Figure 3 - uploaded by Jeremy Heald
Content may be subject to copyright.

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
O artigo busca destacar algumas tentativas de flexibilização do tripé macroeconômico de 2003-2015, com ênfase nas questões fiscais e sua relação com a taxa de juros e taxas de cambio. A dificuldade de implementar uma política alternativa é contrastada com a avaliação de que as politicas de ajuste aumentam a desigualdade e revertem as tendências de...

Citations

... Solidarity economy: A social development paradigm prevalent in Mexico and throughout Latin America is Economia Solidaria or Social defined as "A collection of agents which organize themselves in cooperative associations and foundations, in which the general interest takes priority over individual interests, and decision-making is participative" (Zona, 2017). Accordingly, several "Capitals" are combined such as social capital (social fabric), human capital (above all capabilities, skills and health), physical capital (productive assets, including biological ones), among others, to enable community-based "Productive projects" in rural areas or poor neighborhoods of towns (Heald, 2012, Website of Economia Solidaria, 2017. Training concentrates on fortifying community solidarity groups, which can be a foundation for "Productive projects", but it is insufficient if it omits the formulating of a business model centered on the needs of potential clients with a marketing strategy or overlooks the budgeting of inputs bought from outside the community. ...
... The Economia Solidarity approach is a consequence of the rural or social development background of rural development fieldworkers, but it can lead to dilemmas such as the depletion of animal stocks due to a lack of husbandry skills or the high costs of veterinary services, and the accumulation of craft product stocks which producers cannot sell for want of a marketing strategy. "Productive projects" can lose their direction after an initial wave of enthusiasm, with part of the support package ending up in the hands of suppliers rather than as a benefit for the community (Heald, 2012). The Solidarity Economy model can perhaps circumvent these problems by adopting the business model tools described in Best Practice-Instruments which are widely used in the social enterprise approach (refer to Best Practice-Social Entrepreneurship). ...
Article
Full-text available
The operation of numerous entrepreneurship programs in Mexico underlines that it has become a major, albeit fragmented, public policy. The article analyses a poverty-alleviation-through-entrepreneurship program in the State of Guanajuato and asks: Who should entrepreneurship programs support: the poorest or the most prepared among them? With what support packages and for which type of projects? An initial case study evaluation via a questionnaire applied to beneficiaries widened to an analysis of national entrepreneurship policy and a literature survey of international best practice. It found that in allowing self-selection, the program missed its vulnerable target population in marginalized communities and assisted less poor but more educated young adults in towns. However, it got lucky, because although the program only included funding, highly motivated, capable beneficiaries established modestly viable projects at low per-project cost to the authorities. So where public sector departmental resources are scarce and spread across programs and municipalities, such interventions can enable relatively poor but well-educated beneficiaries, in different sectors and stages of start-up, to self-select into a program which includes an initial project design procedure and a monitoring help-line to tackle evolving problems with externally contracted coaches. But if the objective is to support vulnerable beneficiary profiles or technology-based innovations, programs will need to delegate beneficiary selection, training and mentoring to specialized partners at much higher per-project cost. Generalizing from this experience, governments need to make a very conscious initial choice between two approaches for their entrepreneurship programs: 1) The minimalist in-house cash-only program which, via an initial project design process, selects educated, albeit poor beneficiaries to reap quicker, broader but shallower impacts and 2) The resource-intensive, integrated program with external partners, implementing genuine targeting to achieve significant if smaller-scale reductions of extreme poverty or economic development through innovation, depending on the program orientation and objectives.