No abstract

En el presente trabajo se analiza el proceso de configuración territorial de Mendoza, Argentina, representativo de otros pertenecientes a tierras secas de América Latina, en el marco de la concepción de las "nuevas periferias" asociadas a la reestructuración de las economías. La fragmentación territorial actual sería el producto de una misma lógica que, mientras concentra recursos, población y poder en una pequeña porción del territorio -los oasis irrigados-, lo hace a costa del despojo o agotamiento de recursos y grupos sociales minoritarios de los espacios desérticos. Éstos no tienen cabida en el imaginario local, no forman parte de la identidad de su sociedad y constituyen verdaderos "espacios invisibles" que se integran al modelo desde su subordinación, su vulnerabilidad, y se aproximan progresivamente a la exclusión.

Climate change will increasingly impact large areas of South America, affecting important natural resources and people's livelihoods. These impacts will make rural people disproportionately more vulnerable, given their dependency on ecosystem services and their exposure to other stressors, such as new rules imposed by agribusiness and trends toward the commodification of natural resources. This paper focuses on the vulnerability of rural communities in Andean drylands of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, showing how different economic and political pathways lead to different levels of vulnerability. The paper begins with a brief discussion of the methodological and theoretical concept of vulnerability, which framed the research. Starting from the premise that global environmental change impacts are strongly linked to styles of development, the discussion explores the diverse institutional capital and governance schemes as well as different development styles in the case studies and their role in increasing or reducing local vulnerability to climate and water scarcity. Using a comparative perspective, the exposures and adaptive capacities of rural actors in three river basins are discussed, emphasizing situations that speak for the ways in which development styles counteract or magnify conditions of vulnerability. The analysis considers irrigated and non-irrigated agriculture, water property interests, different productive structures (viticulture, horticulture, etc.), producer typologies (large/small, export, etc.), and geographical location. Finally, the paper offers some insights about development style and adaptive capacities of rural people to overcome those vulnerabilities.

Central Andes region locator map and Maipo River Basin.Central Andes region locator map; Elqui, Maipo, and Mendoza River Basins.

Climate change in many local and regional scales is expected to include climate hazards and extreme conditions including hailstorms, droughts, floods, hurricanes, hail, tornadoes and storms. Droughts are serious climate hazards threatening water supply for human consumption and also agricultural production and are anticipated to increase in intensity and duration in both Mendoza, Argentina and southern Alberta, Canada.Both Mendoza and Alberta have irrigated agriculture and their rivers are fed primarily by snowmelt and rainfall runoff from mountainous headwaters. Many similarities exist between water law and governance in the Mendoza river basin, Argentina and the Oldman river basin in southern Alberta, Canada. However, many differences also exist. Can these governance systems ensure the continuation of agricultural production in the area into the future given increased development and climate change?Utilizing the institutional design principles of adaptive capacity and water governance, this paper will compare and contrast the water governance institutional structures in the two study areas. Data was obtained from two multi-disciplinary studies of institutional adaptation to climate change studying vulnerability of local agricultural producers and communities to climate change, and the interplay of water governance structures, and adaptive capacities. The water governance systems of both countries show concerns relating to gaps in information and equitable outcomes; in addition there are concerns of a lack of capacity to enable reflexivity. Both systems have been responsive (although there is room for improvement). Through strengthening these identified weaknesses these systems can continue to be resilient into the future.