Search

This paper aims to analyze the theoretical-conceptual assumptions concerning cultural heritage and its link with Latin American cultural identity. To achieve this goal, we reflect on cultural heritage as a material, tangible and intangible asset of humanity, whose value is not obtained in a utilitarian way, but through its connection with the ancestral legacy and with social identification towards it. On the other hand, it points out the importance of the ownership and conservation of heritage buildings, which is why cultural management is essential, whose purpose is to summon the citizenry, the State and private entities to respect and value heritage, assuming a responsible, sustainable and sustained attitude towards emblematic historic buildings in Latin America, which have been victims of human intervention, violence, and various natural disasters. Finally, by understanding that adequate care and understanding of the historical, social and philosophical relevance of historical heritage buildings would improve not only the material conditions of the buildings, but also the citizen's conception of their identity and the role they play. as a mechanism of resistance to the changes sponsored by globalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the fundamental axes that currently converge for the needs of nature and humanity. The philosophical statements contained in this reflection become valid when it comes to articulating ethical codes with the advancement of science and, at the same time, educating through an axiological system that leads to sustainable human development. In this order of ideas, it is pointed out how Western progress has led to catastrophic events for life on the planet, coupled with the excessive use of science, without any ethical criteria to regulate their actions. However, as a result of the moral reflection of recent times, of the voices of various social groups, scientific improvements have been questioned and directed towards the production of knowledge that allows human activity to be deployed positively on nature and on society, taking into account that, to make this possible, it is necessary to combine ethics, science and education, to walk towards progress in terms of sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and the proposal for sustainable development. By virtue of this, the article focuses on three aspects: 1) the theoretical conceptualization of sustainable development, which arises from the demands of a society plagued by environmental deterioration, which demanded forceful actions to stop the adverse effects of industrialization. In response, the World Conservation Union, the Brundtland Report (CMMAD, 1987), Agenda 21 (Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992), and the World Summit in Johannesburg in 2002, helped shape the definition of sustainable development managed so far. 2) The proposal for Corporate Social Responsibility, which has antecedents in the 19th century, but it is not until the 20th century, along with the advances in sustainable development, that it enters the academic and managerial scene, postulating a new vision of the company, with social relevance, adapting to the demands of a more conscious society, without losing sight of the need for sustainable production and growth. 3) Corporate Social Responsibility in interrelation with the objectives of sustainable development, representing the opportunity to materialize the responsibility of companies with the environment and the community. It concludes on the importance of awareness regarding globalization and its adverse effects on life on the planet, as well as the need for companies to act responsibly in the face of this phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims the viability of building an ecological citizenship, understood as a response to the environmental crisis, a product of the advance of symbols of the instrumental rationality of modernity. The confluence of diverse theoretical, cultural, educational, philosophical and social movements gave rise to the emergence of a political ecology, which was built on the utilitarian foundations established by Western logos, while allowing a holistic, complex and heterogeneous understanding of relationality man/naturalness. However, the environmental problem was not resolved with the political emergence of ecology; it required entering into sustainable development, with the presence of an ecological citizenry, whose fines are placed on the responsibility and active role of the citizen in favor of the environment, to the communities in the processes of transformation of society. However, to consolidate this proposal, it cannot be achieved without environmental education, thought, in the bureaucratic terms of the academy, as a life training, which must be carried out from birth to death, promoting axiological training and a culture sustained, fair and sustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This papers aims to analyze the discourse of sustainable development as opposed to that proposed by Eurocentric modernity. For this, the work is based on four fundamental aspects: 1. It presents the most relevant characteristics of Western modernity, which have clear imperial, colonial, xenophobic and exclusive connotations, which manifest the intention of erecting a monolithic, monocultural civilization based on in the omnipotence of reason. 2. It points out how capitalism and anthropocentrism to the expansion of the western civilizing model, having serious consequences in the deterioration of life on the planet. 3. It shows that, given the accelerated advance of westernization and planetary deterioration, the discourse of sustainable development is given rise, supported by the documents of the World Conservation Union (1980), the Brundtland Report (CMMAD, 1987), the Summit of the Earth in Rio de Janeiro (1992), the World Summit in Johannesburg (2002), among others, which have clear biocentric and ecological connotations, giving recognition to the intrinsic value of nature, denied by modern anthropocentrism. 4. Finally, it raises the need to decolonize sustainable development, recognize the voices silenced and forgotten by modernity, and open the dialogue of knowledge, the recognition of spirituality and ancestral memory, as necessary paths to advance towards the construction of a different world and different imaginary. The article is developed through documentary research; it does not pretend to be conclusive, but to serve as a reflection on this already broad discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]