Barter market and food security in the Acora and Ilave districts of Puno-Peru: Period 2015-2017
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26867/se.2022.v11i1.126Keywords:
barter, exchange, giving and receiving, equivalence of products, agricultural campaignAbstract
Some families located in poor sectors do not have sufficient monetary resources for survival, therefore, bartering has been practiced since ancient times and continues to be practiced as a way of giving and receiving some good or service that they lack; exchange one object for another out of necessity without the intervention of money. Therefore, this study sought to show how bartering is practiced more frequently as a means of subsistence to poverty to cover the unsatisfied demand, basically for food. The methodological procedure consisted in the application of a survey to the families that barter in the districts of Acora and Ilave, between the months of December 2015 to December 2017 in times of agricultural campaign; the information collected was processed with SPSS. The results show that barter is fully valid for the exchange of available objects with other goods required to guarantee food security in which money does not intervene. Process that is also called a swap, give what is yours (property) to receive other goods equivalent to the good given. In ancient times, the exchange of raw materials for crafts or food products was used more. The advantage was that a stock of products was maintained to promote other marketing channels. It is concluded that despite the persistence of bartering with favorable results, it was not always possible to find the other goods sought, as well as the equivalence of the goods, they do not always calculate the real value of the good in question of being exchanged, of which there is a risk to lose value.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Alberti, G., & Mayer, E. (1974). reciprocidad e intercambio en los andes peruanos. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima Perú
D’Amico, V. (2015). De la pobreza a la desigualdad. Discursos internacionales, efectos nacionales. Latinoamérica. Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos, 61, 237–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.larev.2015.12.010
Elahi, E., Weijun, C., Zhang, H., & Nazeer, M. (2019). Agricultural intensification and damages to human health in relation to agrochemicals: Application of artificial intelligence. Land Use Policy, 83, 461–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2019.02.023
FAO. (2016). Contribución de la pesca artesanal a la seguridad alimentaria, el empleo rural y el ingreso familiaren países de América del Sur. (Oficial Su). http://www.fao.org/3/b-i5768s.pdf
Fujishige, S., & Yang, Z. (2022). Barter markets, indivisibilities, and Markovian core. Bulletin of Economic Research, 74(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/boer.12279
Gajardo Falcón, J. (2005). Pueblos indígenas: sus bosques, sus luchas, sus derechos. In EUNOMÍA. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad (Vol. 0, Issue 0). Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques Tropicales. https://doi.org/10.20318/eunomia.2016.2824
Gligo, N., Alonso, G., Barkin, D., Brailovsky, A., Brzović, F., Carrizosa, J., Durán, H., . . . Villamil, J. (2020). La tragedia ambiental de América Latina y del Caribe. https://www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/46101-la-tragedia-ambiental-america-latina-caribe
Gómez, O. (2017). Los costos y procesos de producción, opción estratégica de productividad y competitividad en la industria de confecciones infantiles de Bucaramanga. Escuela de Administración de Negocios EAN,70, 167–180. https://bit.ly/3Ebcoou
Hendrickson, M. K., Massengale, S. H., & Cantrell, R. (2020). “No money exchanged hands, nobartering took place. But it’s still local produce”: Understanding local food systems in rural areas in the U.S. Heartland. Journal of Rural Studies, 78(September 2019), 480–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.07.005
Martinez, J. (2015). Ecología política del extractivismo y justicia socio-ambiental. INTER disciplina, 7,57–73.
Mauss, M. (2009). El ensayo del don. In Ensayo sobre el don. Forma y función del intercambio en las sociedades arcaicas. Katz Editores. http://mastor.cl/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MAUSS-Marcel-Ensayo-sobre-el-don-1924.pdf
Orlove, B. (1986). Barter and Cash Sale on Lake Titicaca: Barter and Cash Sale on Lake Titicaca: A Test of Competing Approaches. Current Anthropology, 27(2), 85–106. http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/ORLOVE/New Publications/1986Currrent Anthropol-ogy.pdf
Orlove, B. (2010). Ventas y trueques en el lago Titicaca: Un test para perspectivas alternativas. In H. M. Velasco (Ed.), Lecturas de antropología social y cultural (UNED, pp. 307–358). Cuadernos de Antropologìa. https://elibro.net/es/ereader/ister/34308
Programa Mundial de Alimentos, P. (2007). Señas ancestrales como indicadores biológicos de alerta temprana. In WFP-PMA. https://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/liaison_offices/wfp205219.pdf
Radetzki, M. (2021). Review of “Javier Blas and Jack Farchy, The World for Sale, Money, Power and the Traders who Barter the Earth’s Resources, Random House, 2021. 410 pages, £14.99.” Resources Policy,72, 102113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102113
Reyes, H. A. (2016). Dar, recibir y devolver: el reconocimiento del don entre los chaa tatna y los chaa tasi dela Mixteca Alt. Cuicuilco, 23(65), 101–116.
Saguin, K. (2018). Why the poor do not benefit from community-driven development: Lessons from participatory budgeting. World Development, 112, 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.009
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Luis Huarachi-Coila
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.