doi: 10.58763/rc2025517

 

Scientific and Technological Research

 

Social and solidarity economy in agriculture, El Carrizo, Sinaloa

 

Economía social y solidaria en la agricultura, El Carrizo, Sinaloa

 

Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres1  *

 

ABSTRACT

Introduction: the capitalist model concentrates wealth in minority segments of humanity, driving the emergence of economic alternatives. The social and solidarity economy transforms productive practices by promoting sustainable development through principles based on reciprocity, cooperative management, democratic participation, distributive equity, ecological responsibility, gender parity, and other values that optimize relationships within organizational value chains.

Methodology: consequently, this research aims to analyze the social and solidarity economy as an alternative model applicable to the agricultural sector of El Carrizo, Sinaloa, examining its alignment with these principles to catalyze sustainable development processes. The study is based on a positivist paradigm, adopting a quantitative methodology with a descriptive design. This approach integrates exhaustive documentary research that supports the theoretical framework, complemented by an empirical study through structured interviews with producers and agricultural companies in the region of El Carrizo, Ahome, Sinaloa.

Results: the findings show that the social and solidarity economy is a viable alternative that generates multidimensional benefits. In the case of producers and companies, it contributes to organizational consolidation, while for consumers it helps promote ethical trade circuits.

Conclusions: this model fosters structures that guarantee fair trade, bioclimatic preservation, and the strengthening of sustainable rural economies, which is particularly relevant in vulnerable community contexts, although strategic for national macroeconomic indicators.

 

Keywords: agricultural economics, agriculture, collective economy, cooperative, economic and social development.

 

JEL Classification: D63, Q01, O10

 

RESUMEN

Introducción: el modelo capitalista concentra la riqueza en segmentos minoritarios de la humanidad, lo que impulsa la emergencia de alternativas económicas. La economía social y solidaria transforma las prácticas productivas al promover el desarrollo sustentable mediante principios fundados en la reciprocidad, la gestión cooperativista, la participación democrática, la equidad distributiva, la responsabilidad ecológica, la paridad de género y otros valores que optimizan las relaciones dentro de las cadenas de valor organizacionales.

Metodología: consecuentemente, esta investigación establece como objetivo analizar la economía social y solidaria como modelo alternativo aplicable al sector agrícola de El Carrizo, Sinaloa, examinando su alineación con dichos principios para catalizar procesos de desarrollo sostenible. El estudio se fundamenta en un paradigma positivista, adoptando una metodología cuantitativa con diseño descriptivo. Este enfoque integra investigación documental exhaustiva que sustenta el marco teórico, complementada con un estudio empírico mediante entrevistas estructuradas a productores y empresas agrícolas en la región de El Carrizo, Ahome, Sinaloa.

Resultados: los hallazgos evidencian que la economía social y solidaria constituye una alternativa viable que genera beneficios multidimensionales. En el caso de los productores y empresas contribuye a la consolidación organizacional, mientras que para los consumidores ayuda a la promoción de circuitos comerciales éticos.

Conclusiones: este modelo fomenta estructuras que garantizan el comercio justo, la preservación bioclimática y el fortalecimiento de economías rurales sostenibles, particularmente relevante en contextos comunitarios vulnerables, aunque estratégicos para los indicadores macroeconómicos nacionales.

 

Palabras clave: agricultura, cooperativa, desarrollo económico y social, economía agraria, economía colectiva.

 

Clasificación JEL: D63, Q01, O10

 

Received: 11-12-2024          Revised: 28-03-2025          Accepted: 21-05-2025          Published: 31-07-2025

 

Editor: Alfredo Javier Pérez Gamboa

 

1Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa. Ahome, México.

 

Cite as: Ochoa Torres, N. B. (2025). Economía social y solidaria en la agricultura, El Carrizo, Sinaloa. Región Científica, 4(2), 2025517. https://doi.org/10.58763/rc2025517

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The International Labor Organization (ILO), according to Martí et al. (2023), maintains that the Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) is a fundamental axis for reducing poverty, building inclusive societies, and optimizing economic systems. Its impact is evident in the creation of decent jobs, equitable participation, and the effective integration of marginalized groups through cooperative, mutual, associative, and community-based business structures.

