Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad N.° 0 (0) Mes Año/ 00-00/ ISSN: 2709 - 7005

SOCIAL METABOLISM AND BIOECONOMY

DIALOGUE OF KNOWLEDGE

METABOLISMO SOCIAL Y BIOECONOMÍA

DIALOGO DE SABERES.

Gómez Rodríguez, Dustin Tahisin

Universitaria Agustiniana, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Administrativas

Email: dustin.gomez@uniagustiniana.edu.co,

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5359-2300

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5377/aes.v2i2.12807

Recibido 02/09/21 – Aceptado 28/09/21

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Autor por correspondencia: dustin.gomez@uniagustiniana.edu.co (Gómez Rodríguez, Dustin Tahisin)

Forma sugerida de citación: Gómez, D. (2021). “Social metabolism and bioeconomy. Dialogue of knowledge.”. Apuntes de

Economía y Sociedad, UNAN - León, Vol. No 2 (2) (Julio-diciembre 2021). pp. 21 – 27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5377/aes.v2i2.12807.

Conflicto de intereses: Los autores han declarado que no existen ningún conflicto de interés.

Resumen

El objetivo general del artículo es caracterizar dos

categorías analíticas como lo son el metabolismo social y

la bioeconomía desde la perspectiva de la economía

ecológica como puentes de discusión, critica y solución de

las problemáticas que exhibe el siglo XXI. La metodología

es de corte cualitativo, el método es de revisión documental

y su tipo es exploratoria. La principal conclusión, es que,

para poder solucionar las problemáticas del presente, es

necesario generar marcos teóricos como métodos

cualitativos y cuantitativos que busquen el dialogo de

saberes, en virtud que las dificultades que existen se deben

entre otras cosas a la forma como el capitalismo ha mutado

en beneficio de las grandes multinacionales y no

necesariamente para las sociedades humanas con efectos

nocivos para el medio ambiente. Por lo tanto, la Economía

Ecológica como los Metabolismos son enfoques que al

estar anclados en discursos interdisciplinarios pueden

contribuir en generar soluciones a las problemáticas.

Palabras Claves: Economía de la tierra, economía de

mercado, economía medioambiental, medio ambiente.

Abstract

The general objective of the article is to characterize two

analytical categories such as social metabolism and

bioeconomy from the perspective of ecological economics

as bridges for discussion, critique, and solution of the

problems of the 21st century. The methodology is

qualitative, the method is a documentary review, and its

type is exploratory. The main conclusion is that to solve the

problems of the present it is necessary to generate

theoretical frameworks such as qualitative and quantitative

methods that seek a dialogue of knowledge, since the

difficulties that exist are due among other things to the way

in which capitalism has mutated for the benefit of large

multinationals and not necessarily for human societies with

harmful effects on the environment. Therefore, Ecological

Economics and Metabolisms are approaches that, being

anchored in interdisciplinary discourses, can contribute to

generating solutions to problems.

Keywords: Land economics, market economics,

environmental economics, environment.

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

I- Introduction

The socio-economic systems that have emerged over time have generated changes in the territory and territorialities of societies.

One of them, capitalism, has contributed to the unprecedented extraction of materials to increasingly satisfy the growing needs

of humanity for at least two centuries (Pinker, 2018). However, the appropriation and uses of natural resources through this

economic system have led to serious negative impacts on the environment that raise doubts about the viability of this model

and the possible extinction of life as known by human beings. (Maldonado, 2021; Gómez et al., 2021; Infante-Amate et al.,

2021; Rockström et al., 2009; Martínez-Alier, 2009; Naredo 2006; 2003).

