Análisis de la política ambiental y la sustentabilidad en la obtención de agave azul en Tequila, Jalisco, México

Erick Cantillo Sánchez; Fernando Antonio Rosete Verges

doi:10.31637/epsir-2024-1024

Authors

Erick Cantillo Sánchez National Autonomous University of Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4477-9055
Fernando Antonio Rosete Verges National Autonomous University of Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0640-0411

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-1024

Keywords:

Environmental policy, sustainability, blue agave, tequila, water, soil, forests, mountains

Abstract

Introduction: In Tequila, Jalisco, México is a strong production and marketing activity of the alcoholic beverage tequila, the raw material for this product is blue agave, its production process is intensive, which is why it is being contaminated and eroded. natural resources such as soil, water, forests and mountains. Objective: to demonstrate the current level of sustainability of blue agave cultivation in Tequila and how the current municipal environmental policy contributes to its increase. Methodology: the case study was used with interviews and questionnaires carried out with key actors. Results: the research shows that environmental policy has only been consistently efficient in the management of soils and forests; all interviewees agreed that the main problem is the lack of efficiency in the treatment and use of water. Discussion: focuses on the need to reduce production and innovate in the processes associated with agave, the problem is that the income of participants in the industry would be affected. Conclusions: an inclusive and efficient environmental policy is necessary, nourished by innovative processes while being friendly to investment in the tequila sector.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Erick Cantillo Sánchez, National Autonomous University of Mexico

Graduate in Economics, Master of Science in Local Development and Doctor of Science in Sustainable Development from the Michoacana University of San Nicolás de Hidalgo. Currently a postdoctoral fellow in the Postdoctoral Stays in Mexico program by the National Council of Humanities, Sciences and Technologies. Candidate Level in the National System of Researchers (SNI) and Honorary State Researcher by the Institute of Science, Technology and Innovation of the State of Michoacán, Mexico. Winner of the Dr. Ignacio Chavéz Sánchez medal for outstanding performance in master's and doctoral studies. Research lines: Sustainable development, local development, environmental planning and management of development and macroeconomic analysis.

Fernando Antonio Rosete Verges, National Autonomous University of Mexico

Biologist from the UAM-Xochimilco, Master of Science in Natural Resources Management from the Faculty of Biology of the UMSNH and Doctor in Geography from the UNAM. Territorial Planning Expert, with 29 years of experience. He has collaborated with the LEAD program of El Colegio de México and was a researcher at PAIR-UNAM in the Michoacán region. He has participated in 74 national and international publications, has presented more than 64 papers, has taught more than 45 specialized courses and subjects at the undergraduate and graduate level, and has coordinated 18 research projects. Research lines: Ecological territorial planning, ecological planning in marine and coastal areas, participatory community planning, adaptation to climate change and public policies on environmental matters.

References

Benito, G., Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Mubambi, R., Pedersen, T. y Tallman, S. (2022). The future of global strategy. Global Strategy Journal, 12, 421-450. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1464 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1464

Cálix, Á. (2022). La necesidad de una transformación social-ecológica para superar la crisis sistémica global. En C. Pastor (ed), Poderes, privilegios, resistencias y alternativas: lectura crítica en tiempos de post-pandemia (pp. 171-202). Buenos Aires: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales. https://bit.ly/3KYeFJC DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv3142txr.14

Consejo Regulador del Tequila. (2024). Producción Total: Tequila y Tequila 100%. Estadísticas. https://old.crt.org.mx/EstadisticasCRTweb/

Delanty, G. (2020). Teoría Crítica como crítica a la InSustentabilidad: ‘la vida dañada’ en el Antropoceno. Estudios Públicos, 159, 7-37. https://doi.org/10.38178/07183089/0604191216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.38178/07183089/0604191216

Faucheux S., Froger G. y Munda G. (1994). Des outils d’ aide à la decision pour la multidimensionalité systémique: une application au développement durable. Revue Internationale de Systémique, 8(4-5), 495-517. https://bit.ly/3Yi0rKP