 

In agriculture, a strategic sector due to its role in food security, González Costa (2021) warns of critical scenarios of unsustainability: degradation of agroecosystems, decline in crop quality, and even risks to livestock production. This crisis requires prioritizing solutions aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda, through regulatory frameworks, ethical markets, and organizations that guarantee the responsible management of natural resources.

 

In this context, the research poses a central question: Can the SSE operate as a viable alternative for transitioning toward sustainable development in agriculture in El Carrizo, Sinaloa? Consequently, the objective is to analyze this potential by examining the consistency between the principles of the SSE and the socio-environmental requirements of this region.

 

Methodologically, the study adopts a non-experimental, cross-sectional quantitative approach, using sustainability indicators and SSE parameters. The universe analyzed comprises local social solidarity organizations, with a sample focused on farmer members. A structured questionnaire was used to evaluate specific experiences, and the results were compared with the theoretical framework.

 

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

 

A comparative theoretical framework is established that examines the fundamental conceptualizations of agriculture and the SSE, contextualizing their historical evolution in Mexico and their synergy in achieving sustainable development models. This foundation articulates key disciplinary perspectives that shape the contemporary understanding of the agricultural sector.

 

The literature distinguishes a dual dimension in urban agriculture: as a system of immediate food production and as an engine of endogenous community economic development (Mendoza Ludeña, 2024; Wadumestrige Dona et al., 2021). This duality reveals its transformative potential by transcending its mere productive function to become a strategy for territorial revitalization.

 

For their part, Trigo et al. (2021) define sustainable agriculture as processes that institutionalize systemic ecological analysis, ensuring the resilience of natural resources through agricultural designs that rigorously integrate normative, socioeconomic, and environmental dimensions. This concept is expanded by de Gortari Rabiela (2020), who emphasizes skilled production through agroecological practices, where environmental conservation is inextricably linked to organized collective participation.

 

Likewise, sustainability-oriented literature introduces the principle of intergenerational justice, arguing that humanity requires healthy food systems that maintain critical ecosystem balances, ensuring future food sovereignty (Alvarez-Ochoa et al., 2024; De Bruin et al., 2024). This vision is consolidated by González Costa (2021), who proposes agricultural models based on rational water and soil management, safe food production, and organizational structures that reconcile social equity, decent job creation, and environmental preservation as the foundations for sustainable markets.

 

In the field of family farming, studied by authors such as Schwab Do Nascimento et al. (2020), Chao (2024), and Galdeano-Gómez et al. (2024), indigenous/peasant production in family plots is recognized for its triple socioeconomic contribution. This value is because it contributes to the supply of local marketing circuits, the creation of non-precarious rural employment, and the strengthening of incomes in peasant economies.

 

Social and solidarity economy: A historical perspective in Mexico

 

The SSE is conceptualized, following the ideas of Salustri (2021) and Villalba-Eguiluz et al. (2023), as an institutional model where diversified companies and entities carry out economic, socio-environmental, and cultural activities aimed at the common good, aligning themselves with decent work standards. This perspective is expanded by Lopera-Arbeláez et al. (2024) and Lacan (2022), who define it as a socioeconomic movement based on humanistic values that prioritize comprehensive community development through structured cooperation and institutionalized reciprocity.

 

However, Fleischmann et al. (2022) emphasize that SSE organizations face three-dimensional challenges (social, economic, cultural) as they seek to improve quality of life through collective synergies. Their operation is based on guiding principles articulated in the literature: self-managed cooperation, mutual solidarity, democratic governance, organizational autonomy, and commitment to ecosystem sustainability (Bojórquez Carrillo, 2024; Lacan, 2022; Rossi et al., 2021). These principles are embodied in associative structures that transform traditional economic relations.

 

Historical evolution in Mexico

 

González Rivera (2024) documents that constitutional recognition of the SSE (1983) preceded by three decades the Social and Solidarity Economy Law (2012), which formalized its scope as an economic alternative committed to the reproduction of life. This milestone established the National Institute of Social Economy (INAES), responsible for designing sectoral public policies that, however, show programmatic discontinuity in recent years.

 

Complementarily, Céspedes Gallegos et al. (2025) analyze the Mexican “third sector” as a space for institutional innovation that transcends the public-private dichotomy, characterized by collective non-profit service initiatives. These entities operate under principles of social primacy over economic profit, participatory self-management, and equitable distribution, constituting moral economy networks.

