IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v216y2024ics0921800923003075.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transcending the nature-society dichotomy: A dialogue between the Sumak Kawsay and the epistemology of complexity

Author

Listed:
  • Malo Larrea, A.
  • Ambrosi de la Cadena, M.
  • Collado Ruano, J.
  • Gallardo Fierro, L.

Abstract

This transdisciplinary research aims to propose one path, among multiple paths, to transcend the nature/society dichotomy in ecological economics, through an ecology of knowledge between Sumak Kawsay—an Andean indigenous cosmovision—and the epistemology of complexity. A qualitative methodology has been used, which includes a critical revision of scholarship on Sumak Kawsay, the definition of nature, complexity, complex systems, and the epistemology of complexity. This effort points to a critique of the conception of nature held by ‘traditional science’; one that has also resulted in the nature/society dichotomy as an epistemic basis within ecological economics. Thus, an epistemic convergence between Sumak Kawsay and the epistemology of complexity is advocated not only to disregard the nature/society dichotomy in ecological economics but also to include ancestral indigenous principles and values in knowledge production. In conclusion, such a dialogue between Sumak Kawsay and the epistemology of complexity could transcend the nature/society dichotomy within ecological economics by including notions like Pacha Mama and socio-ecological systems. It also has the potential to influence science production by considering principles from ancestral knowledge that points towards community, inclusion, horizontality, complexity, interculturality, and trans-disciplinarity.

Suggested Citation

  • Malo Larrea, A. & Ambrosi de la Cadena, M. & Collado Ruano, J. & Gallardo Fierro, L., 2024. "Transcending the nature-society dichotomy: A dialogue between the Sumak Kawsay and the epistemology of complexity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:216:y:2024:i:c:s0921800923003075
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800923003075
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108044?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vladimir Cvijanovic & Andrea Fumagalli & Carlo Vercellone, 2010. "Cognitive Capitalism and its Reflections in South-Eastern Europe," Post-Print halshs-00542947, HAL.
    2. Víctor M. Toledo, 2008. "Metabolismos rurales: hacia una teoría económico-ecológica de la apropiación de la naturaleza," Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, Red Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, vol. 7, pages 1-26.
    3. Mayumi, Kozo & Giampietro, Mario & Gowdy, John M., 1998. "Georgescu-Roegen/Daly versus Solow/Stiglitz Revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 115-117, November.
    4. Ramos-Martin, Jesus, 2003. "Empiricism in ecological economics: a perspective from complex systems theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 387-398, October.
    5. Malte Faber & Reiner Manstetten & John L.R. Proops, 1992. "Humankind and the Environment: An Anatomy of Surprise and Ignorance," Environmental Values, , vol. 1(3), pages 217-242, August.
    6. Mayumi, Kozo & Giampietro, Mario, 2006. "The epistemological challenge of self-modifying systems: Governance and sustainability in the post-normal science era," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 382-399, May.
    7. Richard B. Norgaard, 1984. "Coevolutionary Development Potential," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(2), pages 160-173.
    8. Berkes, Fikret & Folke, Carl, 1992. "A systems perspective on the interrelations between natural, human-made and cultural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, March.
    9. Spash, Clive L., 2012. "New foundations for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 36-47.
    10. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    11. Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Coevolutionary ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 690-699, February.
    12. Matthew Gandy, 2004. "Rethinking urban metabolism: water, space and the modern city," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 363-379, December.
    13. Vladimir Cvijanovic & Andrea Fumagalli & Carlo Vercellone, 2010. "Cognitive Capitalism and its Reflections in South-Eastern Europe," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00542947, HAL.
    14. Vicente-Saez, Ruben & Martinez-Fuentes, Clara, 2018. "Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 428-436.
    15. Latorre, Sara & Malo-Larrea, Antonio, 2019. "Policy-making Related Actors' Understandings About Nature-society Relationship: Beyond Modern Ontologies? The Case of Cuenca, Ecuador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 387-396.
    16. Giuseppe Munda, 2008. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73703-2, September.
    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. Spash, Clive L., 2013. "The shallow or the deep ecological economics movement?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 351-362.
    2. Farrell, Katharine N. & Silva-Macher, Jose Carlos, 2017. "Exploring Futures for Amazonia's Sierra del Divisor: An Environmental Valuation Triadics Approach to Analyzing Ecological Economic Decision Choices in the Context of Major Shifts in Boundary Condition," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 166-179.
    3. Remig, Moritz C., 2015. "Unraveling the veil of fuzziness: A thick description of sustainability economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 194-202.
    4. Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Jeon, Heesang, 2015. "Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory," Thesis Commons g5njk, Center for Open Science.
    6. Zepharovich, Elena & Ceddia, M. Graziano & Rist, Stephan, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of land-use scenarios in the Chaco Salteño: Complementing the three-pillar sustainability approach with environmental justice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    7. Andonegi, Aitor & Garmendia, Eneko & Aldezabal, Arantza, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation for managing biodiversity conservation conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Gamboa, Gonzalo & Adamowski, Jan & Kosoy, Nicolás, 2015. "Capabilities as justice: Analysing the acceptability of payments for ecosystem services (PES) through ‘social multi-criteria evaluation’," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 99-113.
    10. Huston, Simon, 2020. "Bathing facilities and health phronesis: a preliminary English investigation," OSF Preprints 4atsk, Center for Open Science.
    11. Bliss, Sam & Egler, Megan, 2020. "Ecological Economics Beyond Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Giuseppe Munda, 2015. "Beyond Gdp: An Overview Of Measurement Issues In Redefining ‘Wealth’," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 403-422, July.
    13. Géraldine THIRY & Philippe ROMAN, 2015. "L’indice de richesse inclusive : l’économie Mainstream au-delà de ses limites, mais en deçà de la soutenabilité ?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2015001, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    14. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    15. Pelenc, Jérôme & Etxano, Iker, 2021. "Capabilities, Ecosystem Services, and Strong Sustainability through SMCE: The Case of Haren (Belgium)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    16. Remig, Moritz C., 2017. "Structured pluralism in ecological economics — A reply to Peter Söderbaum's commentary," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 533-537.
    17. Iker Etxano & Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Oihana Garcia, 2018. "Conflicting Values in Rural Planning: A Multifunctionality Approach through Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    18. Dube, Benjamin, 2021. "Why cross and mix disciplines and methodologies?: Multiple meanings of Interdisciplinarity and pluralism in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    19. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    20. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 337-354, December.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:216:y:2024:i:c:s0921800923003075. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.