SOCIOINTERCULTURAL EVALUATION FOR INVESTMENT … · 2015-02-03 · Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012 „ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI”

Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012

„ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI” PUBLISHER, ISSN 1844 – 7007

SOCIOINTERCULTURAL EVALUATION FOR INVESTMENT PROJECT SIN INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES WIXARIKAS

Ernesto Guerra-García, Ph.D. Universidad Autónoma Indígena de México

[email protected]

José G. Vargas-Hernández, M.B.A.; Ph.D. University Center for Economic and Managerial Sciences, University of Guadalajara

[email protected]

María Eugenia Meza-Hernández, M.S. Universidad Autónoma Indígena de México

[email protected]

Abstract This paper analyzesaspects of the problemthat occurs inthe social evaluation ofinvestment projectsfor

indigenous communities’Wixarikas(Huichols). A project in thiscontextmakeparticularly complexthe

evaluation.Onthesocio-economic perspectivewith which it is evaluatedcomes into playthe incommensurability

ofsocialand intercultural issuesthat cannot beignored.It is addressedthe questionsthat have arisen inthe

development of thistype of projectand presentsa theoretical framework forthemethodological proposal of

socio-cultural evaluation.

Keywords:Socialevaluationof investment projects, socio-interculturalevaluation, indigenous communities,

Wixarikas.

Resumen

Se analizan aspectos de la problemática que se presenta en la evaluación social de proyectos de inversión

para las comunidadesindígenas wixarikas (huicholes).Los proyectos en este contextohacen particularmente

compleja la evaluación,En la perspectiva socioeconómica con la que se evalúa entra en juegola

inconmensurabilidad de los asuntos de carácter social e intercultural que no se pueden pasar por alto. Se

abordan las interrogantes que han surgidoen la elaboración de este tipo de proyecto y se presenta un marco

teórico para la propuesta metodológica de evaluación socio-intercultural.

Palabras clave: evaluación social de proyectos de inversión, evaluación socio-intercultural,comunidades

indígenas, Wixarikas.

1. Introduction While developinginvestment projects forthe implementationof alternative energy incommunities

Wixarikas(hichols) in Mexico in 2010, it was found that there were a number of issues todiscuss inthe theory

of social evaluation of investment project swhen they are applied in an indigenous context.These projects aim

to improve the conditions of Wixarikas and other indigenous communities through promoting basic

infrastructure. This basic infrastructure also enables the generation of projects with their own principles and

approaches in line with the cultures and economic logics of the involved ethnic groups, as well as their social

and environmental rationality, especially how they relatewith Mother Earth(Gómez González, Gómez

Calderón and Gómez Calderón, 2008).

InWixarikas communities, the fact of assessing thepossibility of provideelectric

servicethroughalternative energiespresentsin advanceexternalities which can be considered negative to their

culture, as this servicewould involvegreater useof television sets, radios and othermedia whichopen

thepossibility of extendinganacculturatingprocessthat despitethe benefits, negative effects couldbe even

moreundesirable.However,the installation ofall serviceswould result inimproving their means ofagricultural

productionthrough the useof machinery and equipmentthat cannot beused withoutelectricity.But the simple

fact of wanting to help Wixarikas as partof government policymay haveracist implication stoplace thenational

mestizo culturea bovethem.

This is not asimple matter; the sampleis thatdespite the highinterest inthis culture,in recent decades,

the government policyhas not beenable to contribute tosignificantly improve theeconomic and materialwell-

beingof this ethnic group(WiegandandFikes, 2004: 54).

12

mailto:[email protected]





Externalities are found in opposed directionsand they should bevalued thembothfrom the

perspectives ofthe indigenous communitiesand thenon-indigenous society.Clearly, it is evident that thenon-

indigenous culturehas agreaterweightand that decisionswill have aparticular biasinthis direction, butthrough

aseriesof ethical issuesin public policy, theycould be takeninto accountqualificationsof the indigenous worldto

try tobalance theirinterests.For example, unlike the non-indigenous world, forHuicholpeasants both

production andreligionare so closelylinkedwitheconomic and social lifewhich apparentlyshow alack of

interest inthe adoptionand adaptation of technology(TorresContreras,2000:162 -163).

TheHuichol Serrano uses his time not devoted to alternative working techniques in the performance of ritual

acts jointly with his family and other families in the social and production environment production (Torres

Contreras, 2000: 163).

Thisdoes not mean thatWixarikasare isolated fromthe mestizo society. The persistence of their

culture andcommunity canbe explainedthrough processesofidentificationto the world,but the specificityof

their ethnicityis due inpart to thecreativeintegration of whatis not theirculture (Florentine

BeimbordandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009: 13). The complexskeinfor the analysis ofprojects in

thesecontextsbegins withthe consideration thatin the social assessment, mentions Fontaine(1999), externalities

allow to understandthe feasibilityof promoting anon-profitprojectandsocio-interculturalcontext. Externalities

aremulti-wayandshould be analyzedinintra-social, theintra-culturalandinter-cultural(Guerra García,2004).

This research referstointra-societal aspectswhen whatit is analyzedis not unique toone of the

participating culturesinvolvedandis not putinto consideration ininter-cultural relationships.The intra-societal

aspects are all thosecross-cutting issuesinsociety regardlessof the culturesinvolved, such as poverty,

technology and welfarethat concern to allhuman beings.The inter-culturalaffairs, on the other hand,are placed

on thediscussionof the interrelationshipsamong culturessuch as the useof resources, domination, language

shifts and displacements, asymmetries, differences of understanding,among others. Intra-cultural refers tothe

differenceswithintheethnic and cultural groupsand thatdoes not give aclear anduniformidea of what

acommunity or peoplewant.

By introducing thismethodological perspective ofanalysis that it has been called socio-

intercultural(GuerraGarcía, 2004)in the social assessment, itopensan area of researchto generatemodels that

describethe categoriesto consider inthis type of environment.

To payto the issue isnecessary to takeinto accountthefact thatdecision-makers andintended

beneficiariesof the project arefrom different culturesnecessarilyinvolvesa "poli-relativism", i.e., to consider all

possiblerelative positionson the evaluationat the same time.That is, ifrelativity isunderstood as the

applicationof criteriaand calculationsfrom a determined particular perspectiveaccepting thatthere

arecertainother points ofreference,then, impliesnot only theacceptance of the existenceof other criteria,butthe

development of mechanismsto consider theseotherbenchmarksandother ways of seeingthe world

inherassessmentof a project.

