Portal de revistas electrónicas de la UAM (Univ. Autónoma de Madrid)
Not a member yet
14423 research outputs found
Sort by
The Enthymeme from Contraries as a Precedent of Gracián’s «Concepto»
No full textThe purpose of this paper is to show that, in addition to the existing candidates as precedents to Gracián’s concepto, there is one more that modern research has not analysed in sufficient detail: the so-called «enthymeme from contraries». As will be shown, this enthymeme already provided the framework for a comparative scheme between two elements by applying the circumstances in the rhetorical-dialectical theory of inventio and was also associated with «agudeza». There are strong reasons to believe that Gracián and his contemporaries were more familiar with this tradition than we are today.El propósito de este artículo es mostrar que, además de los candidatos ya existentes como antecedentes al «concepto» de Gracián, hay uno más que la investigación moderna no ha analizado con suficiente detalle: el llamado «entimema por contrarios». Como se verá, este ya brindaba la pauta de un esquema comparativo entre dos elementos basándose en las circunstancias en la teoría retórico-dialéctica sobre la inventio y además se asociaba con la «agudeza». Hay fuertes razones para creer que Gracián y sus contemporáneos conocían esta tradición mejor de lo que ahora la conocemos
SINGH, Simon: Los Simpson y las matemáticas. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel, 2013
No full textReseña bibliográfica del libro "Los Simpson y las matemáticas" en el que se descubren tanto los entresijos de la creación de esta obra de animación mundialmente conocida como los secretos tras las matemáticas que aparecen en la serie
El rol de la democracia en la Agenda 2030: un análisis crítico frente a la crisis institucional global
No full textThis article presents a critical analysis of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, focusing on its democratic potential in the current context of institutional crisis and democratic disaffection. The study is grounded in the theoretical framework of substantive democracy, which emphasizes not only the procedural dimensions of democracy, but also the material, symbolic and political conditions necessary for the effective exercise of citizenship. From this perspective, the article posits that the 2030 Agenda incorporates, albeit implicitly, a normative commitment to democratic deepening, insofar as it promotes the protection of human rights, the redistribution of wealth, and the strengthening of public institutions as central pillars of sustainable development.
The research departs from the hypothesis that sustainable development, as framed in the 2030 Agenda, cannot be achieved without active and capable states that guarantee fundamental rights and promote equity. In light of the increasing erosion of democratic legitimacy in many liberal democracies—driven by socioeconomic inequality, institutional inefficiency, and the emergence of authoritarian populisms—the article argues that reconnecting development with the ideals and practices of substantive democracy is essential. By locating the 2030 Agenda within this debate, the paper proposes a systematic examination of the extent to which the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reflect and promote the principles of democratic governance.
To that end, the study adopts a qualitative content analysis methodology (Mayring, 2000), using a predominantly deductive approach. Based on a thorough literature review on democratic theory, the role of the state, and the crisis of liberal democracy, the article constructs an analytical framework composed of four key dimensions derived from the concept of substantive democracy: (i) protection of citizens\u27 rights; (ii) redistribution and equity; (iii) political participation and citizen empowerment; and (iv) political institutions oriented toward peace and human security. These four variables function as analytical proxies for evaluating the democratic content of the 169 targets that make up the 17 SDGs. Each target was treated as an autonomous textual unit and coded based on the presence (1) or absence (0) of each variable.
Data collection and coding were carried out in two phases. In the first, one researcher conducted the initial coding of all 169 targets using the Atlas.ti software. In the second, a second researcher reviewed and validated the coding results, discussing discrepancies and reaching consensus decisions. This dual-phase validation process enhanced the internal reliability of the findings and allowed for a more consistent interpretation of the data. Quantitative aggregation of the coding results enabled the identification of general trends as well as comparative analysis across the different goals and dimensions.
The results of the analysis show that the Agenda 2030 incorporates democratic principles in a partial and asymmetric manner. The most strongly represented dimensions are the protection of rights (88%) and redistribution and equity (88%), which appear explicitly or implicitly in the majority of the SDG targets. These results confirm the presence of a results-oriented vision of democracy, emphasizing the need for material conditions and state interventions to ensure social justice and inclusion.