 

The origins date back to nineteenth-century mutualism: the Junta de Fomento de Artesanos (1822) and the Sociedad Particular de Socorro Mutuo (1843) established protection systems for workers. Mogrovejo (2012) identifies the transition to cooperativism with nineteenth-century European immigration, when guilds and mutual societies developed risk funds for labor contingencies. This process culminated in 1873 with the first formal Mexican cooperative, which emerged from the institutional metamorphosis of mutual societies.

 

The vision of agriculture and the SSE for achieving sustainable development

 

Sustainable development emerges, according to Sánchez-Castillo et al. (2024), as a paradigm of global awareness of the intergenerational preservation of planetary resources. This concept is expanded upon by Gómez López (2020), who defines it as a transformative model that articulates systemic improvements in the economic, social, environmental, and political dimensions, generating dynamics of balanced progress.

 

Organizations operate as catalysts in this transition, particularly through the SSE. As Mozas Moral (2019) points out, based on United Nations documents, the SSE is a strategic driver for implementing the 2030 Agenda, reorienting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) towards companies that prioritize the common good over capital accumulation, integrating collective well-being and ecosystem regeneration.

 

In the agricultural sector, agricultural cooperatives represent the backbone structures for global rural communities. These entities perform a dual socioeconomic function: they optimize safe food production-marketing chains while implementing, according to Ekmeiro-Salvador & Rivas Carrero (2024), triple sustainability models (economic, social, environmental). This approach requires eradicating extractive practices, such as the unsustainable use of water and agrochemicals denounced by Cuadras Berrelleza et al. (2021), in order to build fair, equitable, and ecologically regenerative agricultural systems.

 

Sustainability, as conceptualized by Cota Montes & Guerrero Beltrán (2021), involves balancing cultural, environmental, and economic actions to generate holistic community development. In this regard, the literature expands on this balance, stating that it produces unquantifiable but essential values such as social capital, biocultural resilience, and community empowerment (Dushkova & Ivlieva, 2024; Winston, 2022). In this system, agriculture becomes a lever for improving the quality of life through its organizational structures, modes of production, and distributive ethics.

 

According to Fontenla (2022), the interrelationship with the SDGs requires organizations to internalize profound transformations: respect for biodiversity, circular resource management, emancipatory education, substantive equity, and labor justice. These principles form an ethical-operational framework for aligning agricultural SSE with the following priority SDGs (table 1).

 

Table 1.

Sustainable Development Goals in the context of Social and Solidarity Economy Agriculture

Num

SDGs

Relationship between agriculture and the social and solidarity economy

Citation

1

End of poverty

Agriculture generates jobs.

(Hossain et al., 2024)

2

Zero hunger

The agri-food sector is important for ensuring healthy food for communities.

(Iqbal et al., 2025)

3

Health and well-being

Agriculture must have as its primary objective the health of the population, the health of ecosystems, healthy land, and the well-being of society.

(Hidalgo-Capitán et al., 2019)

5

Gender equality

SDG 5 involves counteracting the lack of gender equality in the agricultural sector, where women represent half of the global agricultural workforce.

(Añaños Bedriñana & García Aguilar, 2024)

8

Decent work and economic growth

Promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all. The agricultural sector generates a large part of employment in rural communities.

(González Costa, 2021); (Santhanam-Martin et al., 2024)

10

Reducing inequalities

Women are among those facing marked inequality, as evidenced by their lack of access to financing, land preparation, and other services. Governments must work to improve credit and financing for vulnerable groups.

(González Costa, 2021)

12

Responsible production and consumption

Producers and consumers are important actors in the value chain for food production and for promoting the need for healthy consumption.

(González Costa, 2021)

13

Climate action

Agriculture contributes to reducing the greenhouse effect, and controlling it is essential for the climate.

(Bhatnagar et al., 2024)

15

Life terrestrial ecosystems

The most important goal in agriculture for food is the conservation of ecosystem biodiversity.

(Venier-Cambron et al., 2024);  (Wan et al., 2024)

16

Promote just, peaceful, and inclusive societies

Organizations are the means by which farmers can overcome social and economic constraints.