Indeed, human beings, who have organized themselves into communities or societies have affected and continue to disturb

nature in its structure, its evolution, and its dynamics in two ways. On the one hand, through the appropriation of natural

resources and environmental services. On the other hand, by excreting and socializing. Since human production, circulation,

transformation, and consumption throw waste into the sphere of the natural. Consequently, human beings produce, as they

reproduce their conditions of existence from the metabolism with nature, something that according to the conventional economy

anchored in the paradigm of modernity in terms of Kuhn does not reach or does not want to see, since the hegemonic economy

repeats processes that go against the reproduction of life (Toledo and Alarcón, 2002; Schmidt, 1976).

Therefore, the general objective of this paper is to characterize two analytical categories such as social metabolism and

bioeconomy from the perspective of ecological economics as bridges for discussion, critique, and solution of the problems of

the 21st century. Because the relations of distribution, production and transformation of goods and services from capitalism,

and this taking neoclassical economics as a path has contributed to death, environmental destruction, inefficient income

distribution, widespread poverty, etc. (Maldonado 2018; 2014; World Inequality Lab. Global;2018; Ortiz and Cummings

,2012). To do this, it is divided into several sections, beginning with an introduction, followed by the methodology, then the

characterization of the two categories, followed by a discussion in which the categories are contrasted with the specialized

literature, and ending with some brief conclusions of the research exercise.

Finally, the central hypothesis of this article is that the ecological economy (bioeconomy) and metabolisms are approaches that

contribute to energizing and possibly solving the problems of the 21st century, since both are based on strong sustainability

(Correa, 2017), the finiteness of planet Earth (Hinkelammert and Mora, 2018) and, consequently, that there is no indefinite

economic growth (Latouche 2013). But, above all, both conceive that the dialogues between the transformation, production

and distribution of goods and services are focused on the biosphere, not as conventional economics establishes outside of it

(González de Molina, 2020; Aguilera et al., Escobar, 2018).

II- Methodology

The methodology is qualitative, and the method is an exploratory documentary review (Gómez et al., 2016). The qualitative

methodology aims to describe, interpret, and understand the phenomena or fragments of social reality (Gómez et al., 2021).

The documentary review method seeks to explore publications that have been carried out on an object of study to identify the

ways in which they have been approached, the state they are in, and the trends of the study (Fernández, 2017; Uribe, 2011).

Likewise, being of the exploratory type, the document was a systematization of the results of the study to understand in a

general way what is known about it, using a window of observation of 20 years, and researching the categories Bioeconomy,

Ecological Economics, and Metabolism in internationally endorsed databases such as Scopus, Wos, Dialnet, and Scielo

(Barbosa et al, 2020; Guirao-Goris, 2015; Bollen,2006).

This article is derived from the doctoral thesis in development entitled: Social metabolism of the oil palm agroindustry in the

territory of Aracataca Magdalena (1965-2018), in the doctorate of Agrociencias of the Universidad de la Salle, Bogotá,

Colombia. Directed by Dr. Jaime Alberto Rendón Acevedo.

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

III- Results

Metabolism

Social transformations since the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century have ostensibly reconfigured the

relationship between human and non-human animals and their environment (Andrade et al., 2012). The rapid and relentless

extraction of raw materials has transformed ecosystems and caused several imbalances, reflecting how the orthodox economy

understands nature (Barbosa, Gómez and Leuro, 2016), the overexploitation and depletion of water resources, atmospheric

pollution (OECD, 2014a:2014b), the greenhouse effect, acid rain, desertification and erosion, the gradual depletion of mineral

resources and fossil fuels, among others (Toledo and González de Molina, 2007, p. 20). Without forgetting that "The

progressive destruction of the habitats of animal and plant species, whose survival is increasingly threatened by the unstoppable

human desires, is a fact that predicts an irreversible ecological crisis of unimaginable consequences for life on earth" (Muñoz,

2016, p.137).