The institutional dimension—understood as the strengthening of public institutions and democratic governance—was present in 70% of the targets. This reveals a moderate but relevant concern for the consolidation of state capacities and the role of institutions in delivering sustainable development. However, the most underrepresented dimension was political participation and citizen empowerment, which appeared in only 47% of the targets. This indicates a significant democratic deficit in the Agenda, as it fails to sufficiently incorporate the active role of citizens in decision-making processes and the design of public policies.
The paper provides a detailed analysis of each of the four dimensions across the 17 SDGs. Notably, Goals 1 to 5 (covering poverty, hunger, health, education, and gender equality) strongly reflect the rights-based dimension, while Goal 5 (gender equality) stands out as the most balanced, integrating all four dimensions at higher levels than the rest. Goals focused on economic prosperity (Goals 7 to 11) display an intermediate integration of equity and institutional concerns but lack citizen participation components. Environmental goals (Goals 12 to 15) show limited democratic content overall, suggesting that sustainability has not been fully conceptualized from a rights- or governance-based perspective.
The article also presents aggregated data showing the degree of convergence between the SDGs and each democratic dimension. These comparative graphs and tables underscore a recurring pattern: while the Agenda engages with social justice and human rights rhetorically and normatively, it does not fully translate these values into mechanisms that promote civic agency or participatory governance. This reveals a technocratic bias in the design of the Agenda, aligned with critiques in the development literature that highlight its managerial orientation, normative universalism, limited participatory frameworks, and depoliticized narratives (Cornwall & Brock, 2005; Sachs, 1992).
Moreover, the study identifies a methodological limitation in that environmental dimensions were not included in the analysis framework, despite being a core component of the sustainable development paradigm. This was a deliberate choice aimed at narrowing the scope of the analysis and enhancing the applicability of the proposed methodology. However, the article acknowledges this exclusion as a limitation and suggests that future research should incorporate environmental rights as part of a broader democratic conception.
In conclusion, the article argues that the 2030 Agenda has the potential to contribute meaningfully to the democratic renewal of development policy. However, realizing this potential requires a situated, critical, and political interpretation by states and civil societies. The Agenda must be implemented not only as a set of technocratic goals but as a political project that reconnects sustainable development with substantive democracy. Strengthening public action, ensuring equitable distribution, and protecting human rights are necessary but insufficient if not accompanied by active civic engagement, participatory mechanisms, and institutional accountability.
Ultimately, embracing a democratic reading of the 2030 Agenda is not merely an academic task but a political imperative. In a context of increasing authoritarianism, social fragmentation, and institutional distrust, re-politicizing the development agenda and expanding the role of citizens in shaping public decisions are essential steps toward legitimizing and strengthening the democratic pact in the 21st century.Este artículo analiza el potencial democrático de la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible desde un enfoque crítico basado en la teoría de la democracia sustantiva. Partiendo de la hipótesis de que la Agenda 2030 contiene, en su formulación, una propuesta implícita de fortalecimiento democrático se plantea que el desarrollo sostenible solo puede ser alcanzado mediante estados activos y políticas públicas orientadas a la protección de derechos, la redistribución de recursos y el fortalecimiento institucional. En este marco, el artículo asume que el vínculo entre desarrollo y democracia sustantiva es clave para enfrentar la crisis actual de legitimidad que atraviesan las instituciones democráticas a nivel global.
La investigación emplea un enfoque cualitativo basado en una estrategia de análisis de contenido predominantemente deductivo. A partir de un marco teórico que articula aportes de diversas corrientes democráticas contemporáneas, se construye un sistema de categorías analíticas que permite evaluar las ciento sesenta y nueve metas específicas que integran los diecisiete Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. Las cuatro categorías utilizadas como variables analíticas son: i) protección de los derechos de la ciudadanía; ii) redistribución y equidad; iii) participación política y empoderamiento ciudadano; y iv) fortalecimiento institucional orientado a la paz y la seguridad humana. Cada meta fue analizada y codificada utilizando el software Atlas.ti, y los resultados fueron validados por dos investigadoras en rondas sucesivas.
