Vol. 7 Núm. 1 (2026): Enero - Marzo
Artículos

Políticas públicas para la sostenibilidad en entornos inciertos: Propuesta de métodos para el contexto venezolano

PDF HTML
  • Adolfo Javier Cegarra Acosta,
  • Lisbeth Yanira Guerra Unda
Adolfo Javier Cegarra Acosta
Universidad Nacional Experimental de los Llanos Occidentales Ezequiel Zamora, Venezuela
Lisbeth Yanira Guerra Unda
Universidad Nacional Experimental de los Llanos Occidentales Ezequiel Zamora, Venezuela
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51896/ocsi.v7i1.1096

Publicado 2026-03-18

Palabras clave

  • políticas gubernamentales,
  • desarrollo sostenible,
  • gobierno,
  • planificación estratégica,
  • toma de decisiones

Cómo citar

Cegarra Acosta, A. J., & Guerra Unda, L. Y. (2026). Políticas públicas para la sostenibilidad en entornos inciertos: Propuesta de métodos para el contexto venezolano. Observatorio De Las Ciencias Sociales En Iberoamérica, 7(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.51896/ocsi.v7i1.1096

Derechos de autor 2026 Adolfo Javier Cegarra Acosta, Lisbeth Yanira Guerra Unda

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.

Resumen

La formulación de políticas públicas para la sostenibilidad en contextos de alta volatilidad e incertidumbre institucional, como el venezolano, enfrenta el fracaso sistemático de los modelos racionales-lineales tradicionales. Este artículo aborda dicha problemática proponiendo el Marco Integrado Prospectivo-Delphi (MIPD), un artefacto metodológico que articula el análisis prospectivo estructural (MICMAC, MACTOR) con el método Delphi bajo los principios epistemológicos del Pensamiento Complejo. A través de un análisis conceptual y una síntesis teórica, se demuestra cómo la integración recursiva del diagnóstico sistémico y la deliberación de actores permite superar la dicotomía histórica entre el rigor técnico y la legitimidad social. El resultado es un modelo dinámico capaz de gestionar tensiones y generar fundamentos de política pública que son, simultáneamente, sistémicamente robustos y políticamente viables, ofreciendo una contribución significativa para la gobernanza de problemas complejos en el Sur Global.

PDF HTML

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

  1. Ahlström, H., Williams, A., & Vildåsen, S. (2020). Enhancing systems thinking in corporate sustainability through a transdisciplinary research process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120691
  2. Alva, R. M. E., & Díaz, J. O. F. (2018). Herramientas MICMAC y MACTOR para el análisis estratégico y prospectivo. Disponible en: https://t.ly/b4hfz
  3. Bardach, E. (2005) A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem solving. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
  4. Beiderbeck, D., Frevel, N., Von Der Gracht, H., Schmidt, S., & Schweitzer, V. (2021). Preparing, conducting, and analyzing delphi surveys: Cross-disciplinary practices, new directions, and advancements. MethodsX, 8https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101401
  5. Boulkedid, R., Abdoul, H., Loustau, M., Sibony, O., & Alberti, C. (2011). Using and reporting the delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 6https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020476
  6. Boyd, E., Nykvist, B., Borgström, S., & Stacewicz, I. (2015). Anticipatory governance for social-ecological resilience. Ambio, 44, 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0604-x
  7. Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2022). Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 184, 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05112-2
  8. Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela [CRBV] (1999) Gaceta Oficial N° 36.860. https://crespial.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Año-1999-Constitución-de-la-República-Bolivariana-de-Venezuela-Gaceta-Oficial-36.860.pdf.
  9. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory with utility and originality. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0486
  10. Godet, M., & Durance, P. (2011). La prospectiva estratégica. Gestión en el tercer milenio, 5(10), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.15381/gtm.v5i10.9911
  11. Grubb, M., McDowall, W., & Drummond, P. (2017). On order and complexity in innovations systems: Conceptual frameworks for policy mixes in sustainability transitions. Energy Research and Social Science, 33, 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.016
  12. Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2014). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 127, 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5
  13. Hariri, M. (2021) 'Structure of integrated reporting, voluntary disclosure and firm-specific characteristics in Saudi Arabian companies', International Journal of Business and Management, 16(10), pp. 73–85. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v16n10p73.
  14. Hariri, M. (2022) 'Relationship between corporate information disclosure and financial performance in Saudi Arabia', International Business Research, 15(3), pp. 18–31. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v15n3p18.
  15. Humphrey-Murto, S., Wood, T., Gonsalves, C., Mascioli, K., & Varpio, L. (2020). The delphi method. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000002887
  16. Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406
  17. Loorbach, D. (2009). Transition management for sustainable development: A prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Governance, 23, 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x
  18. Morin, E. (1998). Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Barcelona: Gedisa.
  19. Morin, E. (2014). Complex thinking for a complex world – about reductionism, disjunction and systemism.2, 14–22. https://doi.org/10.17101/systema.v2i1.257
  20. Oliver, T., Benini, L., Borja, Á, Dupont, C., Doherty, B., Grodzińska-Jurczak, M., Iglesias, A., Jordan, A., Kass, G., Lung, T., Maguire, C., McGonigle, D., Mickwitz, P., Spangenberg, J., & Tarrason, L. (2021). Knowledge architecture for the wise governance of sustainability transitions. Environmental Science & Policy, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.09.025
  21. Peter, C., & Swilling, M. (2014). Linking complexity and sustainability theories: Implications for modeling sustainability transitions. Sustainability, 6, 1594–1622. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6031594
  22. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
  23. Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (2011). The delphi technique: Past, present, and future prospects — introduction to the special issue☆. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78, 1487–1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.09.002
  24. Santos, A. C. M. D., Rezende, M., Ferreira, M. F. N., & Silva, M. J. M. (2021). The paradigm of systemic complexity and the sustainability of homeland earth: An epistemological view of the brazilian reality according to the ideas of Edgar Morin. Acta Scientiarum.Human and Social Sciences, https://doi.org/10.4025/actascihumansoc.v43i2.58715
  25. Saboin, J. L. (2021). The Venezuelan Enterprise: Current situation, challenges, and opportunities. Inter-American Development Bank. https://doi.org/10.18235/0003099
  26. Schulte, M., & Paris, C. M. (2024). Working the system—An empirical analysis of the relationship between systems thinking, paradoxical cognition, and sustainability practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2798
  27. Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (1997). Policy design for democracy. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
  28. Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. Wiley.
  29. Szathmári, A., Köves, A., & Gáspár, J. (2024). Human-centred decision support for the common good: A combination of participatory foresight methods. Journal of Decision Systems, 33, 154–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2024.2345946
  30. Tomai, M., Ramani, S., & Papachristos, G. (2024). How can we design policy better? frameworks and approaches for sustainability transitions. Sustainability, https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020690
  31. Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
  32. Value Reporting Foundation [VRF] (2022) El marco internacional . January. Disponible en: https://t.ly/ioZzb (Accessed: 1 Julio 2025).
  33. Veldhuizen, C. (2020). Conceptualising the foundations of sustainability focused innovation policy: From constructivism to holism. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120374
  34. Voulvoulis, N., Giakoumis, T., Hunt, C., Kioupi, V., Petrou, N., Souliotis, I., Vaghela, C., & Rosely, W. B. W. (2022). Systems thinking as a paradigm shift for sustainability transformation. Global Environmental Change, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102544
  35. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319