However, by the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, analyses have re-emerged that conceive the

need to understand the relationships between social systems and natural systems as a whole and not under a single discourse

(Gómez, 2014), such as social metabolism, industrial metabolism, or socio-ecological metabolisms. The first objective of the

social metabolism approach of socio-ecological systems is to analyze in an integrated way the relations of society with the

nature of a territory. Therefore, the social metabolism is a concept of today, which is perhaps the most powerful theoretical

instrument to jointly analyze the relationships between natural processes and social processes (Toledo, 2011, cited in Toledo,

2013, p.42). Noting that “the study of the metabolic network implies the identification of the material flows through all the

chains and the exploitation of the dynamics that are developed between units that manage those flows" (González de Molina

and Toledo 2001, p. 41).

To summarize, the socio-ecological metabolisms have a line of argument, the human societies, and their relations with nature.

At the same time being able to identify the different networks, organizations, structures, and evolutions that agroecosystems

experience in certain periods of time, to be compared in terms of sustainability (Gómez, 2021; Delgadillo, 2014). Similarly,

such an approach can be understood under two characteristics: the material dimension, which corresponds to the tangible

processes of appropriation, transformation, circulation, excretion of energy and matter; and the immaterial dimension, which

configures the social representations of the actors of a territory, intervening both symmetrically and asymmetrically (Toledo

and González de Molina, 2007; Gómez, 2020).

Bioeconomy

The bioeconomy was born in the 1960s as a response to the socio-environmental problems posed by the transformation process

of capitalism. At first, under the discouraging results of the Club of Rome reports and later with the Brundtland Report. In

general terms, these reports reaffirmed the unsustainability of the current economic model, as there is no indefinite growth

since planet Earth is finite and is the only place that contains life as humans know it (Mayor, 2009; UN, 1987). However, the

pioneer of the Bioeconomy category was the Romanian mathematician Georgescu Roegen, with his seminal work entitled: The

law of entropy of the economic process, published in 1971, which later became known as Ecological Economics. Without

ignoring that conventional economics will also use the category Bioeconomy for both Environmental Economics and

Bioeconomy from the New Economy (Gómez et al., 2018; Carpintero, 2006).

Precisely, the Bioeconomy from the hegemonic discourse of economics anchored in the Neoclassical school is divided into

two: Environmental Economics, which seeks to generate exchange value to natural capital through the mathematical

instrumentalization of ecosystem services. A phrase that is colloquially coined for this discipline is: "the polluter pays". On the

other hand, there is the Bioeconomy from the New Economy, which is divided into two lines of argument and geography. On

the one hand, the one represented by the USA, especially in agriculture and genetic transformation. The second is based on

stem cells, which are more from the European Union. Likewise, these currents are also based on weak sustainability, that is,

they believe that natural capital can supply ecosystem services. For this paper, the bioeconomy is developed from the

perspective of ecological economics, which considers that manufactured capital cannot replace natural capital. Hence,

Ecological Economics is developed from strong sustainability (Milán y Zúniga,2021; Sierra et al., 2019; Vargas et al., 2018:

Marinero et al., 2015). In this paper we will take the bioeconomy from the perspective of ecological economics.

Among Georgescu's contributions include his anti-mechanism view of conventional economics, as well as his critique of the

"universality" and "timelessness" of normal economics. He argues that analytical categories of developed countries should not

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

be used linearly in developing countries. In the same way, he criticizes normal economics, including Marxist economics, when

they conceive of nature as an inanimate stock, as a resource that does not deserve special treatment. This misconception, which

has been proclaimed by Marginalists and Marxists, has contributed to the belief that nature is infinite and that it was meant for

human beings. In particular, the author institutes the importance of using the laws of Thermodynamics, especially the law of

entropy in economic discourse. Because energy is not lost in colloquial terms but is transformed into dissipated heat that cannot

be converted into mechanical work. Therefore, such a category is qualitative and dialectical as opposed to the mechanism of

conventional economics (Georgescu Roegen, 1975, 1971, 1970).