Los resultados obtenidos evidencian que los ODS incorporan de forma significativa los ejes relativos a dos de las dimensiones: protección de los derechos y redistribución y equidad, con una presencia cercana al 40% en ambos casos. La dimensión institucional está presente en un 34% de las metas, mientras que la participación ciudadana aparece de forma marginal (5%). Este patrón revela que la Agenda 2030 prioriza un enfoque democrático orientado a resultados (garantía de derechos y equidad), pero presenta debilidades estructurales en relación con los procesos participativos y de empoderamiento ciudadano.
El artículo concluye que la Agenda 2030 puede ser interpretada como una herramienta de profundización democrática, aunque con importantes matices. Su implementación efectiva requiere una lectura crítica, situada y transformadora por parte de los Estados y las sociedades civiles, capaz de conectar el desarrollo sostenible con la justicia social, la equidad y la participación política como condiciones necesarias para restaurar la legitimidad democrática en el siglo XXI
ACUATIC SAFETY FOR SCHOOL POPULATION WITH INTELECTUAL DISABILITIES. AN EDUATIONAL PROPOSAL.
No full textBased on the motivation of always putting sport at the service of the harmonious development of the human being, with the aim of maintaining human dignity, the objective of this study is to understand the effects of implementing a water safety program for students with intellectual disabilities enrolled in a special education center. Six students with intellectual disabilities, ranging in age from 10 to 16, participated in this study.
The training approach combines classroom activities and practical pool sessions to promote knowledge transfer to real-life situations. The approach is characterized by the use of alternative communication channels, such as pictograms, adapted to the students\u27 needs. The evaluation is participatory and continuous to assess the learning and skills acquired regarding water safety and drowning prevention.
The results of this program confirm that the educational approach is viable and successful, as all participating students improved their water safety. However, the training must be contextualized, flexible, and adapted to the characteristics of each participant.A partir de la motivación de poner siempre el deporte al servicio del desarrollo armónico del ser humano, con el fin del mantenimiento de la dignidad humana, el objetivo de este trabajo es conocer los efectos de la implementación de un programa de seguridad acuática para alumnado con discapacidad intelectual matriculado en un centro de educación especial. En el estudio participaron seis estudiantes con discapacidad intelectual con edades comprendidas entre los 10 y los 16 años.
La propuesta formativa combina actividades en el aula y sesiones prácticas en piscina para favorecer la transferencia de conocimientos a situaciones reales. La propuesta se caracteriza por la utilización de canales de comunicación alternativos y adaptados a las necesidades del alumnado como los pictogramas. La evaluación es participativa y continua para valorar los aprendizajes y las competencias adquiridas sobre seguridad acuática y prevención de ahogamiento.
Los resultados de este programa permiten afirmar que la propuesta educativa es viable y exitosa, pues todo el alumnado participante mejoró su seguridad acuática. Sin embargo, es necesario que la formación se imparta de forma contextualizada, flexible y adaptada a las características de cada participante
Mollo, F. (2025): Gli Altri. Le popolazioni non greche della Calabria antica (IX-III sec. a.C.)
No full textRevie
América Latina en riesgo de desastres: resistencias a la adaptación climática y la resiliencia urbana
No full textThe 2030 Agenda represents an unattainable goal for the Latin American and Caribbean. As a regional shared destiny, it generates expectations and frustrations, lights and shadows, threats and opportunities, all of which translate to strategic communication issues. The multilateral architecture developed since 2015 integrates and converges towards the theoretical unification of the mandates of the SDGs, the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework, and the Framework Convention on Biodiversity, among others. This process of thematization on the international agenda has opened intense debates about how to transpose the global governance of emerging systemic risks into national legislation or regional governance, as well as how to apply them into local action. The balkanization of the approaches has presented difficult dilemmas to manage. Since the 1990s, the Latin American academic community, through the extensive history of LA RED (Network of Social Studies on Disaster Prevention), has actively participated in redefining disasters, as socially constructed rather than natural, or in linking of risks with development and inequality, through prioritizing local contexts within the need to address the causes through forensic methodology.
