Model of Anchors and Situated Decisions in the Community (MADESC)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21987215Keywords:
normative hybridization, social projects, anchors, situated decisionsAbstract
This article presents the Model of Anchors and Situated Decisions in the Community (MADESC an analytical-heuristic framework, built through meta-synthesis and thirty years of participant observation, that integrates three dimensions (real, planned, emergent) and three anchors (identity, relationship, norms). The core idea is that situated decisions emerge from normative hybridization: a creative fusion between project rules and the community's formal and informal norms. MADESC proposes two conceptual shifts: the emergent as a source of solutions rather than a deviation, and non-linearity as the key to viability. It includes a typology of decision configurations (synergy, creative tension, dissonance).
Downloads
References
Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review, 69(3), 99-109.
Argyris, C. (2003). A life full of learning. Organization Studies, 24(7), 1178-1192. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406030247009
Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169-217. https://doi.org/10.1086/259394
Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cambridge University Press.
Bicchieri, C., & Xiao, E. (2011). Do the right thing: But only if others do so. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(2), 191-208. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.621
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015-1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
Cohen, E., & Martínez, R. (2004). Formulación, evaluación y monitoreo de proyectos sociales: Revisión crítica y propuestas para el siglo XXI. CEPAL.
Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL). (1990). Transformación productiva con equidad. Naciones Unidas.
Dannals, J. E., & Li, Y. (2024). A theoretical framework for social norm perception. Research in Organizational Behavior, 44, Artículo 100211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2024.100211
Fals Borda, O. (1985). Conocimiento y poder popular. Siglo XXI.
Kliksberg, B. (2000). Diez falacias sobre los problemas sociales en América Latina. Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, (17), 1-24.
Nueva Sociedad. (2012, mayo-junio). Un balance crítico de los programas sociales en América Latina: Entre el liberalismo y el retorno del Estado. Nueva Sociedad, (239). https://nuso.org/articulo/un-balance-critico-de-los-programas-sociales-en-america-latina-entre-el-liberalismo-y-el-retorno-del-estado/
Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO). (2001).
Desarrollo rural y alivio de la pobreza. En 9.5 Desarrollo rural y alivio de la pobreza. https://www.fao.org/4/y5673s/y5673s1w.htm
Robirosa, M., Cardarelli, G., & Lapalma, A. I. (1990). Turbulencia y planificación social:Lineamientos metodológicos para el desarrollo local. Siglo XXI.
Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
Sen, A. (2000). Desarrollo y libertad. Editorial Planeta.
Skyrms, B. (1997). Chaos and the explanatory significance of equilibrium: Strange attractors in evolutionary game dynamics. En C. Bicchieri, R. Jeffrey, & B. Skyrms (Eds.), The dynamics of norms (pp. 199-222). Cambridge University Press.
Sparkman, G., & Walton, G. M. (2017). Dynamic norms promote sustainable behavior, even if it is not yet common. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1663-1674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617711291
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors keep their copyrights so articles can be reused for teacher and research purpose. Readers and users can also reuse articles for the same purposes but not for commercial purposes. Ágora de Heterodoxias has no responsibility on information given by collaborators which is not necessarily the point of view of the publication
