Introductory Remarks. CLAIP in the Face of the Challenges of Peace and Security in the 21st Century

  • Úrsula Oswald Spring
  • Serena Eréndira Serrano Oswald
Part of the The Anthropocene: Politik—Economics—Society—Science book series (APESS, volume 24)


Forty years after its foundation in Oaxtepec, Morelos, Mexico, the Latin American Peace Research Council (CLAIP) has witnessed a deep transformation in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). During the Eighties, the military regimes gradually gave way to democratically elected governments. However, the elites that had initially supported military coups adapted to emerging social and political conditions and kept their economic control in the majority of the countries in LAC. Thus, LAC is still the most unequal region in the world, even if wealth in other regions that opened up to the neoliberal model has also been concentrated into a few hands (USA, China, Russia, and South Korea).


  1. Calveiro, Pilar (2012). Violencias de Estado, la guerra antiterrorista y la guerra contra el crimen como medios de control global, Mexico, D.F., Siglo XXI editores.Google Scholar
  2. CEPAL (2015). Panorama Social de América Latina 2015, Santiago, CEPAL.Google Scholar
  3. CEPAL (2016a). Panorama Social de América Latina 2016, Santiago, CEPAL.Google Scholar
  4. CEPAL (2016b). XII Conferencia Regional sobre la Mujer en América Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, CEPAL.Google Scholar
  5. CEPAL (2017). Informe anual sobre el progreso y los desafíos regionales de la agenda 2030 para el desarrollo sostenible en América Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Cepal.Google Scholar
  6. Composto, Claudia; Mina Lorena Navarro (2014). “Claves de lectura para comprender el despojo y las luchas por los bienes comunes naturales en América Latina”, in Claudia Composto, Mina Lorena Navarro (Eds.), Territorios en disputa. Despojo capitalista, luchas en defensa de los bienes comunes naturales y alternativas emancipatorias para América Latina, Mexico, D.F., Bajo Tierra Ediciones, pp. 33–75.Google Scholar
  7. Díaz Vázquez, Julio A. (2015). “Cuba: actualización del modelo económico y social”; at:
  8. Latour, Bruno (2013). “Facing Gaia: Six lectures on the political theology of nature”; at:
  9. Le Clercq, Juan Antonio; Gerardo Rodríguez Sánchez Lara (2016). Índice Global de Impunidad México 2016 (IGI-MEX 2016), Puebla, UDLAP.Google Scholar
  10. Melucci, Alberto (1996). “The Process of Collective Identity”, in Hank Johnston, Bert Klandermans (Eds.), Social Movements and Culture. Social Movements, Protest and Contention, Vol. 4, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press;
  11. Ostrom, Elinor (2009). “Governing the Commons”. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Bayreuth, Seminar on Political Ecology, University of Bayreuth.Google Scholar
  12. Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2002). El malestar en la globalización, Madrid, Taurus Pensamiento.Google Scholar
  13. Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2007). Globalisation and its Discontent, New York-London, W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  14. Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2010). Freefall. America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy, New York-London, W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  15. Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2016). The Great Divide. Unequal societies and what we can do about them, New York-London, W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  16. van Dijk, Teun (2016). “Cómo el Globo manipuló la destitución de Dilma Rousseff”; at:
  17. Wallerstein, Immanuel (2011). El moderno sistema mundial: La agricultura capitalista y los orígenes de la economía-mundo europea en el siglo XVI, Vol. 1, Mexico, D.F., Siglo XXI eds.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Úrsula Oswald Spring
    • 1
  • Serena Eréndira Serrano Oswald
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Regional Multidisiciplinary Research (CRIM)National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)Mexico CityMexico

Personalised recommendations