This impliesthat the assessment must bealsoperformedas'multi-criteria', i.e. recognizingthat

treatingcomplex problems such asthose presentedinethno-regionswillneed to considerthe social, cultural,

intercultural and intra-culturalun-commensurabilities present in these situations.

Thisincommensurabilityrefers tothe presence of multiplelegitimate valuesin societyandculture, diverse views

andconflictingthat resultnot only the inneed to involveall the different actors and agents in thedecision

makingprocess,butunderstand the policiesof the State implied tothe effect (Vargas Isaza, 2005).

Theincommensurabilityis associatedwith the multidimensional natureof complexity andthe use of

differentdimensions of socio-intercultural analysis.

Therefore, this paper is aimed to answer the following research questions: How tomake asocio-interculturalassessmentofan investment projectin an indigenous community? Or more specifically,what are

thecategoriesto be considered inthese assessments?These issues have beenanalyzed for thecase mentionedand

briefly describedin thisarticle.

2. Evaluation ofinvestment projects It is understoodas an investment projectto be considered as the formulationof an intervention asa

mean tostudy anexisting problemand analyzingthe feasibility of achievinga desired changeat leastin some

partsof society.The investment projectis onewhereis delineated withclarity anddetail whatis to be achievedand

alsohow to do, allowing to justifythe interventionfrom different pointsof viewto giveor not give solutionto a

problem(Andia Valencia,2010:28-29).

Before achieving anyactivityareassessed the possibilities and potential forthe project or projects.In anycase,

evenwhen the targetis private, the assessment should be considered a formofsocial research.

13



…applied, systematic, planed and directed, on which is supported a judgment about the merit and value of

different components of a program, in such a way that serve as a basis or guide for making rational and

intelligent decisions between courses of action (Matos Bazó, 2005:23).

3. Evaluation ofinvestment projects

The objectivesof any project evaluation, private or social, are always aimed at developingor improvingliving

conditions. The development ofthe formulation comprisesactivities from the intentionuntil the endand how it

isto beput into operationthe project.

The project evaluation,althoughnot mentioned inmany methodologies, borrows from makingpublicpolicy

criteriaalready establishedor commonlyaccepted. The private evaluationof investment projectsprovides

criteriathatmostlycome frompublicpoliciesalignedwithan individualistic perspectivethey put on asecondary

levelthe involvementmade to the community. The social assessment of investment projects, however, departs

frompublic policyunderliningthe common goodas a priority.

It is to be consideredthat public policiescan be placedin streams and approaches of economic

thought.Classical economicsoftenincludes only thevariables that are monetary and cash, but the latest trend

precisely it includes all aspectsof the social fabricthat could notbestrongly measuredthoughcan be qualified.

Especiallywhen considering theknown effectsas externalitiespreviously thought to beindirect orof minor

importance,but increasingly aretaking on agreater significance. Withoutputting asidetheeconomic and

financialtechnicalities, the fact that manyexternalitiesare hardly difficult to quantifyin generalmakes more

difficult to evaluate.

Evaluation isoneof the moredifficult concepts to address in socio-inter-cultural environments because

is generally notpossible to implementa valid metricvalidand accepted byall stakeholders.In addition, the

aspects that commonlyare considered to have universalvalidityare questionedin the presence ofotherways of

seeing and perceiving theworld. Thenfor this case, to evaluate meansto clarifyany doubtsthat the operationof a

projectmight have beforeitisapplied from thepoli-relativismandmulti-criteriamentioned.

Such type of projectsdo not always representa competition forthe allocation ofscarce resources,where

theguiding principleofthe allocationwould be given byan indicator ofprofitability,but thereare otherequally

validcriteriathat dealwith socio-inter-cultural issueswhere cultural relativismprovidesdifferent viewsthatmay

convergeordiverge.The uncertaintiesthat ariseare due in largepart because of problemsinvolving socio-inter-

cultural informationandthedifficulties forprescribing anddetermining thefinal outcome (Arroyave, 1994).

4. The social economics approach

The crisis ofdevelopment modelshas allowed the visibilityof someancestral waysof understanding the

economyand the emergence ofinnovations that havebeing calledthe third sectoreconomy, solidarity economy,

bartereconomy, popular economy orsocial economy (Bastidas DelgadoandRicher,2001:1). In fact, any

economyissocial. However, when the focus is onprivate,allconsiderationsare set aside of the other

actorsinvolvedin the wholeeconomy (Bastidas DelgadoandRicher,2001:2). The purposeis not to

addamoreendogenous variablebutpredominantlyrecognizethe social dimensionsof the

economy(Izquierdo,2009:5).

The aimof the social economyis not for profit, it is awelfare-oriented model of groups

andcommunities (Pujol, 2003:36). So,analternativeenergy projectin these

communitiesensuressustainability,even if the investmentcost is high andapparently did nothavea positive

financial result. Thegood lifeof the community andsocial synergiesgenerationmay be sufficient tojustify a

projectof this type.From this perspective, the Statewould pursuetheaim toimprove conditionsin communities.

In addition, the social economy is diffusedthrougha process of recognitionof thepoorcircumstances in

whichthere is anindigenous community andthe debtfor over500 yearsof Mexican societyhasfor thissector

(Bastidas Delgado and Richer, 2001: 2).

14



In modern times, where it is increasingly clearresponsibility foreach of thepeople, where cooperation

isbecoming increasingly necessaryand where itis not consideredthatthe individual goodnecessarilyleadsto the

common good, socialapproachis increasinglymost needed,even inprivate projects. In this sense

thesocialeconomyis an alternative approachconsistent with theproposedsocio-inter-cultural assessment.

Precisely for the mentioned case, it is necessary to addressan indigenous economy, understood as one

formofsocialeconomyin LatinAmerica, whichstarts from avision of a plenty fulfillment lifeof human beings

intheir relationshipwith natureand itssearch for the goodof all.

For example, forthe case ofWixarikasisknown that

…each family member contributes something to the party and also he has the right to be helped to

open his land to plant, to help him clean the fields, to harvest and to help him hunt the deer (Torres,

2000: 162).

