Suchergebnisse

The paper aims to deepen understanding of the design and implementation processes of public policies to promote the social and solidarity economy (SSE) in Mexico City (CDMX) during the period 2016-2019, and to propose general guidelines to improve and refine them. The paper is based on a review of published materials and field research. The main findings include the following: (a) policies to promote SSE are maintained largely because of legal and institutional inertia and the pressure of social demands to combat unemployment; (b) owing to serious budgetary and staffing constraints, the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (STyFE), which is responsible for implementing the provisions of the Law on the Social and Solidarity Economy (LESS), only serves the cooperative sector and not the whole range of associations recognized as an integral part of the social sector of the economy; (c) little is being done to implement or refine the legal framework; (d) between 2015 and 2018, modest results were achieved, which were marred by the mismanagement (by officials and beneficiaries) of resources and programmes intended to support SSE; (e) in 2019, within the framework of the self-styled "republican austerity", there was a major administrative centralization of the programmes, accompanied by mass layoffs of employees and instructors, the inexperience of the new authorities and the establishment of new 2shell" cooperatives; and (f) the shortcomings of government efforts to guide and channel the transformative and innovative potential of SSE were evident throughout the period under review. Recommendations: (a) immediately align the legislation applicable to SSE enterprises with the Local Constitution and the comprehensive reform of the Law on Cooperative Development of the Federal District (LFCDF); (b) prepare a reliable and updated directory of cooperatives; (c) make all administrative processes simple, flexible and transparent; (d) establish a georeferencing procedure for each cooperative that provides real-time status updates; (e) develop multi-year programmes to achieve long-term goals; (f) tackle intergroup conflicts in the management of institutional spaces; (g) coordinate the public bodies involved in the implementation of public policies - the Government of Mexico City (GCDMX) and the municipalities; (h) set lower quantitative targets than in 2019, giving priority to qualitative aspects (capacity-building and technical support for cooperatives) over quantitative aspects (number of cooperatives formed or strengthened); (i) adopt a standardized training methodology for the formation and strengthening of cooperatives; (j) ongoing evaluation of programmes by institutions that are external to GCDMX; (k) revive the Advisory Council for Cooperative Development of the Federal District (CCFCDF) as an institutional space for dialogue and decision-making with the cooperative movement; (l) encourage research and diagnostic assessments on the conditions in which cooperatives operate and consider, in the light of evidence-based research, the possibility of extending public policy beyond the cooperative sector.

The paper aims to deepen understanding of the design and implementation processes of public policies to promote the social and solidarity economy (SSE) in Mexico City (CDMX) during the period 2016-2019, and to propose general guidelines to improve and refine them. The paper is based on a review of published materials and field research. The main findings include the following: (a) policies to promote SSE are maintained largely because of legal and institutional inertia and the pressure of social demands to combat unemployment; (b) owing to serious budgetary and staffing constraints, the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (STyFE), which is responsible for implementing the provisions of the Law on the Social and Solidarity Economy (LESS), only serves the cooperative sector and not the whole range of associations recognized as an integral part of the social sector of the economy; (c) little is being done to implement or refine the legal framework; (d) between 2015 and 2018, modest results were achieved, which were marred by the mismanagement (by officials and beneficiaries) of resources and programmes intended to support SSE; (e) in 2019, within the framework of the self-styled "republican austerity", there was a major administrative centralization of the programmes, accompanied by mass layoffs of employees and instructors, the inexperience of the new authorities and the establishment of new 2shell" cooperatives; and (f) the shortcomings of government efforts to guide and channel the transformative and innovative potential of SSE were evident throughout the period under review. Recommendations: (a) immediately align the legislation applicable to SSE enterprises with the Local Constitution and the comprehensive reform of the Law on Cooperative Development of the Federal District (LFCDF); (b) prepare a reliable and updated directory of cooperatives; (c) make all administrative processes simple, flexible and transparent; (d) establish a georeferencing procedure for each cooperative that provides real-time status updates; (e) develop multi-year programmes to achieve long-term goals; (f) tackle intergroup conflicts in the management of institutional spaces; (g) coordinate the public bodies involved in the implementation of public policies - the Government of Mexico City (GCDMX) and the municipalities; (h) set lower quantitative targets than in 2019, giving priority to qualitative aspects (capacity-building and technical support for cooperatives) over quantitative aspects (number of cooperatives formed or strengthened); (i) adopt a standardized training methodology for the formation and strengthening of cooperatives; (j) ongoing evaluation of programmes by institutions that are external to GCDMX; (k) revive the Advisory Council for Cooperative Development of the Federal District (CCFCDF) as an institutional space for dialogue and decision-making with the cooperative movement; (l) encourage research and diagnostic assessments on the conditions in which cooperatives operate and consider, in the light of evidence-based research, the possibility of extending public policy beyond the cooperative sector.