(González Costa, 2021)

Source: own elaboration based on the review conducted

 

Social and solidarity enterprises establish a structural alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As Fontenla (2022) argues, these organizations operate as agents of socioeconomic transformation that articulate glocal scalings: they energize endogenous community development while contributing to sustainable global growth patterns. This synergy is reinforced by the literature, which identifies sustainability as a critical interface that mediates the organization-environment relationship, building bridges of reciprocity between economic activity and the integrity of ecological systems (Trigo et al., 2021).

 

METHODOLOGY

 

The research is based on a quantitative cross-sectional methodological design with a descriptive scope, following the principles of Pereyra (2022). This approach allows for the synchronous collection of data at a specific point in time, preserving the natural conditions of the context studied. As Novosel (2023) points out, the non-experimental nature of the study guarantees the observation of variables in their spontaneous manifestation, without manipulative intervention.

 

The sample was selected through purposive sampling, focusing on organizations that operate under SSE principles with institutional and commercial soundness. The sample universe included five key informants—legal representatives, partners, and workers from entities in El Carrizo, Ahome, Sinaloa—whose roles allow access to structural and operational perspectives. These primary sources were complemented by documentation from government institutions and an exhaustive review of specialized literature (scientific articles, theses, and monographs) that validate the reliability of the data.

 

The data collection technique used was structured interviews, based on the protocols of Fàbregues (2016), using a questionnaire designed to operationalize two central variables:

 

1.     SSE principles: measured in:

·      Organizational identity (values and goals)

·      Democratic participation (decision-making)

·      Inclusion and equity (benefit distribution)

 

2.    Sustainable development: measured in terms of:

·      Social sustainability (community capital)

·      Economic sustainability (productive viability)

·      Environmental sustainability (ecosystem management)

 

This instrument enables the systematic quantification of indicators for inter-organizational comparative analysis.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 

The Social and Solidarity Economy in agriculture in El Carrizo, Ahome, Sinaloa

 

El Carrizo, also known as Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, is located in the municipality of Ahome, in the state of Sinaloa, Mexico. According to Mancera González (2023), agriculture in Sinaloa is a benchmark for success in agricultural activity; however, it is essential to incorporate strategies that ensure the conservation of available resources, thus strengthening sustainable development that links practice with theoretical foundations. Along the same lines, Gómez López (2020) argues that organizations governed by the principles of the SSE and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) contribute significantly to the economic growth of rural communities.

 

This territory is recognized as an agricultural valley that currently has 2022 producers, predominantly growing wheat, although other crops such as corn, beans, and various vegetables are also grown. Recently, the introduction of new crops such as figs, blueberries, and safflower has been promoted, the latter in response to the growing water shortage affecting the region.

 

The crop that best represents the agricultural identity of the area is wheat, whose production cycle begins with the application for planting and water use permits in September and extends until the end of October or early November. Harvesting takes place around April, during the spring-summer cycle. In the 2023–2024 cycle, production reached 18 000 hectares, mainly for flour and pasta production.

 

In terms of organization, different types of structures can be identified. Among private companies, Safinsa stands out. Despite operating in the local and regional market with a competitive business approach, it incorporates principles of the social and solidarity economy, promoting social responsibility and environmental care.

 

On the other hand, social and solidarity organizations are represented by farmers' unions, cooperatives, and associations, such as UPROGRANOS, the Local Agricultural Association of Grain and Fruit Producers of the Carrizo Valley, UEPIC SRA de RI Lic. Adolfo López Mateos, and the May 30 Association. All of them pursue the common good of their members and promote community cooperation.

 

In terms of membership, 60% are men, aged between 24 and 60, with professional training. Eighty percent of the organizations have around 25 members, while 20% have fewer than 10. As stated by Mariosa et al. (2022), members recognize that social enterprises generate tangible benefits for farmers.

 

These organizations maintain a clear social identity, reflected both in their statutes and formal documents and in their members' knowledge and ownership of the principles of the SSE. Participation is based on criteria of free association, openness, voluntariness, democracy, universality, and shared access to results and management processes, in line with the proposals of Arampatzi (2022) and Salustri (2021).

 

In terms of inclusion, equality, and economic equity, González Costa (2021) identifies that all organizations include non-member workers, but only one contemplates the participation of people with different abilities. Gender equality in decision-making is present in 80% of companies; however, economic equity presents challenges, as in 60% of cases, resources are not distributed proportionally, while 40% say they do so only occasionally.