This givesasample of a different economicdynamicsof the mestizos.In itselfthe indigenous economylooks:

…to ensure to the indigenous peoples their well-being in all spheres of life, being this philosophical

basis of welfare and lays the groundwork for the implementation of the indigenous economy (Consejo

Indígena de Centroamérica, 2010).

Theindigenouseconomyis composed oftraditional practicesto adapt toa particular environmentwhich consist

ofthefollowing features: a)theproduction that determinesa given landscapeaccording tothe particular form of

territory appropriation of eachtribeworkedwith traditional techniques, b ) distribution, where different

mechanismsoperateto the intermediationas reciprocityand redistributionc) consumption, characterized by the

forms ofmatchingd) work organizationand e) the earth, seen from adifferentworldviewof individual

ownership(Lugo,2007:60).

However, it isnecessary to clarify thatthe indigenous economyhas particular characteristicsaccording

to the indigenous cultureandhasthisrelationshipwithother ethnic groups. Thepre-Columbian elements, which

consist oftraditional practicesto adapt toa particular environment,where there isno money to exchange,

correspond to an economy that canbe calledtraditional(Lugo, 2007: 60),but there are manyelements that have

beencreated fromthe relationshipwith thenon-indigenous world, perhaps the oldesteconomic relationshipof the

latterhasbeen trading.

Trying togeneralize,

Indigenous economies are com posed of a traditional economy with a segment of a market economy which

may be in descending from larger to smaller magnitude, depending on the case in question. Generally, the

segment of the market economy behaves inter-cultural adaptations as goods produced with techniques or

traditional labor organizations to sell them to the market or whose incomes are applicable to reciprocity or

traditional complementarities (Lugo, 2007: 60).

ToLugo(2007:60-61)the traditional economyconsists of thefollowingelements: 1)the production

oftraditional practicesthat determinea landscape, a product of particular formsof land appropriation, 2)

distribution,where different mechanismsoperateother thanthe intermediary of money, which in their

differentlanguages haveto do withreciprocity, mutual aid, barter, communitycollaboration, etc.., 3)

consumption, whichis characterized byfinding waysofmatching, 4) social indigenous organization, which

determines to a greater orlesser extenttheallocation of work, use and theenjoyment of theresources andthe use

ofgoods andservices production and5) Theland asa living beingthatbelongsto itself, so that private propertyis

always a matterof conflict in thelegalframeworkin relation tonon-indigenous population(Lugo, 2007: 60-61).

Barterfor example, isone of the elementsof the traditional economy that is not onlycurrentlyused

bymany indigenous communities,but isre-emerging indifferent nichesof society,for examplein clubs

andinterest groupsin localand international levels andhas being questionedits inefficiency(Tocancipá Falla,

2008: 147). Based onthe above, it can beunderstood whythe idea thatthe indigenous peoplelack power to be

used asleverage fortheir good livingor tolive togetherin a moreharmonious way in Mexican society, requires a

broaderviewthat theprovidingcommon assessmenttools, both private and social.

15



For all the above totake placeit is necessarythe real andtrue recognitionof the social organizationsin

this casethe government,communities andindigenous peoples.Thispublic policy ishighly relevantfor

evaluation insuch type of contexts(Huot andBussiéres, 2006:124)

5. Social evaluation

Asocialinvestment projectseeks to meetsocial objectivesthroughgovernment targetsor alternatives, used by

support programs(Matos, 2005). Most important inthis type of interventionisthat the direct users andsocial

beneficiaries must agree withthe formulationposed, i.e., the project must be generatedin a unidirectionalway,

in this case mestizogovernmenttoan indigenous community,but mustbe multidirectional.

However,regarding thesocialdimension, few evaluationsgo beyondindicators that describethe

satisfaction ofbasic needs andare pendingor without consideringother socio-inter-cultural aspectssuch as inter-

cultural equality, balance within and between generations, the level of social organizationorthe management

capacityof a community orregion,the formationof social networks, social and human capital, the response and

societal organization facing market structures and their change processes(Mazabel-Domínguez, Romero-

Jacuinde y Hurtado-Cardoso, 2010).

In thepresent caseis noteworthy thatthe indigenous areasinMexico havejuxtapositionsbetween

usesand interestsimplyingthat the soilin the worldviewof their people andeconomicactivities

arepredominantlynon-indigenous(Korsbaek, 2009). Recent exampleshave involvedsome

ethnicstrugglesagainst themining exploitationanduseof certainprivate interestson the usesthat indigenous

peopleswant tomake on thesoil (Saliba, 2011; La Jornada,2011;Zapateando, 2012). So thedifference fromthe

other evaluationsis that the benefits, costs and externalitiesshould be observed fromdifferent

perspectivessimultaneously.That is, ininter-cultural projectsis notsufficient to makethe formulationand

evaluation fromone perspective, but it is necessary to puton the tableall the criteriaand viewpointsof the

participating culturesinvolved.

This showsthat thedifferent etno-regions have conflicts anddisputes regardingthe agenda

thateconomicactorsthat arenotindigenoushave forthe useof what they considertheir land.Thus,in addition

toprivateminingprojects, indigenous aspirationsconfrontothercompanies inconnection with new sources

ofenergy, innovative technologies andmedia, which have also presentedbreaks, joints and

disagreements,subject tofurther study. The problemthat arises isthat on thesocial valuationthere are other

elements which are perceived andthen visibleasa communityharm thatare difficult toquantify orto generatea

weighting inmonetary units.Hence thedevelopment approach ofsuch projectsmust be preferablya qualitative

approach.

6. Externalities

Socialresearch projectsalwaysinvolve a numberof edgesconcerning the managementof externalitiesnot

onlyunresolved, butare raisedto the extentthey are foundin practice.

Externalitiesoccur whensocialor economicactivitiesof a group ofpeople havean impact onanother oron the

nature andtheimpact is nottaken intoaccount adequatelyby the first group(Jaime and

Tinoco,2006:105).Externalitiesoccur whensocialor economicactivitiesof a group ofpeople havean impact

onanother oron the nature andtheimpact is nottaken intoaccount adequatelyby the first group(James and

Tinoco,2006:105).

