El estudio de la sustentabilidad en su dimensión social desde el realismo crítico

Juan Pedro Ibarra-Michel

Resumo


Esta reflexión teórica propone un acercamiento distinto al estudio de la sustentabilidad en los grupos sociales mediante la adopción del paradigma científico del realismo crítico. La adopción de este paradigma, desde un punto de vista propio, puede subsanar las deficiencias en las explicaciones tradicionalmente derivadas de visiones positivistas o fenomenológicas del fenómeno de la sustentabilidad. La propuesta del realismo critico incentiva la creación de metodologías novedosas que permitan identificar mecanismos y estructuras difíciles de observar en un primer momento coadyuvando a una interpretación más certera de lo que acontece en la realidad percibida. La virtud del realismo critico como base filosófica y paradigmática de la ciencia es que permite al investigador que integre a sus herramientas y posicionamientos epistémicos una utilización holística de métodos, estrategias y formas de interpretación de la realidad percibida lo que se puede traducir en una ventaja para el entendimiento de fenómenos complejos como la sustentabilidad. Por lo anterior es que el trabajo explora este acercamiento filosófico en aras de contribuir a una mejor ciencia para el estudio de la sustentabilidad en los grupos sociales.


Palavras-chave


Realismo critico, Sustentabilidad

Referências


Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Bashkar R. (2008), A Realist Theory of Science. Routledge, Taylor & Francis NY.

Bertalanffy, L.v. (1969). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. Braziller, New York. Number 1, 1-10

Birkin, F., & Polesie, T. (2013). The relevance of epistemic analysis to sustainability economics and the capability approach. Ecological Economics, 89, 144-152.

Boulding, K. E. (1987). “The epistemology of complex systems”. European Journal of Operational Research, 30(2), 110-116.

Bruckmeier K. (2009) “Sustainability between Necessity, Contingency and Impossibility”. Sustainability 2009, 1, 29-1411.

Bygstad, B., & Munkvold, B. E. (2011). In search of mechanisms. Conducting a critical realist data analysis.

Denzin, N. (1970). The research act in sociology: A theoretical introduction to sociological method. McGraw‐Hill New York.

Dillard, J; Dujon, V. & King, M. (2008). Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability. Taylor and Francis. New York.

Elder‐Vass, D. (2007). Social structure and social relations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(4), 463-477.

Eckersley, R. (2001). “Postmodern science: The decline or liberation of science?” en Stocklmayer, S., Gore, M. & Bryant, C., Science communication in theory and practice, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 83-94.

Földi, Z. (2006). Neighbourhood dynamics in Inner-Budapest-A realist approach. Utrecht University.

Foucault, M. (1971). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Pantheon Books.

Gallopín, G. C. (2004). “Sustainable Development: Epistemological Challenges to Science and Technology”, ECLAC, Santiago de Chile, 13 – 15 October 2004.

Guba, E. G. (1990). The Paradigm dialog. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications.

Guba,E G.,& Lincoln, Y.S.(1994).Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Heylighen, Francis; Cilliers, Paul; Gershenson, Carlos (2007). “Complexity and Philosophy”. Bogg, Jan, Geyer, Robert (ed.). Complexity, Science and Society. Oxford/ New York. Radcliffe Publishing, 117-134.

Joseph, J. (1998), “In defense of critical realism”, Capital and Class 65: 73–106.

Kasenmir, Jäger, Jaeger & Gardner (2003). Public Participation in Sustainability Science. A Handbook. Cambridge University Press, UK.

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lipscomb, M. (2009). The theory and application of critical realist philosophy and morphogenetic methodology: Emergent structural and agential relations at a hospice (Doctoral dissertation, University of the West of England).

Maxwell, J. A, & Mittapalli, K. (2010). Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods research for the social and behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) (pp. 145-167). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Morin, E. (1996) Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Editorial Gedesa Barcelona

Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation.Nursing Research, 40, 120–123.

Mosher, C. (2010) “A Wholistic Paradigm for Sustainability: Are Social Workers Experts or Partners?” Critical Social Work. Vol. 11, No. 3.

Oliver, C. (2011). Critical realist grounded theory: A new approach for social work research. British Journal of Social Work 1- 17.

Olsen, W. (2009). Realist Methodology: A Review in Benchmarks in Social Research Methods Olsen W. ed. University of Manchester, Manchester.

Philip, L. J. (1998). “Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to social research in human geography—an impossible mixture?”. Environment and planning A, 30(2), 261-276.

Organización de las Naciones Unidas (2007). Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies. United Nations, Third edition. New York.

Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers (Second ed.). Oxford, UK. Wiley Blackwell.

Rusbult, C. (1997). Cultural Influence in Science:Causes and Effects

( Part 2 ). En línea: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/science/cp2.htm

Shadish, W. R., T. D. Cook, & D. T. Campbell (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Singh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K., & Dikshit, A. K. (2009). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological indicators, 9(2), 189-212.

Smith, S. P., & Johnston, R. B. (2014). How Critical Realism Clarifies Validity Issues in Information Systems Theory-Testing Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 26(1), 5-28.

Smith, M. L. 2010. "Testable theory development for small-N studies: Critical realism and middle-range theory." International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 3:1, pp.41-56.

Sobh, R., & Perry, C. (2006). Research design and data analysis in realism research. European Journal of marketing, 40(11/12), 1194-1209.

Stahl T. (2013): “What is Immanent Critique?”, SSRN Working Papers, URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2357957, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2357957

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Yeung, H. W. C. (1997). “Critical realism and realist research in human geography: a method or a philosophy in search of a method?”. Progress in Human Geography, 21(1), 51-74.

Zachariadis, M., Scott, S. V., & Barrett, M. I. (2013). Methodological Implications of Critical Realism for Mixed-Methods Research. MIS quarterly, 37(3), 855-879.


Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.




Revista Metropolitana de Sustentabilidade - ISSN  2318-3233


 

 Impact Factor 1,362 - year 2015

  

 Quality Factor 2,000 - year 2015