The paper aims to deepen understanding of the design and implementation processes of public policies to promote the social and solidarity economy (SSE) in Mexico City (CDMX) during the period 2016-2019, and to propose general guidelines to improve and refine them. The paper is based on a review of published materials and field research. The main findings include the following: (a) policies to promote SSE are maintained largely because of legal and institutional inertia and the pressure of social demands to combat unemployment; (b) owing to serious budgetary and staffing constraints, the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (STyFE), which is responsible for implementing the provisions of the Law on the Social and Solidarity Economy (LESS), only serves the cooperative sector and not the whole range of associations recognized as an integral part of the social sector of the economy; (c) little is being done to implement or refine the legal framework; (d) between 2015 and 2018, modest results were achieved, which were marred by the mismanagement (by officials and beneficiaries) of resources and programmes intended to support SSE; (e) in 2019, within the framework of the self-styled "republican austerity", there was a major administrative centralization of the programmes, accompanied by mass layoffs of employees and instructors, the inexperience of the new authorities and the establishment of new 2shell" cooperatives; and (f) the shortcomings of government efforts to guide and channel the transformative and innovative potential of SSE were evident throughout the period under review. Recommendations: (a) immediately align the legislation applicable to SSE enterprises with the Local Constitution and the comprehensive reform of the Law on Cooperative Development of the Federal District (LFCDF); (b) prepare a reliable and updated directory of cooperatives; (c) make all administrative processes simple, flexible and transparent; (d) establish a georeferencing procedure for each cooperative that provides real-time status updates; (e) develop multi-year programmes to achieve long-term goals; (f) tackle intergroup conflicts in the management of institutional spaces; (g) coordinate the public bodies involved in the implementation of public policies - the Government of Mexico City (GCDMX) and the municipalities; (h) set lower quantitative targets than in 2019, giving priority to qualitative aspects (capacity-building and technical support for cooperatives) over quantitative aspects (number of cooperatives formed or strengthened); (i) adopt a standardized training methodology for the formation and strengthening of cooperatives; (j) ongoing evaluation of programmes by institutions that are external to GCDMX; (k) revive the Advisory Council for Cooperative Development of the Federal District (CCFCDF) as an institutional space for dialogue and decision-making with the cooperative movement; (l) encourage research and diagnostic assessments on the conditions in which cooperatives operate and consider, in the light of evidence-based research, the possibility of extending public policy beyond the cooperative sector.

The objective of this article is to show the potential of the Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) networks in a model of reconstruction of the internal market in Mexico from the experience of other development models, recovering the heterodox proposals of Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) from the last century, of local development and the integral vision of SSE from the construction of solidarity networks, as well as local and regional and national. The first approach to network identification was made through a non-probabilistic sampling (snowball), incorporating strategic agents at the national level with the support of the International Center for Public, Social and Cooperative Economy, Mexico Chapter. Fifteen large national networks were identified that practically cover all the states of the Republic, thirty regional organizations and some thirty collective organizations which are hard to classify. ; El objetivo de este artículo es mostrar las potencialidades de las redes de la Economía Social y Solidaria (ESS) en un modelo de reconstrucción del mercado interno en México, a partir de la experiencia de otros modelos de desarrollo, recuperando las propuestas heterodoxas de la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL) del siglo pasado, del desarrollo local y la visión integral de la ESS a partir de la construcción de redes solidarias, tanto locales y regionales como nacionales. El primer acercamiento a la identificación de las redes se realizó por medio de un muestreo no probabilístico tipo "bola de nieve" (snowball sampling) incorporando a agentes estratégicos al nivel nacional con el apoyo del Centro Internacional de la Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, Capítulo México. Fueron identificadas 15 grandes redes nacionales que prácticamente cubren todos los estados de la República, 30 organizaciones regionales y una treintena de organizaciones colectivas un poco difícil de clasificar.

Introduction: The construct Quality of Life (QL) is polysemic, complex, holistic and multidisciplinary, but also appropriately flexible and useful for the identification of areas and factors to work for the betterment of the QL, particularly in the case of planning in public politics. Objective: To identify the personal and social conditions that influence the QL perception and weight indicators to assess well-being. Materials and Methods: 174 interviews were conducted in nine villages in the municipality of Tecoanapa, Guerrero. The instrument used contains questions on seven dimensions considered as part of the CV. The principal components method for calculating the overall synthetic index (OSI) and DP2 was applied. Results: The OSI reported a median, minimum and maximum value of 13.09, 5.09, and 46.28, respectively. The DP2 index ranges between 6.41 and 19.56, the median was 12.62. Comparatively, the OSI was accumulated in the very poor category (64.94%). DP2 was distributed between poor (42.53%) and good (37.36%) categories. The QL perception was mainly good (85.06%). OSI does match the opinion of those interviewed at 7.47% and DP2 at 39.08%. Calculating the OSI, the maximum weighting was for personal well-being, then health and education at the end. For DP2, the maximum weighting was for education, then health and finally personal well-being. Conclusions: The calculated indices are a good approximation to QL. It is shown that OSI and DP2 correctly classified the analysis units. ; Introducción: El constructo Calidad de Vida (CV) es polisémico, complejo, holístico y multidisciplinar, pero también apropiadamente flexible y útil para la identificación de espacios y factores a trabajar para el mejoramiento de la CV, particularmente en el caso de la planeación en políticas públicas. Objetivo: Identificar las condiciones personales y sociales que influyen la percepción de CV y ponderar indicadores para evaluar el bienestar. Materiales y métodos: Se realizaron 174 entrevistas en nueve poblados del municipio de Tecoanapa, Guerrero. El instrumento utilizado contiene preguntas sobre siete dimensiones consideradas como constituyentes de la CV. Se aplicó el método de componentes principales para el cálculo del índice sintético global (ISG) y Distancia P2 (DP2). Resultados: El ISG reportó un valor mediano, mínimo y máximo de 13,09, 5,09, y 46,28, respectivamente. El índice DP2 fluctúa entre 6,41 y 19,56, la mediana fue de 12.62. Comparativamente, el ISG se acumuló en la categoría muy mala (64.94%). El DP2 se distribuyó entre las categorias mala (42,53%) y buena (37,36%); y la percepción de CV fue principalmente buena (85,06%). El ISG logra coincidir con la opinión de los entrevistados en 7,47% y DP2 en 39,08%. En el cálculo de ISG, la máxima ponderación fue para el bienestar personal, luego salud y al final educación. Para DP2, la máxima ponderación es educación, luego salud y al final bienestar personal. Conclusiones: Los índices calculados son una buena aproximación a la CV. Se muestra que ISG y DP2 clasifican adecuadamente las unidades de análisis.