Butthisdoesnotmeanthattheirdevelopmentislessvaluable.Instead, discussions on the socio-inter-cultural

perspective lead to generatenewconstructs that allowunderstandingthatwhathappensin aconcretesocialreality.

Traditionallythe evaluation ofan investment projectintend to builda starting pointfor determiningthe

compensationsthat would probably be necessaryto grant for counteractingthe negative effectson thenatural or

socialsystems. However, thiscompensatoryand correctivephilosophyis not recommended forprojects in which

participatedifferent cultures, becauseactionsimplyingcompensation and involvinga party couldbe unacceptable

toanother.

16



In the treatmentof externalitiesis important to mentionthat from thesocialapproachis feasible to

calculate the costsof the negative effectand then try topayincorrectiveform is not precisely the

optimal(Fontaine, 2008: 13), i.e.to internalizeexternalitiesis notthe best philosophyin the social assessment,

because when the groups arefrom differentcultures there areinter-culturalsituationsthat mustbe

addressedproactively.

7. Economics and managementof natural resources

The importance ofthis type of projectsincreasesthefinding thatruralindigenous communitieshave been

assignedthe task of beingproviders ofresourcesto urban areasandhave been giventhe responsibility to

preservethe environmental balance(Mozas Moral and Bernal Jurado, 2006: 127).Alsoan added featurewith

this typeofalternative energy projectsin indigenous communitiesis that at the samediscusses

issuesofeconomics and management ofnatural resources.In this regardit should be notedthat interest inthe

sources ofnew and renewableenergy (SNRE) (Fuentes de Energía Nuevas y Renovables, FENR) was due

tothe energy crisisthatincreasinglyis stress sing(RodríguezMurcia, 2008: 88).

Within thisdiscipline isthe green economy, which unlikeconventional economic theory, its objective

is not thepursuit of efficiency, profitability and growth inpurely monetary terms, but to try tosupportthe

sustainability ofcapitalnatural (Domínguez Torreiro, 2004:8). Thereforethis type of projectalsois part of

anaturalresource economicsthat encompasseseverything relatedto 1)the management andvaluationof natural

resources, 2) determiningacceptable levelsof negative externalitiesand 3)the calculationof positive

externalities.

But despitethat awareness ofthe global ecological crisisis an undeniable fact, thecurrenteconomic

systemsdifficult notonly has the evaluation of these projects but also the incorporation of new methods of

energy used to be moresustainable. What isclear is that thehuman dependence onecosystemscan be

seensoclearlyin subsistence economieslinkedto the natural environment, where human communities,including

indigenouscommunities take directly fromthe ecosystems only what they needto live;ofthis,

community’sWixarikashavegreat wisdom.

Recognition of thisfactimplies the assumption thattheeconomic and social developmentwill

dependonthe medium and longterm, not onlytheproper maintenanceof ecological systemsthat sustainand

constitutetheplanet's naturalcapitalbut alsothe respectand attentiongiven to theindigenousculturesfrom

whichthere is too much tolearn (Gómez and de Groot,2007:5-6).Issues related tonatural resources areanalyzed

bothfrom an economic perspectiveand from theinstitutional frameworkwith its rules, duties and obligations,

formal and informal(Domínguez Torreiro, 2004: 6-7).Also shouldbe consideredcertain forms ofrelationship

that eachculture haswith nature.

8. Incorporating theenvironmental dimension inproject analysis

In this typeof projects inrural indigenous communitiesis difficult toignore theenvironmental impact

assessment, which involves the identification,analysis and evaluation ofproject impactsonthe environment,

natural and social, from the poli-relativismandmulti-criteria evenwhentheyarenot necessarilyexpressedin

monetary units. The addition of thiscategoryinvolves consideringa number ofadditional activitiesnot

normallyconsideredand whose executionisrequiredtoday.

To evaluate theenvironmental impactof a project onthe economic environmentit is possibleto note

thatfrom the timeof its constructionand aftercommissioning and implementing,itwillinfluencethe environment

where it will be installedby the effects produced on the existingand futurenatural, human and economic

activities, during itsoperation andto the final stage of abandonment.In particular, theenvironmental evaluation

is togauge thefutureeffects througha processto identify,interpret,predictand disseminatethe project's

potentialeffectsonthe economic andsocio-inter-culturalenvironment in which itwill be locatedand operated

that would bereflected inthe actual and future environmental changes.

17



9. Development orgood living

Another element to considerin evaluatingprojectsin indigenous communitiesis that inLatin Americais

runninga renewalof the critique ofconventional developmentunder a process thatoffers severalspecial features

andit providesanother approach tosocial assessment.

In this new situation points out that while many of the positions on the conventional development, and even

many of the critical currents, they operate within their own knowledge of western modernity, the most recent

Latin America alternatives are beyond those limits (Gudynas y Acosta, 2011: 72).

What is important hereasit isin communities’Wixarikasassessmentis thatthe positions of the'good life'

recovervisionsrooted inthe knowledgeofindigenous peoples'ownknowledge. The positionsof good

livingchallengeto the developmentwith its philosophy ofprogress and thatin practicemeant anadversarial

relationshipwith nature.

Living well is not, then one more alternative development in a long list of options, but is presented as an

alternative to all those positions (Gudynas y Acosta, 2011: 72).

Thegood lifeis a concept ofpublic policy inconstruction,but generallyrecoversthe idea of agood life,

welfare ina broader senseand in the caseof the social economyandsocial assessmentasa general

ruleprovidesthat a communitylives well, without waiting for progressat the cost ofthe devastationof natural

resources. AsmentionedKichwaleaders:

…is a holistic vision of what should be the goal or mission of every human effort, which consist of finding

and creating the material and spiritual conditions for building and maintaining the good life, which is also

defined as harmonious life that in languages such as runa shimi (Quichua) is defined as “alli kausar” or

sumac Kausai (Hidalgo, 2011), 88).

From the aboveit is stressed thatthe evaluation of aproject is differentif itis part ofany

policydevelopmentor withinthe one presentedto the approachof good living.Public policiesare crucialin

guidingthe work ofsocialevaluation.

10. Wixarikas indigenous communities Forthe Huichol culture, also called Wixarika, bewisemeans knowingthe nature(Iturrioz, cited by Juránková,

2007: 150).For this culturethe mestizo worldisanalter worldcoexistingwith hismythical(Durín, 2005: 91).