IV- Discussion

Metabolism as an approach to socio-ecological systems and ecological economics as a discipline is supported by other

knowledge such as biology and thermodynamics. Indeed, they both have categories, concepts, and methods that are more

consistent with reality. Since the relationships between economic agents, social actors, or non-human animals are not carried

out in an ontological vacuum, much less with the logics of the 19th century as established by the hegemonic discourse of

economics since the neoclassical school. On the contrary, both conceive that life is the principle and guide of the distribution,

transformation, and production of goods and services. Because humans before being social beings are biological beings that

must be channeled into the cycles of life, and any change in the territory and territoriality affects both the landscape, the biotic

and abiotic beings that coexist.

In the same way, interdisciplinary approaches are currently fundamental to understanding the relationships between society

and nature (Losada and Trujillo, 2017). Because social metabolism and ecological economics are constructed and nourished

by methodological tools such as the analysis of material and energy flows, with which the materiality and immateriality of

interrelationships can be dimensioned. However, one of its greatest contributions is its permanent dialogue with ecological

urbanism, the new rurality, political ecology, environmental history, knowledge obliterated by reductionist discourses, etc.

(Maldonado, 2017; Reina, 2013; Martínez-Alier, 2008; Gómez, Vargas, and Posada, 2007; Georgescu-Roegen, 1994).

To conclude the section, this paper agrees with the postulates (Henry et al., 2017; Rangel et al., 2015; Henry et al., 2014;

Hodson de Jaramillo and Chavarriaga-Aguirre, 2014) when they state that the Bioeconomy from the conventional discourse of

economics is developed under green growth, environmental accounting, and sustainable development. Similarly, it agrees with

the postulates of (Pavone, 2012; Passet, 1996) when they state that the aforementioned is how capitalism has mutated to

maintain itself without changing its methods, its analytical categories, and therefore revitalizing chrematistics that on average

do not contribute to empowering life, but to reducing it to a cost, to short-term utility, etc. It is also in line with the postulates

of (Milán and Zúniga, 2021; Gómez and Rincón 2018; Rangel et al., 2015) when they state that the Bioeconomy from the

normal economy is an economically viable tactic for Latin American countries, due to the diversity in natural capital that these

territories possess and their possible added values.

V- Conclusion

The social metabolism of socio-ecological systems is an increasingly persistent approach to analyzing the problems of the 21st

century due to its capacity to generate dialogues between knowledge, understand how to solve the crises at the planetary level

and the dynamics that have occurred since the Industrial Revolution, and the linear view of the conventional discourse of

economics. Precisely, the latter needs to debate and broaden the approaches with which it analyzes its object of study, since

orthodoxy has not been able to contemplate and generate solutions.

Ecological economics, due to its conceptual richness as well as its analytical instruments, is a way to understand the importance

of socio-ecological systems and at the same time is a tool that contributes to the dialogue between knowledge, since it draws

on thermodynamics and biology to perform economic analysis.

In order to solve the problems of the present, it is necessary to generate theoretical frameworks such as qualitative and

quantitative methods that seek a dialogue of knowledge, since the difficulties that exist are due, among other things, to the way

how capitalism has mutated for the benefit of large multinationals and not necessarily for human societies, with harmful effects

on the environment. Therefore, Ecological Economics and Metabolisms are approaches that, being anchored in interdisciplinary

discourses, can contribute to generating solutions to problems.

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

VI- Reference

Aguilera M, Rincón H, y Gómez, D. (2020). Bioeconomics, a research alternative in management and related

fields. In M. Aguilera-Prado and H. Rincón Moreno (Eds.), Temas y métodos de investigación en

negocios, administración, mercadeo y contaduría. Editorial Uniagustiniana. 193-225.

Andrade, G., Betancur, J., Forero, E., Lynch, J., Stiles, F., y Prieto, A. (2012). Marco teórico y operativo para la

construcción la estrategia del inventario nacional de biodiversidad (Enibio).Bogotá, Colombia: Instituto

de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander Von Humboldt.

Barbosa, E., Gómez., y Leuro, A. (2016). Ecología y Bioeconomía. Dialogo de saberes. Revista Clío América.108-

119.