 

The concept of sustainability, in line with the theoretical analysis carried out, is known to members, who recognize that their agricultural activity contributes to sustainable development. However, they warn that the continuity of this condition in El Carrizo is at risk. Concerning social investment, 60% allocate resources to education, 20% to infrastructure, and another 20% do not allocate resources for these purposes. In general, organizations implement actions related to equality, diversity, and social welfare, reaffirming the findings of González Costa (2021) and Li and Santhanam-Martin et al. (2024) on the importance of sustainable organizations in generating social growth and decent jobs.

 

In the economic dimension, 80% of organizations report working under fair trade and responsible consumption criteria, in line with González Costa (2021), who emphasizes that organizational responsibility is essential for social and economic progress. On the other hand, in the environmental dimension, 60% have internal regulations or measures that regulate environmental impact. In comparison, 40% address it in a limited way, suggesting the need to strengthen this aspect. Even so, organizations are developing sustainable supply practices, recycling, resource optimization, and biodiversity protection, as described in the literature (Venier-Cambron et al., 2024) (Wan et al., 2024).

 

The study's discussion reaffirms that agriculture in El Carrizo, Sinaloa, is a strategic sector for the local economy, especially in crops such as wheat, corn, beans, vegetables, and emerging crops such as figs, blueberries, and safflower, the latter as an adaptive strategy to water scarcity. In this regard, Mancera González (2023) highlights that, although agriculture in Sinaloa has proven to be successful, its sustainability will depend on the efficient management of resources, particularly water, in a context marked by climate change. Water optimization is thus a fundamental axis for ensuring profitable and sustainable agriculture.

 

In this context, social and solidarity organizations, such as cooperatives and agricultural associations, play an essential role. These organizations not only seek economic benefits for their members but also promote values of cooperation, equity, environmental sustainability, and social commitment. As Gómez López (2020) points out, entities aligned with the SSE and the SDGs become drivers of local economic development and community well-being, reinforcing the interdependence between economic prosperity, social justice, and care for the natural environment.

 

Main challenges

 

Water scarcity: as noted in the analysis, water scarcity is one of the main challenges facing agriculture in El Carrizo. Wheat cultivation, one of the region's most important agricultural products, depends on a constant and sufficient supply of water to maintain productivity. The adoption of less water-intensive crops, such as safflower, is emerging as a positive adaptive strategy to address this challenge (figure 1). However, this type of conversion requires ongoing technical monitoring, accompanied by investment in research and development, in order to assess its long-term productive, economic, and environmental viability.

 

Figure 1.

Representation of the main challenges associated with water scarcity

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

Limited government support: although agriculture is a fundamental pillar of the local economy, the sector in El Carrizo faces a lack of institutional support. The formulation and implementation of public policies aimed at directly strengthening farmers and sector organizations, as recommended in the study, is imperative (figure 2). The absence of effective support, both in terms of subsidies and substantial improvements in rural infrastructure, limits the potential for expansion and competitiveness of the regional agricultural sector.

 

Figure 2.

Representation of the main challenges associated with the poor support received

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

Distribución equitativa de los recursos: en materia de equidad económica dentro de las organizaciones sociales, los datos evidencian que un número considerable de empresas no realiza una distribución proporcional de los recursos generados, situación que podría derivar en tensiones internas y en un debilitamiento de la cohesión organizativa (figura 3). Fortalecer la transparencia y garantizar mecanismos de reparto justo de las utilidades se torna esencial para prevenir conflictos y asegurar la sostenibilidad social, económica y cooperativa de las prácticas productivas.

 

Figure 3.

Analysis of the factors causing unequal distribution of products

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

Opportunities for sustainable development

 

Within the framework of the SSE: the organizations analyzed reflect a tangible commitment to the principles of the SSE, both in their understanding and in their practical application by their members, which constitutes a significant asset. The emphasis on cooperation, equity, and environmental sustainability can be consolidated as a driver of more inclusive and balanced development. The deepening and dissemination of these principles in local agricultural activity can multiply the positive impact of organizations on the social and productive fabric of the community (figure 4).

 

Figure 4.

Cycle of introduction and development of the SSE in local agriculture

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration.

 

Inclusion of women and people with special needs: although female participation and the inclusion of people with special needs still face limitations in specific organizations, the data show significant progress. Increasing the presence of women in decision-making spaces and strengthening the integration of historically vulnerable groups are measures that would contribute to greater social equity and diversity within the agricultural sector, thereby reinforcing its legitimacy and representativeness (figure 5).