Spirituality and religiosity influences the mode of being of the Huichol, in the way of seeing the world, in

their view (Juránková, 2007: 151).

The word'Huichol' derives from 'hueitzolme', a territorial area currently locatedinNayarit, itslanguage

belongs to thedialecttotoramefrom the familysouthernUto-Aztecan(WiegandandFikes, 2004: 51-

52).TheWixarikasinhabit the regionHuicot comprising approximatelytwo hundred and fifty

thousandhectaresshared by thestates ofNayarit, Durango, Jalisco andZacatecas.This areais located in

theSierraMadre Occidentalin abroad bandcalledthe BigNayar, but the weight that the desertlocated

inSanLuisPotosihas for themis crucial totheir culture (Porras Carrillo, 2006: 34).

In fact,the pilgrimagethat according tothe obligations imposedbythe Huicholculture shouldmake the huichol to

the desert ofSanLuis Potosiis one of thekey eventsin his lifeand one of thehighlights andattractions of

thisindigenous people(PorrasCarrillo, 2006:34)..

This type ofmigration ontheWixarikasallows in a greaterperspectiveto understandthe dynamicsof

their culture intheir intensiveinteraction with'the other'(Florentine BeimbornandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009:

15).It is generally apoor regionwith unpaved roads andsidewalks,electricityis very scarce and lowsince the

problemsof access to thisterritorymakes difficult the installation ofservices and

communications(Barrera,2002:45).

18



The altitudesofvariegatedterrainof mountains,plateaus, cliffs and canyonsare locatedfrom400 to3,000 meters

abovesea level, containing within ita varietyof ecological niches, with a wealth biotic ofuntold wealth(Guízar

Vazquez, 2009: 171).

In addition to the Wixarikasinhabit thisregionotherethnic groups besidesmestizos: the Coras,

theTepehuanos, theTepecanos and the Mexicaneros which congregatein total56, 614indigenous people

(Guízar Vasquez, 2009: 171).The townWixarika has settledagriculturalactivitiesfromat least900 years

ago(Tetreault andLucioLopez,2011:170),traditionally are living inthree communities, San Sebastián, Santa

Catarinaand SanAndrés, who along with TuxpanandGuadalupe de Ocotánare thefivepoliticalterritorial

unitswereformedfrom the time ofthe Spanish Crown inthe eighteenth century (Wiegand andFikes, 2004: 51).

According to the latestCensus ofPopulationand Housing of the National Statistics, Geography and

Informatics (Censo de Población y Vivienda del Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática,

INEGI), 44, 788Huicholspeakerslivein these regionswith an agegreater thanfive years, of which 22, 129are

men and22, 659women (INEGI, 2010).According toINEGI(2011)the Huichol languageis inplace 22speakers

in number of speakersbeforethe Chontaland afterthe Chatino, but it is one of the groupswitha higher

percentage ofmonolingualsin Mexico (Juránková, 2007: 149).

The productive organization ofthe groups in thisethno-regionhas focused onprimary activities ofthe

agriculturalnature; the breedingof cattle,bothWixarikasasother ethnic groupsis the mostrelevant

activity.Rainfedagricultureand forestryhave alsogained importancein recentyears (Guízar Vasquez, 2009:

177). However,the above are nottheonly economic activities. The migration processis alsostrongly linked toits

economy.An interesting fact isthat there are severaltypes of migrationsin addition to thereligious: The

seasonal, shelter andthe handcraft.

Theseasonalis whenthe Huicholgo to workas laborersand employees outsideof the mountainsin the

dry season. Many of them move from onejob to anotherwithout havingthe opportunity to returnregularlyto the

mountains.The secondtype of migrationoccurs becauseeventuallyhave toflee the violencetowardsthe coast

wherethere aregroups that have beendefinitively established,bothindigenouspeoplesasmestizo’s

townships.Handcraftmigrationisthe third type ofmigrationhas to dowiththe heightthattoday aretakingthe craft

marketsacross the country, a number ofpassesWixarikas spent full seasonson trading tourand for some thisis

already a formoflife (Florentine BeimbornandPeñaflorRomandie, 2009: 15-16).

For the specific caseof land usein theNayar,theWixarikashave sustainedfighting.

Among theWixarikasthere is a subtleand complexregionaldivision of labor, based not only

onspecialized productionasagricultural and manufactured goods, but also ina particular wayto grow,produce

andmanufacture productsfor eachgroup.This division of labor is wrappeditself inaclasshierarchyand of a

group, as well as relativeterritoriality, prompting constantdisagreementsand

conflictsinvolvinganimositiesbetweenall groups involved, and even within eachgroup:Coras against

Wixaritari, Tepehuanos againstCoras,etc.(Guízar Vasquez, 2009: 172).

Prolongedintraand inter-culturalconflictis cruderagainst colonizationfrom the mestizo rancherswho

have had thesupportof the state toadvance the ethnophagic process resulting from the asymmetriesamong the

indigenous and non-indigenousgroups. The fact isthat the territoryWixarika hasbeen claimedmore

insistentlyevery daysince thecolonial timesand today.That claimis madein more sophisticated waysbythe

mestizo group, the current struggleis not onlyin the juxtapositionof mining regions withthesacred areas,but

themestizo groupuses education, religion and technology, amongothers,to penetrate andchangetheir

world.These andother considerationssocio-inter-culturalof theWixarikas life cannot beneglected inthe

evaluation ofan investment project.

11. Proposal for socio-inter-cultural evaluation

In thiscomplexitydescribed,the proposal for socio-inter-cultural evaluationlies in structuring the categories

ofanalysis according tothemacro-spheresand micro-spheresin the corresponding categoriesto specific

casesa)intra-societal, b) intra-culturalissuesand c)cross-cultural issues. Figure1 showsa diagramreferringto the

above:

19



Figure 1. Schema for socio-intercultural analysis DIMENSIONS INTRA-SOCIAL INTRA-CULTURAL INTER-CULTURAL

MACRO-SPHERA

Political, social, economics SOCIO-INTER-CULTURAL

MICRO-ESPHERA

Gender, class y ethnicity

Source: Authors'construction

A. Evaluation fromthemacrospheres

Toevaluate a projectaspresented isnecessary to takeinto account thepolitical, socialand economic macro-

spheres. In the caseof communitiesWixarikasmaximumcriteriacome froma) trendsin public policy, whether

the development orthe good life, which in turnimplywhat the Statewants to do withthe poor andthe

marginalized,thatin mostcasesconvergeto generatethe necessary synergieson the most needy; b) worldwideand

nationallyenvironmentaltrendsthat encouragealternative technologiesand avoid thosethat add toglobal

warmingc) inter-culturalism, which the Statewishes to dowith ethnic groupsthat make up thenation, that is, to

what extent and how theyare targetedefforts towardsindigenous peoples.