Global risk society is undergoing a runaway process of climate change and urbanization. On the one hand, the idea that there is a direct, clear, and unequivocal connection between biodiversity and climate change is gaining ground, addressing a relationship between sustainability and climate crisis; on the other hand, vulnerability and disaster risk are more oriented ss people (migration, borders, poverty, malnutrition, etc.), who inhabit increasingly unsustainable, vulnerable, and exclusionary megacities. Regional governance is pushed to reinvent itself anew for and by Latin America, going within and beyond academic circles. Although the pitfalls of exacerbated multilateralism, the divisive power of states, and idiosyncratic local contexts persist, regionalism as a resistance to global vulnerability can fracture resistance to change. The separation between the environmental and social spheres is biased and artificial because it does not consider power relations in the modalities of organization and decision-making.
After the pandemic, geopolitical conflicts, globalisation turns, and climate emergency, a new paradigm for systemic risk governance is emerging with strengthening resilience, extreme events, interconnected impacts, and the privatization of gains. However, the threats could become new opportunities to give space to prospective and better management and reduction of the socialized risks to increase underlying and preexisting patterns of vulnerability, and exposure. The major change to be reached is the recognition that the systemic nature of socially constructed risk is endogenous to how development is pursued (UNDRR, 2019, 2022, 2024).
The pressing nature of the emergency of climate change is a factor in emissions and carbon footprints, but it should not distract us from the root of the problem: the reproduction of social inequality in terms of vulnerability. Adaptation should not be understood as adjustment but as transformation oriented towards the common good, prevention, and forward-looking management. A key insight into this dominant cli-mentality shapes the space of thinkable solutions and assigns responsibilities (Steig y Oels, 2025; Lewis y Kelman, 2012). We urgently need to focus not on reduction or resilience, but on emerging resistance to the creation of disaster risk. Perhaps the innovative approach lies in denaturalizing climate change to renaturalise urban environments.
This text follows a critical reinterpretation of the four priorities of the Sendai Framework in relation to the horizons of the 2030 Agenda, focusing on SDGs 11 and 13. From a Latin American regional perspective, it discusses the resistance to the conceptual relationships established around the understanding of risk and disasters, governance and management, investments in disaster risk reduction, and disaster preparedness. Against the backdrop of these priorities, resilience emerges as a cross-cutting concept, appearing sixty times, compared to seven times in the SDGs. However, the vagueness of its meaning leads to misunderstandings (Graveline y Germain, 2022), as it is difficult to discern whether it is a condition or a goal in the process of strengthening resilience. Resilience\u27s favourable connotation is also associated with sustainability and CCA. Latin American scholars resist this dominant view from a vulnerability perspective, questioning resilient cities (SDG 11) and climate adaptation (SDG 13), as they are addressed by the 2030 Agenda, or climate summits (Lavell, 2023). International diplomacy has institutionalized the naturalization of concepts and measures related to climate mitigation and adaptation, or urban resilience. It is proposed to incorporate the shift towards disaster risk creation and socio-environmental justice (Jerolleman, 2019) to understand climate change and urban sustainability in a transformative way, reconfigured as two sides of the same coin.
The objective of this article is to critically analyze the multilateral approach and academic research on risk reduction from a Latin American perspective. In the post-2030 Agenda, debates to identify gaps and barriers are crucial to drawing lessons from the directions to be taken. In this process of reinvention, the epistemic community of LA RED emphasizes shifting adaptation and resilience towards emerging resistances; because DRR is not enough without impacting the mechanisms that create disaster risk.
Raising the voices of LAC, in its specificity as a regional community, and the voices of the weak and excluded, implies questioning the limits that the approach of global governance, climate change adaptation, and the local implementation of urban resilience impose on the containment of regional agency, as structural resistance, and the power of the weak, as everyday resistance; aborting alternative scenarios. Instead of promoting, making visible, and learning from resistance to change, multilateralism and academic research act as resistance to change. The great remaining challenge is to delve deeper into those transformative resistances that point the way to opposing disaster risk creation mechanisms. As already occurred with the inclusion of DRR on the international agenda, the Latin American epistemic community meets the conditions to once again take center stage in the setting around which the post-2030 priority agenda should be configured. This approach must be necessarily articulated beyond DRR, focusing not on adaptation and resilience but on the multiple emerging resistances (Lewis y Kelman, 2012; Wisner y Lavell, 2017).