 

Figure 5.

Outline for strengthening social equity and diversity in agriculture

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

Education and training: the allocation of resources to educational programs by organizations in El Carrizo is a key factor in strengthening capacities and updating knowledge on sustainable agricultural practices (figure 6). This training effort should be extended to strategic areas such as the rational and efficient use of water, as well as the transition to crops that are more resilient to the effects of climate change, in order to ensure adaptation and productive continuity.

 

Figure 6.

Education and training cycle in local agriculture based on the social and solidarity economy

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

Environmental focus: although 60% of organizations have incorporated measures to reduce their environmental impact, there is still a need for broader integration of sustainability into agricultural management. The systematic adoption of practices such as recycling, responsible management of agrochemicals, and biodiversity preservation must be consolidated as a priority (figure 7). In line with the literature, these actions not only mitigate environmental degradation but also strengthen ecosystem resilience and the future viability of agricultural activity.

 

Figure 7.

Outline for strengthening sustainability in agricultural management

Note: the figure is in its original language

Source: own elaboration

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

In summary, the El Carrizo Valley in Sinaloa is a representative example of agriculture with high profitability potential but facing structural challenges mainly associated with water scarcity and limited institutional support. In this scenario, social and solidarity organizations play a strategic role in promoting regional economic development based on principles of equity, cooperation, and sustainability. However, to ensure the long-term viability of this model, it is essential to strengthen internal equity, expand the participation of women and vulnerable groups, and systematically implement sustainable agricultural practices, with a special emphasis on efficient and responsible water resource management. Only through a comprehensive approach that integrates economic, social, and environmental sustainability will El Carrizo be able to move toward a fully sustainable development model capable of generating lasting benefits for both producers and the community as a whole.

 

REFERENCES

 

Alvarez-Ochoa, C. P., Acevedo, J. A. R., & Tuesta, Y. N. (2024). Transitions to Food Sustainability with Intergenerational and Ecological Justice. Food Ethics, 9(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-024-00146-w

 

Añaños Bedriñana, K., & García Aguilar, S. (2024). Mujeres rurales y educación en España. Análisis desde una dimensión de los derechos humanos y la igualdad de género (ODS 5). En M. Á. Martín López & A. Fillol Mazo (Eds.), Exigencias de gobernabilidad, sostenibilidad y perspectiva de género en la atención al mundo rural (1a edición). Dykinson S.L.

 

Arampatzi, A. (2022). Social solidarity economy and urban commoning in post-crisis contexts: Madrid and Athens in a comparative perspective. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44(10), 1375–1390. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1814677

 

Bhatnagar, S., Chaudhary, R., Sharma, S., Janjhua, Y., Thakur, P., Sharma, P., & Keprate, A. (2024). Exploring the dynamics of climate-smart agricultural practices for sustainable resilience in a changing climate. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 24, 100535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2024.100535

 

Bojórquez Carrillo, A. L. (2024). Análisis bibliométrico de los estudios sobre Economía Solidaria (2013-2023). Telos: Revista de Estudios Interdisciplinarios en Ciencias Sociales, 26(2), 742–762. https://doi.org/10.36390/telos262.25

 

Céspedes Gallegos, S., Clara Zafra, M. Á., & Juárez Juárez, Y. J. (2025). Economía Social y Solidaria. Reflexiones desde la óptica de la Educación Superior en México. Revista Inclusiones, 12(2), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.58210/fprc3615

 

Chao, K. (2024). Family farming in climate change: Strategies for resilient and sustainable food systems. Heliyon, 10(7), e28599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28599

 

Cota Montes, D., & Guerrero Beltrán, A. G. (2021). Evaluación de dos agroecosistemas mediante indicadores de sustentabilidad en Sinaloa municipio, Sinaloa. Ra Ximhai, 171–189. https://doi.org/10.35197/rx.17.03.2021.07.dc

 

Cuadras Berrelleza, A. A., Peinado Guevara, V. M., Peinado Guevara, H. J., López López, J. D. J., & Barrientos, J. H. (2021). Agricultura intensiva y calidad de suelos: Retos para el desarrollo sustentable en Sinaloa. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, 12(8), 1401–1414. https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v12i8.2704

