Dinámicas y determinantes del fortalecimiento de la asociatividad rural: el caso de Colombia
Loading...
Download
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication date
2023
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales. Escuela de Estudios Cooperativos
Citations
Exportar
Citation
Abebaw, D. & Haile, M. (2013). The impact of cooperatives on agricultural technology adoption: Empirical evidence from Ethiopia. Food policy, Vol. 38, 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.10.003.
Andrews, K; Ganz, M; Baggetta, M; Han, H; & Lim, C. (2010). Leadership, Membership, and Voice: Civic Associations That Work. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 115, No. 4, 1191–1242.
Brandão, J.B. & Breitenbach, R. (2019). What are the main problems in the management of rural cooperatives in Southern Brazil? Land Use Policy, Vol. 85, 121-129,
Bebbington, A. & Perreault, T. (2003). Social capital, development and access to resources in highland Ecuador. Economy Geography, Vol. 75, Nº 4, 39 - 418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.1999.tb00127.x.
Bebbington, A. (1997). Social capital and rural intensification: local organizations and islands of sustainability in the rural Andes. The Geographical journal. Vol. 163, Nº 2, 189-197. https://doi.org/10.2307/3060182.
Benson, A. & Faguet, J.p (2021). Increasing Access to agricultural credit: the heterogeneous effects of Collective Action. Journal of Development Studies. Documento CEDE No. 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3677998.
Conley, T. & Udry, C. (2010). Learning about a new technology: Pineapple in Ghana. American Economic Review, Vol. 100, N. º 1, 35–69. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.1.35.
Desai, R. & Joshi, S. (2014). Can Producer Associations Improve Rural Livelihoods? Evidence from Farmer Centres in India. Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 50, N. º 1, 64-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2013.849339.
FAO (2020). Hunger and Food Insecurity. https://www.fao.org/hunger/en/.
Fischer, E. & Qaim, M. (2012). Linking Smallholders to Markets: Determinants and Impacts of Farmer Collective Action in Kenya. World Development, Vol. 40, N. º 6, 1255-1268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.11.018.
FNC (2020). Diagnóstico de la asociatividad en el sector cafetero colombiano. Ensayos sobre Economía Cafetera, Vol. 33, No. 1, 9 -36.
Gáfaro, M., A.M. Ibáñez & P. Justino (2022). Community Organization and Armed Group Behaviour: Evidence from Colombia. UNU-Wider Working Paper Series No. 2022/2. https://doi.org/10.35188/UNU-WIDER/2022/133-4.
García, A., Oreja, J.R. & González, E. (2002). Las relaciones verticales y el poder de negociación de los agricultores integrados en forma cooperativa frente a los individuales. CIRIEC-España, Revista de Economía Social, Pública y Cooperativa, N. º 41, 111- 138.
Gómez, L., Aguilar, D., Forero, C., Orozco, L., Wills, E. & Moscoso, M. (2016). Asociatividad, desarrollo e inseguridad: casos del campo colombiano. Cartilla de divulgación. Universidad de los Andes, Departamento Nacional de Planeación.
Grava, O., Ardakani, Z., Delalić, A., Azzi, N., & Bartolini, F. (2021). Agricultural cooperatives contributing to the alleviation of rural poverty. The case of Konjic (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 82, pp. 328-339.
Hannan, M. & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, Vol, 82, 929-964.
MADR (2015). Informe final evaluación de impacto Segunda Fase” Proyecto de Apoyo de Alianzas Productivas – PAAP. Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
MADR (2021). Lineamientos de Política de Asociatividad Rural Productiva. Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural de Colombia, Resolución 161 de 2021.
Markelova, H., Meinzen-Dick, R., Hellin, J. & Dohrn, S. (2009). Collective action for smallholder market access, Food Policy, Vol. 34, N. º 1, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.10.001.
Markussen, T. & Tarp, F. (2014). Political connections and land-related investment in rural Vietnam. Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 110, 291-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2014.01.011.
McPherson, J. & Rotolo, T. (1996). Testing a dynamic model of social composition: diversity and change in voluntary groups. American Sociological Review, Vol. 61, N. º 2, 179-202. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096330.
Narrod, C., Roy, D., Okello, J., Avendaño, B, Rich, K. & Thorat, A. (2009). Public–private partnerships and collective action in high value fruit and vegetable supply chains. Food Policy, Vol. 34, N.º 1, 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.10.005.