Barbosa Pérez, E.M., Vargas Pacheco, H. y Gómez Rodríguez, D.T. (2020). Breve estudio bibliométrico sobre

economía solidaria. Cooperativismo y Desarrollo, 28 (118), 1-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.16925/2382-

4220.2020.03.0

Bollen, J., Rodríguez, M. y Van de Sompel, H. (2006). Journal status. Scientometrics,69:(3), 669-687

Correa F. (2017). Sustainable development. Theoretical review from the economy. Medellín, Colombia:

UNAULA Editions.

Delgadillo, O. (2014). La caña de azúcar en la historia ambiental del valle geográfico del río Cauca (1864-2010).

Repositorio Institucional - Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Facultad de Estudios Ambientales y Rurales.

Tesis Doctorado Estudios Ambientales y Rurales. Bogotá: Colombia.

Escobar A. (2018). Another possible is possible: Walking towards the transactions from Abya Yala / Afrolatino

to America. Bogotá, Colombia: Ediciones des Abajo.

Fernández, S. (2017). Si las piedras hablaran. Metodología cualitativa de Investigación en Ciencias Sociales. La

Razón Histórica, 37, 4-30.

Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1994). Qué puede enseñar a los economistas la Termodinámica y la Biología. En:

Aguilera. F, Alcántara. De la Economía Ambiental a la Economía Ecológica (pp. 188-198). Fuhem e

Icaria.

Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1975). Energía y mitos económicos. El Trimestre Económico. Vol. XLII, Nº168, Octubre

– Diciembre. México, FCE.

Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971). Entropy law and the economic process. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1970). The Economics of Production. The American Economic Review, Vol. 60 N°2

Papers and Proceedings of the Eighty-second Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association.

Gómez, D. (2021). Sostenibilidad. Apuntes sobre sostenibilidad fuerte y débil, capital manufacturado y natural.

Inclusión y Desarrollo, 8 (1), pp. 131-143

Gómez, D., Barbosa, E. y Téllez, C. (2021). Transitions against the Problems of the 21st Century the Ecological

Economy. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics y Sociology, 39(9), 76-84.

https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2021/v39i930644

Gómez, D., Aldana, K., Rodríguez, R. (2021). Antropologías del desarrollo, enfoques alternativos y

postdesarrollo. Breve revisión de conceptos y apuntes críticos. Población y Desarrollo. 27 (52): 108 –

122.

Gómez, D. (2020). Metabolismo social y bioética. Un dialogo de saberes. Revista Iberoamericana de Bioética

(12), 01-11.

Gómez Rodríguez, D.T., y Rincón Moreno, H.M. (2018). La Bioeconomía como posible estrategia comparativa.

Alianza del Pacífico: caso Colombia. Revista Ciencias Económicas, 15(01), 101-115.

Gómez, D., Ariza, E., y Velasco, N. (2018). Diálogos entre la economía ecológica y la Bioeconomía.: Bogotá,

Colombia: Editorial de la Universidad de San Buenaventura.

Gómez Rodríguez, D. T., Carranza Abella, Y. y Ramos Pineda, C. A. (2017a). Revisión documental, una

herramienta para el mejoramiento de las competencias de lectura y escritura en estudiantes universitarios.

Chakiñan, Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, (1), 46-56.

Gómez, D. (2014). Apuntes desde la ciencia económica ¿El sujeto racional o el sujeto complejo? Revista Clío

América.83-89.

Gómez, L., Vargas, E., y Posada, L. (2007). La economía ecológica. Editorial Universidad Nacional, Bogotá:

Colombia.

González de Molina, M., Fernández, D., Guzmán G., Infante, J., Aguilera, E., Vila J, et al. (2020). The

Metabolism of Spanish Agriculture, 1900-2008. Springer Open Publishing. USA.