 

De Bruin, A., De Boer, I. J. M., Faber, N. R., De Jong, G., Termeer, K. J. A. M., & De Olde, E. M. (2024). Easier said than defined? Conceptualising justice in food system transitions. Agriculture and Human Values, 41(1), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-023-10482-y

 

de Gortari Rabiela, R. (2020). De la revolución verde a la agricultura sustentable en México. Nueva antropología, 33(92), 66–86. https://revistas.inah.gob.mx/index.php/nuevaantropologia/article/view/15995

 

Dushkova, D., & Ivlieva, O. (2024). Empowering Communities to Act for a Change: A Review of the Community Empowerment Programs towards Sustainability and Resilience. Sustainability, 16(19), 8700. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198700

 

Ekmeiro-Salvador, J. E., & Rivas Carrero, T. (2024). Globalización alimentaria: La dimensión ética sobre el derecho a alimentarse. Anales Venezolanos de Nutrición, 37(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.54624/2024.37.1.004

 

Fàbregues, S. (2016). Técnicas de investigación social y educativa.

 

Fleischmann, A., Holck, L., Liu, H., Muhr, S. L., & Murgia, A. (2022). Organizing solidarity in difference: Challenges, achievements, and emerging imaginaries. Organization, 29(2), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084221083907

 

Fontenla, E. H. (2022). Complementación entre los principios cooperativos y los ODS. Una mirada desde la economía social y solidaria. Revista CIRIEC Costa Rica: Revista de Economía Social y Solidaria, 1(1), 120–121. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9152765

 

Galdeano-Gómez, E., Piedra-Muñoz, L., García-Barranco, M. D. C., Sorroche-del-Rey, Y., Hernández-Rubio, J., & Sánchez-García, J. (2024). The Role of Family Farming in Socio-Economic Sustainability: An Exploratory Analysis of Rural Development in Southeast Spain. En M. D. C. Valls Martínez & J. M. Santos-Jaén (Eds.), Environmentally Sustainable Production (pp. 107–122). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52656-5_6

 

Gómez López, I. (2020). Desarrollo sostenible. Editorial Elearning, SL.

 

González Costa, F. J. (2021). La agricultura y la alimentación en el centro de los 17 ODS [Tesis de grado, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena]. https://repositorio.upct.es/entities/publication/9245864e-7572-4a06-b535-8780056d203b

 

González Rivera, T. V. (2024). ¿A la deriva la economía social y solidaria mexicana? Propuestas y omisiones de cara a las elecciones 2024. Notas de coyuntura del CRIM, 10, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.22201/crim.001r.2024

 

Hidalgo-Capitán, A. L., García-Álvarez, S., Cubillo-Guevara, A. P., & Medina-Carranco, N. (2019). Good Living Goals An alternative proposal to the Sustainable Development Goals. Revista iberoamericana de estudios de desarrollo = Iberoamerican journal of development studies, 8(1), 6–57. https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_ried/ijds.354

 

Hossain, M., Mendiratta, V., & Savastano, S. (2024). Agricultural and rural development interventions and poverty reduction: Global evidence from 16 impact assessment studies. Global Food Security, 43, 100806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2024.100806

 

Iqbal, B., Alabbosh, K. F., Jalal, A., Suboktagin, S., & Elboughdiri, N. (2025). Sustainable food systems transformation in the face of climate change: Strategies, challenges, and policy implications. Food Science and Biotechnology, 34(4), 871–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-024-01712-y

 

Lacan, A. (2022). Value-Based Governance as a Performance Element in Social and Solidarity Economy Organizations: A French Sustainable Post-Modern Proposal. Sustainability, 14(4), 2153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042153

 

Lopera-Arbeláez, I., Gallego, F. L., Richter, S., & Barrio, Á. E. (2024). Collective reincorporation of FARC-EP and social and solidarity economies: Beyond moral imagination. Peacebuilding, 12(3), 367–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2023.2278913

 

Mancera González, O. (2023). Las codependencias de la agroindustria en Sinaloa, México. Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 31(61). https://doi.org/10.18504/pl3161-006-2023

 

Mariosa, P. H., Pereira, H. D. S., Mariosa, D. F., Falsarella, O. M., Conti, D. D. M., & De Benedicto, S. C. (2022). Family Farming and Social and Solidarity Economy Enterprises in the Amazon: Opportunities for Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 14(17), 10855. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710855

