Comparación de los enfoques en el abordaje de la inclusión social de la población recicladora en los planes distritales de desarrollo“Bogotá Humana 2012 – 2016” y “Bogotá Mejor para todos 2016 – 2020”

Abstract

During the last decade, the workers who recycling have demanded to the public administration of Bogotá, the recognition of their work and for this, they have used different legal tools that exist in the country, that is how in 2002 an action of Tutela interposed by them, gives origin to Sentencia T-724, which specifies the need to take into account this population, when it comes to contracting processes of public cleaning services for the city, because the activity they develop is linked to this service. This determination marks the beginning of a process of inclusion and recognition of its work by the state and citizens, but several factors have been found that have adversely affected the achievement of this objective, such as difficulties in the formalization of this activity, the logistical conditions during the provision of the service, the conditions of associativity of the recycling population and the continuity of the actions proposed through the different district administrations. This last aspect is of vital importance in the analysis presented in this document, since during the administration between 2012 and 2016, "Bogotá Humana", the affirmative actions required by the constitutional court were carried out, which resulted in the inclusion of recyclers as one of the providers of the public cleaning service, however, the current district administration with the development Plan "Bogota Best for All" (2016-2020), modified this provision. In view of these changes in regulations, the need to compare both approaches on the role of the recycler in the provision of the service for the city was identified, allowing the identification of advances and setbacks in its inclusion process, for three main aspects related to the development plan: the commensurability of the expected results and impacts, the formulation for the continuity of actions and the importance of articulation with the interests of the community. In conclusion, there is evidence of a lack of clear goals and indicators in the 2016-2020 development plan compared to its predecessor.