This article is divided into three sections that address the main pending epistemological dilemmas when addressing the new paradigm of DDR in LAC. It starts with the modus pensandi in which disasters are a social construct, unnatural, and respond to root causes that connect the SDG, CCA, and DRR, under the common underlying factors of vulnerability that explain them. Secondly, it analyses the modus operandi of SDGs 13 and 11, questioning the modes of scientific production and political implementation of CCA (Mills-Novoa and Mikulewicz, 2025; Shah et al., 2025), and confronts the dilemmas and expectations of COP30, to be held in the Amazonian city of Belém. Thirdly, the modus vivendi in the region and in resilient cities is discussed as conflictive cultural spaces, expressions of power and reproduction of vulnerability, to emphasise the invisible structural and everyday resistances. It concludes with some forward-looking reflections, beyond the 2030 Agenda for and according to Latin America.La Agenda 2030 se interpreta como sumatorio de marcos políticos internacionales orientados al desarrollo sostenible, el cambio climático, la reducción de riesgo de desastres (RRD) y la resiliencia urbana, los cuales operan fragmentariamente. La Red de Estudios Sociales en la Prevención de Desastres (La Red), ha configurado una aproximación holística al estudio de los desastres y la práctica de la gestión del riesgo. En el modus pensandi, destaca la necesidad de enfocarse en el riesgo, la vulnerabilidad social, los déficits de desarrollo y los desastres pequeños y cotidianos. En el modus operandi, remarca los niveles locales y de participación comunitaria para comprender cómo la gestión del riesgo se manifiesta sobre el territorio. Se profundiza en la gobernanza territorial por y para Latinoamérica, en la reducción, gestión y creación de riesgo de desastre. Este acercamiento convierte los ODS en factores subyacentes e impulsores del riesgo.
A partir de los ODS 13 y 11, entrelazados como impulsores de riesgo, se identifican formas de resistencia, estructural y cotidiana: epistemológica al fenómeno global de adaptación al cambio climático (ACC); metodológica a las políticas de resiliencia urbana. En ambos casos, se desvía el foco de las vulnerabilidades preexistentes y emergentes, así como la internacionalización, institucionalización y homogeneización de discursos hegemónicos actúan como barreras al cambio. En los marcos internacionales dominantes reforzados por conceptos virales como sostenibilidad, adaptación o resiliencia se ocultan alternativas transformadoras hacia soluciones por y para Latinoamérica. La agencia, conflictividad y poder de resistencia de Latinoamérica, anclado en las experiencias históricas de pertenencia y conocimiento, son soslayadas. El modus vivendi de la región, se silencia, desplazando los marcos de interpretación propios. La imposición y superposición de narrativas foráneas entorpecen la conceptualización y aplicación de las políticas de RRD a la vez que enmascaran y enquistan las formas persistentes de creación de riesgo de desastres (CRD).
El artículo propone una revisión conceptual crítica de la Agenda 2030, desde la RRD y la resiliencia a la CRD y la resistencia. Para la elaboración de este trabajo se ha realizado un análisis temático cualitativo, acotado en los últimos cinco años, tomando en cuenta las contribuciones tras la pandemia y el informe de medio periodo del Marco de Sendai. Se han escudriñado los recientes informes internacionales auspiciados por la ONU, los artículos científicos en revistas especializadas en riesgo de desastres desde el foco latinoamericano, con especial atención a aquellas publicaciones orientadas a la CRD o con referencias explícitas a La Red. Esta selección documental se ha analizado siguiendo la estructura del artículo: primero, se evalúa la comunidad epistémica latinoamericana desde la transversalidad de la RRD; segundo, se analiza el ODS 13 en relación con la COP30 a celebrar en Belém y el ODS 11 como espacios de CRD; tercero, se discute sobre la construcción de múltiples resistencias estructurales y cotidianas; se concluye con la urgencia de incidir, no en la reducción o las resiliencias, sino en las resistencias emergentes frente a la CRD, retornando las viejas y nuevas vulnerabilidades al centro más allá del 2030
The contradiction of the Sustainable Development Goals: growth versus ecology on a finite planet