 

Martí, J. P., Rubio, M. R., Borge, D., Estrella, H. de J. J., Morais, L. P., Bucheli, M., Herrera, J. J. R., & Schujman, M. (2023). Aproximación a los marcos legales y la institucionalidad especializada para la economía social y solidaria en América Latina. Revista de la CEPAL, 140, 45–64. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9132223

 

Mendoza Ludeña, L. (2024). Evaluación Crítica Del Desarrollo Sostenible En Zonas Urbanas De Latinoamérica: Revisión Sistemática. Visión de Futuro, 28, No 2 (Julio – Diciembre), 146–162. https://doi.org/10.36995/j.visiondefuturo.2024.28.02.005.es

 

Mogrovejo, R. (2012). El cooperativismo en América Latina: Una diversidad de contribuciones al desarrollo sostenible. Organización Internacional del Trabajo.

 

Mozas Moral, A. (2019). Contribución de las cooperativas agrarias al cumplimiento de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible: Especial referencia al sector oleícola. Ciriec-España Valencia, Spain.

 

Novosel, L. M. (2023). Understanding the Evidence: Non-Experimental Research Designs. Urologic Nursing, 43(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.7257/2168-4626.2023.43.2.99

 

Pereyra, L. E. (2022). Metodología de la investigación. Klik.

 

Rossi, A., Coscarello, M., & Biolghini, D. (2021). (Re)Commoning Food and Food Systems. The Contribution of Social Innovation from Solidarity Economy. Agriculture, 11(6), 548. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060548

 

Salustri, A. (2021). Social and solidarity economy and social and solidarity commons: Towards the (re)discovery of an ethic of the common good? Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 92(1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12307

 

Sánchez-Castillo, V., Gómez-Cano, C. A., & Pérez-Gamboa, A. J. (2024). La Economía Azul en el contexto de los objetivos del desarrollo sostenible: Una revisión mixta e integrada de la literatura en la base de datos Scopus. AiBi Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería, 12(2), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.15649/2346030X.4028

 

Santhanam-Martin, M., Wilkinson, R., Cowan, L., & Nettle, R. (2024). Elaborating decent work for agriculture: Job experiences and workforce retention in the Australian orchard industry. Journal of Rural Studies, 111, 103330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103330

 

Schwab Do Nascimento, F., Calle-Collado, Á., & Muñoz Benito, R. (2020). Economía social y solidaria y agroecología en cooperativas de agricultura familiar en Brasil como forma de desarrollo de una agricultura sostenible. CIRIEC-España, revista de economía pública, social y cooperativa, 98, 189–211. https://doi.org/10.7203/CIRIEC-E.98.14161

 

Trigo, A., Marta-Costa, A., & Fragoso, R. (2021). Principles of Sustainable Agriculture: Defining Standardized Reference Points. Sustainability, 13(8), 4086. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084086

 

Venier-Cambron, C., Helm, L. T., Malek, Ž., & Verburg, P. H. (2024). Representing justice in global land-use scenarios can align biodiversity benefits with protection from land grabbing. One Earth, 7(5), 896–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.03.006

 

Villalba-Eguiluz, U., Sahakian, M., González-Jamett, C., & Etxezarreta, E. (2023). Social and solidarity economy insights for the circular economy: Limited-profit and sufficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 418, 138050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138050

 

Wadumestrige Dona, C. G., Mohan, G., & Fukushi, K. (2021). Promoting Urban Agriculture and Its Opportunities and Challenges—A Global Review. Sustainability, 13(17), 9609. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179609

 

Wan, N.-F., Dainese, M., Wang, Y.-Q., & Loreau, M. (2024). Cascading social-ecological benefits of biodiversity for agriculture. Current Biology, 34(12), R587–R603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2024.05.001

 

Winston, N. (2022). Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities. Sustainable Development, 30(1), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2238

 

FINANCING

The author did not receive funding for the development of this research.

 

DECLARACIÓN DE CONFLICTO DE INTERÉS

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

 

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Data curation: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Formal analysis: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Research: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Methodology: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Project management: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Resources: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Software: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Supervision: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Validation: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Visualization: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Writing – original draft: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.

Writing – review and editing: Nadia Belén Ochoa Torres.