Perhaps thesetrendsin public policyare the most importantconsiderationinevaluating anyinvestment

project.

B. Evaluation fromthe micro-spheres

Since the talk is related tospecific projects,the evaluation must considerthe manifestations of thevarious

stakeholders, local governments, and theWixarikapeople here in this caseandmestizo societythat is located

inthe vicinityand possiblymay also receiveexternalitiesof the projects.Inthis case it isimportant to consider

otheraspects ofthe specificity of theparticipating community, which can also guide thefinal decision, for

example thedemographic makeupinWixarika isrelevant.

C. The evaluationfrom theintra-social

This categoryincludes the analysis of costs, benefitsand externalities thathavemore to do withthe affairsof

society regardlessof cultures andethnic groupsinvolved. In this case,the sustainable uses ofthe

technologies,policies to addresspovertyregardless ofethnic groupyou belong tothe population in thisState,

amongothers,belong to theintra-socialevaluation. The useof alternative energyin the communitiesavoid

usingharmfulenergies, here the problem lies inevaluating the potentialenvironmentalcost or benefit. This

isbecause thecontaminationis consideredanegative externality generatedby the processes ofproduction and

consumption, in this case of electrical energy(Reyes Gil, Galván Rico & Aguilar Serra, 2005: 436).

On the other hand, the inclusion of theinterests of futuregenerationsbringsto rural indigenous

communitiesopportunities forcertain incentivesfromglobal policiesfor mitigation andadaptation to climate

changethroughthe mechanisms of cleandevelopmentofenergy(Pinto Silbato, 2004: 123).Ifto this problemis

addedtheMexicangovernment's responsibilitytohave entered theKyoto Treaty,the

evaluationbecomesimmeasurableand the resulttendsdefinitelyto the installationof the bestsolar power plants,

regardless of whether there arecash flowsto recoverthemonetaryinvestment.

That is,the financial investmentis minimal compared to: a) the fight against the damaging effectsof

climate change,b) the opportunity for developmentof rural and indigenous communitiesand c) compensation

to indigenous communitiesbythe historical factof the Spanish domain first mestizo domainlaterfor more

thanfive hundred years.

The presence ofcuttingsustainableprojectsis one of the intra-societalaspectsthat makecomplexthis

assessment, since the value of usingalternative energy ismore significant, regardless of the cultures

involved.So thatinthe era we liveprojectsof this typecould have adifferentiatingfeaturefrom othersocial

assessments.

20



D. The evaluationfrom theintra-cultural

In practice it resultsthat the indigenous communitiesare nota uniform whole, for while somepeople refuse

tohave the benefitsof alternative energybecausethey seecertain dangersof acculturation,others preferto applyin

thehousehold andproduction that would give thema better way oflife.That is,not allWixarikasmanifested

inconsensus onintervention projects.

Inthe case ofmestizosis,noteveryone agreeswithWixarikahelp a community, especially if there are

others-indigenousor not -which also requirebenefits.

Therefore,the adoptionof technology inthe ruralindigenousarea isa challenge, defining the most suitable

methodologyin relation touser involvementrequiresmore socio-intercultural researchWixarikas.

The technology usedby farmersWixarikasis normallyintegrated into itssocio-cultural structure and

dynamicsand it isfromtheir perception of theenvironmentthat they developaculturally specifictechnical

system, so thatany technological innovationdisruptstheir lifethe way they seethe world and theyvalues

(Berrueta Soriano, Limón Aguirre, Fernández Zayas & Soto Pinto, 2003: 95).This raisesmany

questionsthatareultimatelylinked toexternalities.How doesorcould disruptthe useof alternative

energytoculturaltechnical systemof the Wixarikas?Howthis technologywould changetheir lifestyle, their way

of seeing the world andtheir values?Doesthis technology allow astrong presence ofthe inhabitantsand

theircultural values?

When the electric energy gets to thecommunity, some people who thoughtthey wouldemigrate

andnot dobecausesatisfierscouldpossiblybe enoughforpeople to stay, possibly altering theirmigratory tradition.

Another effect is thatby the time ofgettingthe electricpoweralso they reachthemass mediatodisruptcultural

values.Preliminary assessmentbetween costsand benefits is noteasy to determine. Thearrival of energyis also

linkedwith the use ofmedia andtheseprocessesof acculturationincreases.Howwouldthese processesbe? How

much it is valued thedisplacement of alanguagein a cultureand society? These are questions thatcannot be

solvedsimply.

E. Theevaluation fromthe inter-cultural

The evaluationof inter-cultural projectsmust be understoodin contextby relating it tothe contextualized

political strategies. Inter-culturalismcan’t be thoughtfroman instrumental logic, which favors theextension

oruniversalization of a trans-culturalmodelwithsupposed goodintentions.Neithercan passthe same criteria

usedin different contexts.Asmentionedby Diez(2004:195):

The constructionof a projectrefersto socio-historicallysituated processes and practicesthat

shape andare configuredin a field ofdispute,in whichthere are correlations of

variablesbetween differentforces of actors with differentand frequentlyconflicting, interests.

Intheevaluation processes are present, the formations, structures and resistances, relationships of

social inequality andthe struggleto transform them. Thus, in this form,public policy

aimedatexpandingruralindigenousenergyis not always desirablebecause of thedynamic processes

ofacculturation that generallyhavethe inter-cultural relations. Butif it is acceptedthis policy asessential

tosurvival andgood lifeof communities,at leastitshould be notedthe adoption ofrenewableenergy solutions, as

wellthe potential benefitswould not beoutweighed bythe negative externalitiesthat would make the investment

an unsustainableprojectfrom theglobal point of view(Pinto Silbato,2004:123).

