprint," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-15, April.
    10. Timo Busch, 2020. "Industrial ecology, climate adaptation, and financial risk," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(2), pages 285-290, April.
    11. Yu Wang & Dejing Meng & Linna Li & Ying Wang, 2025. "Research on the Impact of Market-Based Environmental Regulation Policies on Ecological Pressure: Evidence from China’s Carbon Emissions Trading Pilot," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-26, February.
    12. Ang, Frederic & Van Passel, Steven & Mathijs, Erik, 2011. "An aggregate resource efficiency perspective on sustainability: A Sustainable Value application to the EU-15 countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 99-110.
    13. Hezri, Adnan A. & Dovers, Stephen R., 2006. "Sustainability indicators, policy and governance: Issues for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 86-99, November.
    14. Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2015. "The roles of human values and generalized trust on stated preferences when food is labeled with environmental footprints: Insights from Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 84-91.
    15. Long, Tengju & Wu, Ge & Miao, Zhuang & Chen, Xiaodong, 2024. "Quantifying consumption-based environmental productivity from “Energy-Environment Footprints”," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    16. Jouni Korhonen & Thomas P. Seager, 2008. "Beyond eco‐efficiency: a resilience perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(7), pages 411-419, November.
    17. Ye-Ning Wang & Qiang Zhou & Hao-Wei Wang, 2020. "Assessing Ecological Carrying Capacity in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area Based on a Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    18. Lijing Tang & Yuanyuan Yang & Dongyan Wang & Qing Wei, 2022. "Optimizing County-Level Land-Use Structure Method: Case Study of W County, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-26, April.
    19. Siche, J.R. & Agostinho, F. & Ortega, E. & Romeiro, A., 2008. "Sustainability of nations by indices: Comparative study between environmental sustainability index, ecological footprint and the emergy performance indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 628-637, July.
    20. Hanna Safwat H. Shakir & Kendall T. Harris & Irvin W. Osborne-Lee & Gian Paolo Cesaretti & Rosa Misso & Magdy T. Khalil, 2013. "Global Ecological Footprint, Climate Change Impacts and Assessment," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(2), pages 9-38.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • P28 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist and Transition Economies - - - Natural Resources; Environment
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000152:020122. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Luis Eudoro Vallejo Zamudio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/cenes/index .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.