Nilsson, J. (2001). Organisational principles for co-operative firms. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 17, N. º 3, 329–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(01)00010-0.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons, Cambridge, CUP
PLANFES (2020). Plan Nacional de Fomento a la Economía Solidaria y Cooperativa Rural de Colombia. Unidad Administrativa Especial de Economía Solidaria de Colombia, Resolución 2950 de 2020.
Scott, W. R. & Meyer, J. (1991). The Organization of Societal Sectors: Propositions and Early Evidence. In: Powell, W. and DiMaggio, P. (eds). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press. 108-140.
Vandeplas, A., Minten, B. & Swinnen, J. (2013). Multinationals vs. cooperatives: the income and efficiency effects of supply chain governance in India. Agricultural Economics, Vol. 64, N.º 1, 217-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12004.
Verhofstadt, E. & Maertens, M. (2014). Smallholder cooperatives and agricultural performance in Rwanda: do organizational differences matter? Agricultural Economics Vol. 45, N.º 1, 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12128.
Vitaliano, P. (1983). Cooperative Enterprise: Alternative Conceptual Bases for Analysing a Complex Institution. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 65, 1078–1083.
Wossen, T., Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A., Haile, M. G., Feleke, S., Olanrewaju, A., & Manyong, V. (2017). Impacts of extension access and cooperative membership on technology adoption and household welfare. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 223-233.
Zenger, J. & Folkman, J. (2019). Women Score Higher Than Men in Most Leadership Skills. Harvard Business Review, pp. 1-18.
Abstract
La asociatividad rural es clave para el desarrollo del campo, permitiendo a los productores rurales, a través de la acción colectiva, aprovechar economías de escala para mejorar su acceso a mercados, información, tecnología y apoyos. A pesar de su relevancia, en países como Colombia, existe poca información sobre las características y necesidades de este tipo de organizaciones, lo cual dificulta el diseño de intervenciones de política acordes a las necesidades reales, al igual que la medición del impacto de estas sobre las organizaciones beneficiarias. En este artículo realizamos un diagnóstico detallado de los cambios en las condiciones productivas, comerciales, financieras, organizacionales y administrativas de 54 organizaciones beneficiarias de un programa de fortalecimiento técnico y socioempresarial en Colombia. Estimamos un modelo probabilístico para identificar las características organizacionales que aumentan la probabilidad de observar mayores mejoras. Los resultados evidencian aumentos significativos en el nivel de maduración de las organizaciones, sobre todo en las capacidades productivas y comerciales, precisamente en las cuales se evidenciaban las mayores debilidades iniciales. Encontramos que ser una asociación, tener a una mujer como líder, y tener más años de constituida, aumenta la probabilidad de observar mayores mejoras. Identificamos, además, los procesos específicos del funcionamiento de las organizaciones que mejoran tras el fortalecimiento, y las actividades del programa que potencialmente explican cada mejora. De esta contribuimos a entender los mecanismos que explican el fortalecimiento efectivo de la asociatividad rural.
Rural associativity is key for rural development, allowing producers, through collective action, to profit from economies of scale to improve their access to markets, information, technology, and support. Despite its relevance, there is little information on the characteristics and needs of rural producer organizations in Colombia. In this article, we elaborate a detailed productive, commercial, financial, organizational, and administrative diagnosis of 54 organizations in Colombia that received a process of technical and business strengthening. We estimate a probabilistic model to identify the organizational characteristics that increase the probability of observing greater improvements. The results show significant increases in the level of maturation of the organizations, especially in their productive and commercial capacities, precisely in which the greatest initial weaknesses were evident. We found that being an association, having a woman as a leader, and having been established for more years, increases the probability of observing greater improvements. We also identify the specific processes of organizational functioning that improve after strengthening and the program activities that potentially explain each improvement. Our results contribute to understanding the mechanisms that explain the effective strengthening of rural associativity.
Rural associativity is key for rural development, allowing producers, through collective action, to profit from economies of scale to improve their access to markets, information, technology, and support. Despite its relevance, there is little information on the characteristics and needs of rural producer organizations in Colombia. In this article, we elaborate a detailed productive, commercial, financial, organizational, and administrative diagnosis of 54 organizations in Colombia that received a process of technical and business strengthening. We estimate a probabilistic model to identify the organizational characteristics that increase the probability of observing greater improvements. The results show significant increases in the level of maturation of the organizations, especially in their productive and commercial capacities, precisely in which the greatest initial weaknesses were evident. We found that being an association, having a woman as a leader, and having been established for more years, increases the probability of observing greater improvements. We also identify the specific processes of organizational functioning that improve after strengthening and the program activities that potentially explain each improvement. Our results contribute to understanding the mechanisms that explain the effective strengthening of rural associativity.