Here it is necessary to evaluatethe externalities thatexistbetween cultureswhen the

projectenhancesinter-cultural relations.Acculturation effectsmust be analyzed, especially those ofnon-

indigenoussocietyoverWixarikas, loss of cultural values, such as language, customs and in general the

influence on theirworldview. But how toassessexternalitieswhen the criteriaare incommensurable? For

example, in evaluating anyinvestment project, the evaluatorhas to observethe possibility ofsoil contamination.

The problemis that,for the cultureWixarikaland is sacredand should not bedisrupted. To calculatean

optimal point, in this case meansthat the indigenous people give up theirprinciples andhave to yield

21



tomestizo´scriteria: To disrupta little bit theearth to the"level ofacceptance."In summary, thesolution

becomesimpossible.Letothers decide forthem is neitherfairnor just, so it ismorepreciselyat a crossroads.

11. In conclusion

It is concludehere that it isnecessary to openresearchin line withthe socio-inter-cultural assessmentin

the indigenous context, to address in more deptheach of theraised externalities.Socio-inter-

culturalevaluationof investment projectsis aresearch methodologythatis part ofthe implementationof public

policies, which extends beyondtheapplication of quantitative techniquescentered on financial interest

intheprivate perspective.

In the way of transversal and cross analysis of macroand micro-spheresis proposedto study

certainaspects of intra-societal, intra-culturaland inter-culturalcharacterized features ofmulticultural

societies.As explained, the analysis ofmacro-spheres departs fromprecepts of thesocialeconomyand

considersthe specific aspects ofthe indigenous economyin whichtheoriesare contrastedwith thedevelopment of

the emergingproposalsof living.In this methodology, it is clear thatfinancialtechnicalmattersare reducedto

theneed for furtherqualitativeanalysisof externalities.

The complexityof the evaluationis increasedwhen the projectsin question are relatedtoalternative

energiesthat falldown and framed intoecological economicsof natural resources, where the idea of

sustainabilityin itselfmarksa significant difference intheways of conductevaluationinsocial investmentprojects.

In short, fromthe perspective ofsocio-inter-culturaleconomy, alternativeenergy projectsin

communities’Wixarikascould notbe expected to paymonetaryinvestmentfor a generationofmostly peasants,

since their economic statuswould not allow it. However,the investment is justifiedbecause itwould

promotesocial and economic developmentofthe community, butalsoif it isdonethrough the

useofrenewableenergy thatwould generatepositive externalitiesto the worldand the futureof humanity.The

lattervalue isfully justifyingthe project.

References

Aguilera Vidal, R. and Palacios Sepúlveda, F. (2005). “La evaluación de los proyectos de inversión para la

toma de decisiones”, en Economía y Administración, núm. 64, Chile: Universidad de Concepción.

Andia Valencia, W. (2010). “Proyectos de inversión, un enfoque diferente de análisis”, en Industrial Data,

vol. 13, núm. 1, Perú: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos.

Arroyave Loaiza, Gilma (1994), “Análisis de sensibilidad de los proyectos de inversión en salud”, en Salud

Pública de México, vol. 36, núm. 003, México: Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública.

Bastidas Delgado, O. and Richer, M. (2001). “Economía social y economía solidaria: intento de definición”,

en Cayapa, vol. 1, núm. 001, Mérida: CIRIEC-Venezuela.

Barrera, R. O. (2002). “Consideraciones geomorfológicas sobre la Sierra Madre Occidental en el norte de

Jalisco, México”, en Investigaciones Geográficas, núm. 048, México: Universidad Nacional

Autónoma de México.

Berrueta Soriano, Víctor M, Limón Aguirre, Fernando, Fernández Zayas, José L. y Soto Pinto, María L.

(2003), “Participación campesina en el diseño y construcción un secador solar para café”, en

Agrociencia vol. 37, núm. 001, México: Colegio de Posgraduados.

Consejo Indígena de Centroamérica (2010).Economía indígena. Documento en línea en:

www.cicaregional.org/leer.php/9621715, fecha de consulta: 19 de octubre de 2010.

Diez, M. L. (2004). “Reflexiones en torno a la interculturalidad”, en Cuadernos de Antropología Social, núm.

19, Argentina: Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Domínguez Torreiro, M. (2004). “El papel de la fisiocracia en nuestros días: una reflexión sobre el análisis

económico de los recursos naturales y el medio ambiente”, en Revista Galega de Economía, vol. 13,

núm. 001-002, España: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.

Durín, S. (2005). “Sacrificio de res y competencia por el espacio entre los wixaritari (huicholes)”, en

Alteridades, vol. 15, núm. 029, México: UAM-Ixtapalapa.

22

http://www.cicaregional.org/leer.php/9621715



Florentine Beimborn, M. and Romandía Peñaflor, A. (2009). “Emigración y continuidad cultural de los

wixaritari. Breve reflexión sobre una relación ambigua”, en Liminar, Estudios Sociales y

Humanísticos, vol. VII, núm. 2, México: Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas.

Fontaine, E. (2008). “La evaluación privada y social de proyectos: el rol del Estado”, en Panorama

socioeconómico, vol. 26, núm. 036, Talca: Universidad de Talca.

Fontaine, E. (1999). Evaluación social de proyectos, Editorial Alfa Omega, México, pp. 471.

Gómez, B. E and de Groot, R. (2007). “Capital natural y funciones de los ecosistemas: explorando las bases

ecológicas de la economía”, en Ecosistemas, vol. XVI, núm. 003, España: Asociación Española de

Ecología Terrestre.

Gómez González, G., Gómez Calderón, E. X. and Gómez Calderón, Y. (2008). “Perspectiva de los

agronegocios en el desarrollo indígena: caso Querétaro”, en Ra Ximahi, vol. 4, núm. 003, México:

UAIM.

Gudynas, E. y Acosta, A. (2011), “La renovación de la crítica al desarrollo y el buen vivir como alternativa”,

en Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, vol. 16, núm. 53, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.

Guerra García, E. (2004), “La sociointerculturalidad y la educación indígena”, en Sandoval Forero, E. y

Baeza, M. A. (coord..), Cuestión étnica, culturas, construcción de identidades, México: UAIM,

ALAS, El Caracol.