González de Molina, M., y Toledo, V. (2001). Metabolismo Naturaleza e historia. Hacia una teoría de las

transformaciones socio ecológicas. Icaria editorial. Barcelona.

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

Guirao-Goris, S. (2015). Utilidad y tipos de revisión de literatura. Revista de enfermería, 9(2), 64-75.

Henry, G., Hodson, E., Aramendis, R., Trigo, E., y Rankin, S. (2017). La bioeconomía: motor de desarrollo

integral para Colombia. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

Henry, G., Trigo, E., y Hodson de Jaramillo, E. (2014). Bioeconomía en ALC: diferentes vías, resultados

preliminares y buenas prácticas. En E. Hodson de Jaramillo, Hacia una Bioeconomía en América latina y

el Caribe en asociación con Europa. Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.

Hodson de Jaramillo, E., y Chavarriaga–Aguirre, P. (2014). Recursos naturales en América latina y el caribe: una

perspectiva en Bioeconomía. En E. Hodson de Jaramillo, Hacia Una Bioeconomía en América latina y el

Caribe en asociación con Europa. Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Pontificia Universidad javeriana

Hinkelammert F, y Mora H. (2018). Towards an economy for life. Prelude to a reconstruction of the economy.

San José de Costa Rica, Costa Rica: Technological Publishing House of Costa Rica.

Infante-Amate, J., Aguilera, E., Vila, J., Sanjuán Á.,Oropesa. F., y González de Molina, M. Las bases materiales

del desarrollo económico en España (1860-2016).82021). Cuadernos Económicos de ICE. no 101 ·

2021/I. https://doi.org/10.32796/cice.2021.101.7194

Latouche S. (2013). Decrease and Post-development. Creative thinking against the economics of the absurd.

Madrid, Spain: Editions of Cultural Intervention / the Old Mole.

Losada, D., y Trujillo, H. (2017). Extractivismo y tensiones del desarrollo en la Amazonía colombiana. Lectura

desde la economía ecológica y la decolonialidad. Editorial Bonaventuriana.

Maldonado, C. (2021). Las Ciencias de la Complejidad son Ciencias de la Vida / Carlos Eduardo Maldonado –

Primera edición. Chile: Trepen Ediciones.

Maldonado C. (2018). Bioeconomy, Biodevelopment and civilization. A map of problems and solutions. In

Epistemologies of the South to germinate alternatives to development. Debate between Enrique Leff,

Carlos Maldonado and Horacio Machado. Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Universidad del Rosario. 57-81.

Maldonado, C. (2017). La extraña idea del desarrollo. Genealogía de un concepto. Pensamiento Americano, 144-

160.

Maldonado C. (2014). Biodevelopment and complexity. Proposal of a theoretical model. In M. Eschenhaguen, A

journey through alternatives to development: Perspectives and theoretical proposals. Bogotá, Colombia:

Universidad del Rosario. 71-94.

Marinero-Orantes, E., Vargas Cañas, J., Catari, G., Martínez, L., Sardiñas Gómez, O., & Zúniga González, C.

(2015). Análisis de la agenda pública y privada de la Bioeconomía en Centroamérica y el Caribe: Estudios

de Caso de El Salvador, Honduras, Cuba y Nicaragua. Revista Iberoamericana De Bioeconomía Y Cambio

Climático., 1(1), 242-284. https://doi.org/10.5377/ribcc.v1i1.2151

Martinez-Alier, J. (2009). Social metabolism, ecological distribution conflicts, and languages of valuation.

Capitalism Nature Socialism, 20(1), 58-8.

Martínez-Alier, J. (2008). Conflictos ecológicos y justicia ambiental. Revista Papeles.11-27.

Mayor, F. (2009). Los límites del crecimiento. Temas para el debate, (185), 10-16.

