IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/feb/artefa/00021.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Metodos experimentales y participativos para el analisis de la accion colectiva y la cooperaci_n en el uso de recursos naturales por parte de comunidades rurales

Author

Listed:
  • Juan-Camilo Cardenas

Abstract

En esta ponencia queremos explorar, a partir de nuestros resultados de investigacion, posibles puentes de complementariedad y sinergia entre la economia experimental y los m_todos participativos de investigacion, para poder estudiar problemas rurales, en particular aquellos asociados al uso de recursos naturales por parte de las comunidades. Desde el 1er semestre del 2001 hasta la fecha hemos realizado una serie de talleres y experimentos economicos en varias comunidades del pas. En esta ponencia vamos a hacer referencia a los tres estudios de caso que se realizaron en el proyecto "Regulacion de Recursos Comunitarios: Ejercicios economicos en el campo" que se llevaron a cabo en el Neusa y la Vega en Cundinamarca, y el Parque Sanquianga en Nario. El proposito de estos estudios de caso era estudiar los problemas del uso comunitario de recursos como la pesca, la piangua y o el agua en una microcuenca. En cada comunidad se realizaron 26 sesiones de experimentos economicos con participacion de 130 campesinos en cada comunidad; igualmente se llevaron a cabo talleres y ejercicios desde el Diagnostico Rural Participativo (DRP) para discutir con los mismos participantes tanto los resultados de los experimentos como la problem_tica asociada al uso de estos recursos naturales. Dicha informacion fue sistematizada con el fin de contrastar los tres casos, y las posibles consistencias entre dos aproximaciones (economia experimental y herramientas participativas) que hasta el momento no han sido utilizadas de manera conjunta ni para las mismas situaciones. Como se presentar_, la economia experimental ofrece potencialidades interesantes para estudiar la validez de los modelos economicos de comportamiento de las personas frente a, por ejemplo, los dilemas del uso de recursos colectivos; igualmente puede ofrecer informacion muy detallada y verificable acerca de las decisiones micro de las personas; por su parte las metodolog?as participativas permiten explicar procesos y situaciones que un agente externo dif?cilmente puede comprender acerca de las causalidades e interacciones de factores que afectan la problem_tica de una comunidad. A traves de estos instrumentos podemos mostrar como estas dos metodologias pueden de una manera eficaz responder a preguntas centrales acerca del uso comunitario de recursos.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan-Camilo Cardenas, 2003. "Metodos experimentales y participativos para el analisis de la accion colectiva y la cooperaci_n en el uso de recursos naturales por parte de comunidades rurales," Artefactual Field Experiments 00021, The Field Experiments Website.
  • Handle: RePEc:feb:artefa:00021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/00021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shogren, Jason F. & Margolis, Michael & Koo, Cannon & List, John A., 2001. "A random nth-price auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, pages 409-421.
    2. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    3. John A. List, 2002. "Preference Reversals of a Different Kind: The "More Is Less" Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 1636-1643.
    4. Heberlein, Thomas A. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Bishop, Richard C. & Schaeffer, Nora Cate, 2005. "Rethinking the scope test as a criterion for validity in contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Boxall, Peter C. & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1995. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments versus Contingent Valuation," Staff Paper Series 24126, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    6. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    7. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    8. Magat, Wesley A. & Kip Viscusi, W. & Huber, Joel, 1988. "Paired comparison and contingent valuation approaches to morbidity risk valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 395-411, December.
    9. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    10. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    11. Grether, David M & Plott, Charles R, 1979. "Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 623-638, September.
    12. Bazerman, Max H. & Moore, Don A. & Tenbrunsel, Ann E. & Wade-Benzoni, Kimberly A. & Blount, Sally, 1999. "Explaining how preferences change across joint versus separate evaluation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 41-58, May.
    13. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    14. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    15. Irwin, Julie R & Slovic, Paul & Lichtenstein, Sarah & McClelland, Gary H., 1993. "Preference Reversals and the Measurement of Environmental Values," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 5-18, January.
    16. Wiktor Adamowicz & Jonathan E. Alevy & John A. List, 2006. "Behavioural Economics and the Valuation of Non-marketed Goods and Services: The Lab, the Behavioral Anomalies and the Policymaker," Chapters,in: Using Experimental Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, pages 41-71.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:feb:artefa:00021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joe Seidel). General contact details of provider: http://www.fieldexperiments.com .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.