Fiorentin, F., Suárez, D. y Yoguel, G. (2023). Who benefits from innovation policy? The role of firms capabilities in accessing public innovation funding. Innovation and Development, 13(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1918918 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1918918

Freeman Herreid, C., Prud’homme-Genereux, A., Wright, C., Schiller, N. y Herreid, F. (2021). Survey of case study users during pandemic shift to remote instruction. Advances in Physiology Education, 45(3), 620-625. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00046.2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00046.2021

Jiang, T., Gao, H., Chen, G., Dai, X., Xu, W. y Wang, Z. (2024), The complexity of environmental policy implementation in China: a set-theoretic approach to environmental monitoring policy dynamics. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1335569 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1335569

Leff, E. (1998). Saber ambiental. Sustentabilidad, racionalidad, complejidad, poder. Siglo XXI Editores.

Lira, M., Segundo, P. y Urquijo, P. (2019). Revisitación geográfica en tres localidades de Michoacán. Las observaciones de Dan Stanislawski siete décadas después. En P. Urquijo y A. Vieyra (eds), Geografía y ambiente desde lo local (pp. 59-78). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://bit.ly/3W2s6Nk

Lundquist, S. (2024). Do Parties Matter for Environmental Policy Stringency? Exploring the Program-to-Policy Link for Environmental Issues in 28 Countries 1990–2015. Political Studies, 72(2), 612-633. https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217221132072 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217221132072

Méndez, R. (2019). Desarrollo local en el capitalismo global: un debate persistente. En P. Urquijo y A. Vieyra (eds), Geografía y ambiente desde lo local (pp. 33-58). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://bit.ly/3W2s6Nk

Micheli, J. (2002). Política ambiental en México y su dimensión regional. Región y sociedad, 14(23), 129-170. https://doi.org/10.22198/rys.2002.23.a712 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22198/rys.2002.23.a712

Muuls, M., Narula, R., Piscitello, L. y Zanfei, A. (2023). Global value chains: antecedents and new perspectives. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 50, 19-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-023-00258-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-023-00258-0

Nenci, S., Fusacchia, I., Giunta, A., Montalbano, P. y Pietrobelli, C. (2022). Mapping global value chain participation and positioning in agriculture and food: stylised facts, empirical evidence and critical issues. Bio-Based and Applied Economics, 11(2), 93-121. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-12558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-12558

Organización de las Naciones Unidas. (1987). Informe de la Comisión Mundial Sobre el Medio Ambiente y el Desarrollo. Nuestro Futuro Común. ONU. https://bit.ly/4cQFdYr

Perri, A. y Santangelo, G. (2023). Close together or far apart? The geography of host-country knowledge sourcing and MNCs’ innovation performance. Regional Studies. 57(2), 370-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2022.2084058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2022.2084058

Stoll-Kleemann, S. y Welp, M. (2008). Participatory and Integrated Management of Biosphere Reserves. Lessons from Case Studies and a Global Survey. GAIA Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 17(1), 161-168. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.17.S1.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.17.S1.14

Toledo, V. (2019). ¿De qué hablamos cuando hablamos de sustentabilidad? Una propuesta ecológico-política. Interdisciplina, 3(7), 35-55. https://doi.org/10.22201/ceiich.24485705e.2015.7.52383 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ceiich.24485705e.2015.7.52383

Tudela, F. (1992). La sustentabilidad del desarrollo. Revista Latinoamericana de Economía. Problemas del Desarrollo, 23(91), 27-30. https://bit.ly/3Uz7YRz

Van Den Bergh, J. (1996). Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development: Theory, Methods and Applications. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Vázquez- Barquero, A., Rodríguez-Cohard, J. (2018). Local Development in a Global World: Challenges and Opportunities. Regional Science Policy and Practice, 11 (6), 885-897. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12164

Woodside, A. (2010). Bridging the chasm between survey and case study research: Research methods for achieving generalization, accuracy, and complexity. Industrial Marketing Management, 39, 64-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.03.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.03.017

Zhongju L. (2018). Content analysis of China’s environmental policy instruments on promoting firms’ environmental innovation. Environmental Science & Policy, 88, 46-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.013