Milán Pérez, J., y Zúniga-Gonzalez, C. (2021). Necesidades de investigación y transferencia de tecnologías sobre

cambio climático en Nicaragua: Una oportunidad en la Bioeconomía. Revista Iberoamericana De

Bioeconomía Y Cambio Climático. 7(13), 1518-1543. https://doi.org/10.5377/ribcc.v7i13.11270

Muñoz, D. (2016). La cuestión animal: un desafío para el humanismo ¿El fin del hombre? Humanismo y anti-

humanismo en la filosofía contemporánea. Universidad de San Buenaventura, editorial. Bogotá:

Colombia.

Naredo J. (2006). Economic roots of ecological and social deterioration. Beyond the dogmas. Madrid, Spain:

Siglo XXI de España Editores, S.A.

Naredo, J. (2003). La economía en evolución. Historia y perspectiva de las categorías básicas del pensamiento de

la economía. Barcelona: siglo XXI.

OECD (2014). The cost of air pollution: health impacts of roads transport, OECD publishing.

OECD (2014). Climate resilience in development planning: experiences in Colombia and Ethiopian, OECD

publishing.

ONU, (1987). Nuestro futuro común. Madrid: Alianza.

Ortiz I, y Cummings M. (2012). Global inequality. The distribution of income in 141 countries. Working

document on economic and social policy. New York, USA: UNICEF.

Pinker, S. (2018). Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress. Penguin.

Rangel Cura, R., Zúniga González, C., Colón García, A., Losilla Solano, L., y Berrios-Zepeda, R. (2015).

Medición de la contribución de la bioeconomía en América Latina: caso Cuba. Revista Iberoamericana

De Bioeconomía Y Cambio Climático. 1(1), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.5377/ribcc.v1i1.2150

Revista Científica Apuntes de Economía y Sociedad Vol. N.º 2 (2) julio-diciembre 2021/ 21-27 ISSN: 2709 - 7005

Reina, F. (2013). Metabolismo Social: Hacia la sustentabilidad de las transiciones socio ecológicas urbanas.

Tesina de grado de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia de la Maestría en medio ambiente y desarrollo.

Obtenido en: http://www.bdigital.unal.edu.co/12514/1/890519-2013.pdf

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E., y Nykvist, B. (2009).

Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2).

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32

Schmidt, A. (1976). El concepto de naturaleza en Marx. Siglo XXI Editores: México.

Sierra-Figueredo, P., Marinero-Orantes, E., Sol-Sánchez, Ángel, & Zúniga-Gonzalez, C. (2019). Producción de

azúcar de caña en El Salvador y su relación con la variabilidad de la Actividad Solar y Geomagnética: Un

enfoque de la Bioeconomía y el Cambio Climático. Revista Iberoamericana De Bioeconomía Y Cambio

Climático. 5(10), 1209-1221. https://doi.org/10.5377/ribcc.v5i10.8946

Stiglitz J. (2012). The price of inequality. Madrid, Spain: Taurus.

Toledo, V, y González de molina, M. (2007). El metabolismo social: las relaciones entre la sociedad y la

naturaleza. En: El paradigma ecológico en las ciencias sociales. Barcelona: Icaria. p. 85-112.

Toledo, V., y Alarcón, P. (2002). Revisualizar lo rural un enfoque socioecológico. Gaceta Ecológica, (62), 7-20.

Uribe, J. (2011). La investigación documental y el estado del arte como estrategias de investigación en ciencias

sociales. Páramo, O (Comp.). La investigación en ciencias sociales. Estrategias de investigación (195-

210). Bogotá: Universidad Piloto de Colombia.

Vargas-Hernández, J., Pallagst, K., y Hammer, P. (2018). Bio economía en la encrucijada del desarrollo

sostenible. Revista Iberoamericana De Bioeconomía Y Cambio Climático. 4(7), 800-815.

https://doi.org/10.5377/ribcc.v4i7.5952

World Inequality Lab. Global Inequality Report 2018.In World Inequality Lab; 2018.Available:

https://wir2018.wid.world/files/download/wir2018-summary-spanish.pdf