IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v24y2022i3d10.1007_s10668-021-01567-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An indicator-based sustainability assessment method for indigenous communities: a case study from Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Molina Maturano

    (Barrio la Laguna Ticomán, Delegación Gustavo A. Madero)

  • Luz A. García Serrano

    (Barrio la Laguna Ticomán, Delegación Gustavo A. Madero)

  • Juan A. Carmona García

    (Moscow State Institute of International Relations)

  • Mayela A. García de Alva Magos

    (Biotic Product Development Center CEPROBI)

  • Anna M. Hersperger

    (Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL)

Abstract

Indigenous and Western communities are faced with increasing issues of sustainability compromising their natural resources and cultural heritage, for example, a cross-pollination/complementary approach in relation to their current knowledge systems and discourses on sustainability. There is a need for methods that integrate different discourses relating to sustainability to identify the most pressing needs in terms of sustainability. Sustainability assessments are a type of impact assessment that focus on enhanced sustainability both now and in the future; however, the literature on indigenous sustainability assessment methods, is scarce. To address this gap, we have developed a novel Sustainability Assessment method for Indigenous Communities (SAIC). The SAIC method combines Western and indigenous sustainability objectives and principles, in order to extend the range of options for action to address sustainability. The SAIC method consists of two sections (i) values and considerations and (ii) procedure. The “values and considerations” section establishes the fundamental participatory and ethical considerations for conducting sustainability assessments in indigenous communities, and the “procedure” section establishes a set of 55 indicators in eight categories. The method was tested in a Zapotec, indigenous community in México. Results show that this community was rated highly in all eight categories. However, indicators for family planning and access to health services were rated poorly. The identified issues can be used as guidelines for decision making in future regional projects and development plans. The results reveal further areas for improvement, such as strengthening the links to national or international networks and increasing the use of renewable energies. The method presented in this paper provides an assessment approach based on Western and indigenous sustainability discourses, which is suitable for assessing indigenous communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Molina Maturano & Luz A. García Serrano & Juan A. Carmona García & Mayela A. García de Alva Magos & Anna M. Hersperger, 2022. "An indicator-based sustainability assessment method for indigenous communities: a case study from Mexico," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3293-3333, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01567-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01567-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-021-01567-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-021-01567-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bozigar, Matthew & Gray, Clark L. & Bilsborrow, Richard E., 2016. "Oil Extraction and Indigenous Livelihoods in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 125-135.
    2. Sala, Serenella & Ciuffo, Biagio & Nijkamp, Peter, 2015. "A systemic framework for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 314-325.
    3. Arun Agrawal, 1995. "Dismantling the Divide Between Indigenous and Scientific Knowledge," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 413-439, July.
    4. Del Popolo, Fabiana & Schkolnik, Susana, 2005. "Los censos y los pueblos indígenas en América Latina: una metodología regional," Notas de Población, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Piers Blaikie, 2000. "Development, Post-, Anti-, and Populist: A Critical Review," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(6), pages 1033-1050, June.
    2. Hardy, Derrylea J. & Patterson, Murray G., 2012. "Cross-cultural environmental research in New Zealand: Insights for ecological economics research practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 75-85.
    3. Arts, Bas & de Koning, Jessica, 2017. "Community Forest Management: An Assessment and Explanation of its Performance Through QCA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 315-325.
    4. Cuestas-Caza, Javier & Toledo, Lucía & Rodríguez, Fabricio, 2024. "Transcultural bioeconomy governance in a plurinational state: Sumak Kawsay and bio-based production in two Kichwa territories of Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    5. Ferreira, Ana & Pinheiro, Manuel Duarte & de Brito, Jorge & Mateus, Ricardo, 2018. "Combined carbon and energy intensity benchmarks for sustainable retail stores," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 877-889.
    6. Priya Gupta, 2021. "Conservation is Development in the Forests of Nagarahole Tiger Reserve, India," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 16(1), pages 54-74, April.
    7. Zdenka Gyurák Babeľová & Augustín Stareček & Dagmar Cagáňová & Martin Fero & Miloš Čambál, 2019. "Perceived Serviceability of Outplacement Programs as a Part of Sustainable Human Resource Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-21, August.
    8. Xudan Lin & Hong Zhu & Duo Yin, 2022. "Enhancing Rural Resilience in a Tea Town of China: Exploring Tea Farmers’ Knowledge Production for Tea Planting, Tea Processing and Tea Tasting," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Muhammad Riaz & Wojciech Sałabun & Hafiz Muhammad Athar Farid & Nawazish Ali & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2020. "A Robust q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information Aggregation Using Einstein Operations with Application to Sustainable Energy Planning Decision Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-39, May.
    10. Abdallah Alaoui & Moritz Hallama & Roger Bär & Ioanna Panagea & Felicitas Bachmann & Carola Pekrun & Luuk Fleskens & Ellen Kandeler & Rudi Hessel, 2022. "A New Framework to Assess Sustainability of Soil Improving Cropping Systems in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. David Tremblay & François Fortier & Jean‐François Boucher & Olivier Riffon & Claude Villeneuve, 2020. "Sustainable development goal interactions: An analysis based on the five pillars of the 2030 agenda," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1584-1596, November.
    13. Joan Hereu-Morales & César Valderrama, 2022. "Towards a Sustainability-Based Society: An Analysis of Fundamental Values from the Perspective of Economics and Philosophy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-14, July.
    14. Stephen C. L. Watson & Adrian C. Newton, 2018. "Dependency of Businesses on Flows of Ecosystem Services: A Case Study from the County of Dorset, UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, April.
    15. Victoria Vicario-Modroño & Rosa Gallardo-Cobos & Pedro Sánchez-Zamora, 2023. "Sustainability evaluation of olive oil mills in Andalusia (Spain): a study based on composite indicators," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6363-6392, July.
    16. Rui Meng & Lirong Zhang & Hongkuan Zang & Shichao Jin, 2021. "Evaluation of Environmental and Economic Integrated Benefits of Photovoltaic Poverty Alleviation Technology in the Sanjiangyuan Region of Qinghai Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-19, November.
    17. Dalitso Mvula & Chrispin Hamooya, 2022. "An investigation of the acquisition, transfer and preservation of Indigenous Knowledge by traditional healers in Chibombo District of Zambia," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 6(7), pages 502-509, July.
    18. Christian Kuhlicke, 2010. "The dynamics of vulnerability: some preliminary thoughts about the occurrence of ‘radical surprises’ and a case study on the 2002 flood (Germany)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 55(3), pages 671-688, December.
    19. Jarvis, Diane & Stoeckl, Natalie & Larson, Silva & Grainger, Daniel & Addison, Jane & Larson, Anna, 2021. "The Learning Generated Through Indigenous Natural Resources Management Programs Increases Quality of Life for Indigenous People – Improving Numerous Contributors to Wellbeing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    20. Richard A. Niesenbaum, 2019. "The Integration of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-11, August.

    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:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01567-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.