Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad logo

Desarro. soc. | eISSN 1900-7760 | ISSN 0120-3584

Sobre los fines y los medios: evaluación de la política para el desarrollo con desarrollo humano y causalidad múltiple

No. 83 (2019-07-01)
  • Pablo Garcés Velástegui
https://doi.org/10.13043/dys.83.10

Resumen

La evaluación de política pública usualmente implica estudiar resultados y sus causas. Los análisis de política para el desarrollo convencionalmente han utilizado perspectivas economicistas enfocadas en indicadores pecuniarios y en el modelo único mejor adaptado a la información. Sin embargo, a) si los resultados de esta política se evalúan en términos de la calidad de vida de las personas; y, b) si las políticas establecen resultados similares para diferentes personas en distintos contextos, enfoques alternativos parecen necesarios para estudiar sus fines y medios. Consecuentemente, este artículo promueve el uso combinado del Enfoque del Desarrollo Humano y Capacidades con el análisis cualitativo comparado con conjuntos difusos como una opción prometedora. Mientras el primero, al ser un marco conceptual enfocado en las personas, puede contribuir a la evaluación de los fines, el segundo, al permitir el estudio de la causalidad coyuntural múltiple, puede iluminar los diversos medios que llevan a ellos.

Palabras clave: política pública, desarrollo humano, teoría de conjuntos, análisis causal, análisis comparativo

Referencias

Alkire, S. (2010). Human development: Definitions, critiques and related concepts (OPHI Working Papers 36). Oxford: University of Oxford.

Alkire, S., & Deneulin, S. (2010a). A normative framework for development. In S.Deneulin, & L.Shahani (Eds.), An introduction to the human development and capability approach (pp. 3-21). London: Earthscan.

Alkire, S., & Deneulin, S. (2010b). The human development and capability approach. In S.Deneulin, & L.Shahani (Eds.), An introduction to the human development and capability approach (pp. 22-48). London: Earthscan.

Berg-Schlosser, D., De Meur, G., Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. (2009). Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as an approach. In B.Rihoux, & C.Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and related techniques (pp. 1-18). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Birkland, T. (2011). An introduction to the policy process. New York: Routledge.

Cassani, A., Luppi, F., & Natalizia, G. (2016). Pathways of democratisation to human development in post-communist countries. European Journal of Political Research, 55(3), 512-530.

Chambers, R. (2004). Ideas for development (Working Paper 238). Sussex: IDS.

Chiappero-Martinetti, E. (2006). Capability approach and fuzzy set theory: Description, aggregation and inference issues. In A.Lemmi, & G.Betti (Eds.), Fuzzy set approaches to multidimentional poverty measurement (pp. 93-114). New York: Springer, Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion and Well-Being.

Clower, R., Dalton, G., Harwitz, M., & Walters, A. (1966). Growth without development: An economic survey of Liberia. US: Northwestern University Press.

Comim, F. (2008). Measuring capabilities. In S.Alkire, F.Comim, & M.Qizilibash (Eds.), The capability approach in human development: Concepts, applications and measurement (157-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dasgupta, P. (2001). Human well-being and the natural environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Delreux, T., & Hesters, D. (2010). Solving contradictory simplifying assumptions in QCA: Presentation of a new best practice (Working Paper 58). COMPASSS.

Garcés, P. (2016). Beyond positivism: Fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and pragmatist research. Revista PUCE, 103, 439-459.

Garcés, P. (2018a). Do many roads lead to Rome? Multiple causation in monetary transfers and how to approach it. Revista de Estudios de Políticas Públicas, 6, 1-11.

Garcés, P. (2018b). Política pública como política humana: un prolegó­meno a un marco conceptual y método de análisis. Revista Estado Gobierno y Gestión Pública, 31, 77-118.

Garcés, P. (2018c). Diverse causes, similar outcomes: Reassessing the means and ends of development policy employing multiple causality and capabilities. Revista de Gestión Pública, 7(2), 171-202.

Haq, M. (1995). Reflections on human development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Haq, M. (1995). The human development paradigm. In M.Haq (Ed.), Reflections on Human Development (pp. 13-23). New York: Oxford University Press.

Klugman, J., Rodríguez, F., & Choi, H-J. (2011). The HDI 2010: New controversies, old critiques. Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(1), 249-288.

Kühner, S. (2015). The productive and protective dimensions of welfare in Asia and the Pacific: Pathways towards human development and income equality? Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 31(2), 151-173.

Medina, I., Castillo, P., Álamos-Concha, P., & Rihoux, B. (2017). Análisis cualitativo comparado (QCA). Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.

Mehta, L., Haug, R., & Haddad, L. (2006). Reinventing development research. Forum for Development Studies, 33(1), 1-6.

Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Ragin, C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. London: University of Chicago Press.

Ragin, C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ranis, G., Stewart, F., Ramirez, A. (2000). Economic growth and human development. World Development, 25(2), 197-209.

Rihoux, B., & Lobe, B. (2009). The case for Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Adding leverage for thick cross-case comparison. In D.Byrne, & C.Ragin (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Case-Based Methods (pp. 222-242). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Rihoux, B., Rezsöhazy, I., & Bol, D. (2011). Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in public policy analysis: An extensive review. German Policy Studies, 7(3), 9-82.

Robeyns, I. (2017). Well-being, freedom and social justice. Cambridge: Open Book Publishersç.

Schneider, C., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis. London: Cambridge University Press.

Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sen, A. (1990). Development as capability expansion. In K.Griffin, & J.Knight (Eds.), Human development and the international development strategy for the 1990s (pp. 41-58). London: Macmillan.

Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M.Nussbaum, & A.Sen The quality of life (pp. 30-53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sen, A. (2000). A decade of human development. Journal of Human Development, 1(1), 17-23.

Smithson, M., & Verkuilen, J. (2006). Fuzzy set theory: Applications in the social sciences. London: SAGE Publications.

Spence, R. (2010). Economic growth. In S.Deneulin, & L.Shahani (Eds.), An introduction to the human development and capability approach (pp. 73-100). London: Earthscan.

Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J-P. (2010). Mis-measuring our lives, why GDP doesn’t add up. London: The New Press.

Summer, A., & Tribe, M. (2008). International development studies: Theories and methods in research and practice. London: Sage Publications.

Turok, I. (1991). Policy evaluation as science: A critical assessment. Applied Economics, 23, 1543-1550.

UNDP. (2016a). Human Development Report 2016: Human development for everyone. New York: United Nations Development Program.

UNDP. (2016b). Human Development Report 2016: Human development for everyone. Technical notes. New York: United Nations Develop-ment Program.

Wolff, J., & de-Shalit, A. (2013). Disadvantage. London: Oxford University Press.

Zimmermann, B. (2006). Pragmatism and the capability approach: Challenges in social theory and empirical research. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(4), 467-484.