No full textThere are two sides to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which appear at risk of contradiction. One calls for humanity to achieve harmony with nature and to protect the planet from degradation, with specific targets laid out in Goals 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15. The other calls for continued global economic growth equivalent to 3% per year, as outlined in Goal 8, as a method for achieving human development objectives. The SDGs assume that efficiency improvements will suffice to reconcile the tension between growth and ecological sustainability. This paper draws on empirical data to test whether this assumption is valid, paying particular attention to two key ecological indicators: resource use and CO2 emissions. The results show that global growth of 3% per year renders it empirically infeasible to achieve (a) any reductions in aggregate global resource use and (b) reductions in CO2 emissions rapid enough to stay within the carbon budget for 2°C. In other words, Goal 8 violates the sustainability objectives of the SDGs. The paper proposes specific changes to SDG targets in order to resolve this issue, such as removing the requirement of aggregate global growth and introducing quantified objectives for resource use per capita with substantial reductions in high‐income nations. Scaling down resource use is also the most feasible way to achieve the climate target, as it reduces energy demand. The paper presents alternative pathways for realizing human development objectives that rely on reducing inequality—both within nations and between them—rather than aggregate growth.Los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) tienen dos caras que parecen estar en riesgo de contradicción. Una exige que la humanidad alcance la armonía con la naturaleza y proteja el planeta de la degradación, con metas específicas establecidas en los Objetivos 6, 12, 13, 14 y 15. La otra exige un crecimiento económico mundial continuo equivalente al 3% anual, como se describe en el Objetivo 8, como método para alcanzar los objetivos de desarrollo humano. Los ODS presuponen que las mejoras en la eficiencia serán suficientes para reconciliar la tensión entre el crecimiento y la sostenibilidad ecológica. Este documento se basa en datos empíricos para comprobar si esta suposición es válida, prestando especial atención a dos indicadores ecológicos clave: el uso de recursos y las emisiones de CO2. Los resultados muestran que un crecimiento mundial del 3% anual hace empíricamente inviable lograr (a) cualquier reducción en el uso agregado de recursos globales y (b) reducciones en las emisiones de CO2 lo suficientemente rápidas como para mantenerse dentro del presupuesto de carbono para 2°C. En otras palabras, el Objetivo 8 atenta contra los objetivos de sostenibilidad de los ODS. El documento propone cambios específicos en las metas de los ODS para resolver este problema, como la eliminación del requisito del crecimiento global agregado y la introducción de objetivos cuantificados para el uso de recursos per cápita, con reducciones sustanciales en los países de altos ingresos. Reducir el uso de recursos es también la forma más viable de alcanzar el objetivo climático, ya que reduce la demanda energética. El documento presenta vías alternativas para alcanzar los objetivos de desarrollo humano que se basan en la reducción de la desigualdad, tanto dentro de las naciones como entre ellas, en lugar del crecimiento agregado
Navigating Between the Nation-State and Empire: The Resilience of the Moroccan regime in its relations with the Diaspora
No full textEste artículo aborda el análisis de las políticas de diáspora de Marruecos en relación con la construcción del Estado y con el desarrollo de las comunidades en diáspora. Apoyada sobre el marco conceptual del Estado-nación y el Estado imperio como dos dimensiones presentes en la forma de gobernar en Marruecos, la hipótesis que guía este trabajo sostiene que la diáspora y la dependencia estructural que tiene el Estado de sus poblaciones expatriadas activan y refuerzan la dimensión imperial del Estado. A través del análisis de las políticas de diáspora en perspectiva histórica y de los cambios implementados y anunciados en los últimos años, el objetivo de este artículo es acceder a un conocimiento más profundo sobre el funcionamiento del Estado en Marruecos.This article examines Morocco’s diaspora policies in relation to state-building and the development of diaspora communities. Drawing on the conceptual framework of the nation-state and the empire as two coexisting dimensions of Morocco’s governance, the central hypothesis advanced here is that the diaspora —and the structural of the state on its expatriate populations— activates and reinforces the imperial dimension of the state. By examining diaspora policies from a historical perspective, as well as the reforms implemented and announced in recent years, this article seeks to provide deeper insight into the functioning of the Moroccan state