Guízar Vázquez, F. (2009). “Wixaritari (huicholes) y mestizos: análisis heurístico sobre un conflicto

intergrupal”, en Indiana, núm. 26, Berlin: Instituto Ibero- Americano de Berlín.

Hidalgo F., F. (2011). “Buen vivir, Sumak Kawsay: Aporte contrahegemónico del proceso andino”, en Utopía

y Praxis Latinoamericana, vol. 16, núm. 53, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.

Huot, G. and Bissiéres, D. (2006). “El grupo (Chantier) de economía social y los sectores de la economía

social en Québec”, en Cayapa, vol. 6, núm.011, Mérida: CIRIEC: Venezuela.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI) (2011).Características culturales de la

población. Documento en línea en:

http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/sisept/default.aspx?t=mlen10&c=27643&s=est, fecha de consulta:

12 de julio de 2012.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI) (2010).Lenguas indígenas en México y

hablantes (de 5 años y más) al 2010. Documento en línea en:

http://cuentame.inegi.org.mx/hipertexto/todas_lenguas.htm, fecha de consulta: 12 de julio de 2012.

Izquierdo Server, R. (2009). “Responsabilidad social de las empresas, crisis y economía social”, en CIRIEC-

España, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, núm. 65, España: Centro Internacional

de Investigación e Información sobre la Economía, Pública, Social y Cooperativa.

Jaime, A. y Tinoco López, R. O. (2006), “Métodos de valuación de externalidades ambientales provocadas

por obras de ingeniería”, en Ingeniería e investigación y tecnología, vol. VII, núm. 002, UNAM,

México.

Juránková, M. (2007). “El perfil comunicativo de los huicholes que viven en la ciudad”, en Comunicación y

Sociedad, núm. 007, México: Universidad de Guadalajara.

Korsbaek, Leif (2009), “Los peligros de la comunidad indígena y sus defensas”, en Ra Ximahi, vol. 5, núm.

003, México: UAIM.

La Jornada (2011). “Minera canadiense pone en riesgo a pueblos indígenas”, en La Jornada, 11 de marzo,

México.

Lugo, D. (2007). “Economía indígena y estrategias de reproducción en el grupo indígena Warao”, en Cayapa,

vol. 7, núm. 013, Mérida: Centro Internacional de Investigación e Información sobre la Economía

Pública, Social y Cooperativa.

Matos Basó, R. (2005). “Enfoques de evaluación de programas sociales: análisis comparativo”, en Revista de

Ciencias Sociales (Ve), año/vol. XI, núm. 002, Venezuela: Universidad del Zulia.

Mazabel-Domínguez, D. G, Romero-Jacuinde, M. y Hurtado-Cardoso, M. (2010). “La evaluación social de la

sustentabilidad en la agricultura de riego”, en Ra Ximhai, vol. 6, núm. 2, México: UAIM.

Mozas Moral, A. y Bernal Jurado, E. (2006). “Desarrollo territorial y economía social”, en CIREC-España

Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, núm. 055, Valencia: CIRIEC-España, Revista

de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa.

Pinto Silbato, F. (2004). “Energías renovables y desarrollo sostenible en zonas rurales de Colombia. El caso

de la Vereda Carrizal en Sutamarchán”, en Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, núm. 053, Bogotá:

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.

Porras Carrillo, E. (2006). “Algunos aspectos de las relaciones entre el desierto y los huicholes”, en

Culturales, vol. II, núm. 003, México: Universidad Autónoma de Baja California.

23

http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/sisept/default.aspx?t=mlen10&c=27643&s=est

http://cuentame.inegi.org.mx/hipertexto/todas_lenguas.htm



Pujol, J. (2003).”La economía social en Cataluña”,en CIRIEC- España Revista de Economía Pública, Social y

Cooperativa, núm. 047, Valencia: Centro Internacional de Investigación Inform. Sobre la Economía

Pública, Social y Cooperativa.

Reyes Gil, Rosa E., Galván Rico, Luís E. y Aguilar Serra, Mauricio (2005), “El precio de la contaminación

como herramienta económica e instrumento de política ambiental”, en Interciencia, vol. 30, núm.

007, Venezuela: Asociación Interciencia.

Rodríguez-Murcia, H. (2008). “Desarrollo de la energía solar en Colombia y sus perspectivas”, en Revista de

Ingeniería, núm. 28, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.

Saliba, F. (2011). “En México, los indígenas huicholes no quieren las minas de oro y plata”, en Le monde, 30

de diciembre, París Francia.

Torres Contreras, J. J. (2000), “Tierras magras y políticas equivocadas en el sistema productivo huichol, caso

Santa Catarina, municipio de Mezquitic, Jalisco”, en Espiral, vol. 7, núm. 019, México: Universidad

de Guadalajara.

Tetreault, D. V. and Lucio López, C. F. (2011). “Jalisco: pueblos indígenas y regiones de alto valor

biológico”, en Espiral, vol. XVIII, núm. 51, México: Universidad de Guadalajara.

Tocancipá Falla, J. (2008), “El trueque, tradición, resistencia y fortalecimiento de la economía indígena en el

Cauca”, en Revista de Estudios Sociales, núm. 31, Colombia: Universidad de los Andes.

Vargas Isaza, O. L. (2005). “La evaluación multicriterio social y su aporte a la conservación de bosques”, en

Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía – Medellin, vol. 58, núm. 1, Colombia: Universidad

Nacional de Colombia.

Wiegand, P. and Fikes, J. (2004). “Sensacionalismo y etnografía, el caso delos huicholes de Jalisco”, en

Relaciones, vol. 25, núm. 098, México: Colegio de Michoacán.

Zapateando (2012), “Indígenas marchan para la libertad de Patishtán y contra minas y presas”, en

Zapateando, 27 de marzo. Documento en línea en:

http://zapateando.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/indigenas-marchan-para-la-libertad-de-patishtan-y-

contra-minas-y-presas-accion-urgente-por-la-libertad-de-alberto-patishtan/, fecha de consulta 15 de

mayo de 2012.

24

Documents

SOCIOINTERCULTURAL EVALUATION FOR INVESTMENT … · 2015-02-03 · Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2012 „ACADEMICA BRÂNCUŞI”