This article examines human development in Latin America by integrating historical genealogy, epistemological debates, and applied intervention frameworks within a critical research design. Drawing on mixed methods, it analyzes how structural inequalities, health disparities, and governance models shape opportunities for well-being. Interviews with key informants and documentary analysis reveal contradictions between institutional policies and lived experiences. The findings contribute to the debate on the epistemology of human development and offer new insights for regional interventions that align social justice, health, and sustainability agendas.

The objective of this study is to explore the conceptual genealogy, epistemological foundations, and applied interventions of human development in the Latin American context, with particular emphasis on health and social well- being (Sen, 1999). The genealogy of the concept demonstrates a transition from economic determinism to a multidimensional approach emphasizing education, health, and capabilities (Nussbaum, 2011). Within this shift, the epistemology of human development in Latin America has engaged with dependency theory, liberation philosophy, and critical social sciences, seeking to transcend reductionist models based solely on economic growth (Escobar, 2015).

The regional context underscores persistent inequalities, limited access to medical care, and fragile governance structures, factors that hinder the expansion of individual and collective capacities (CEPAL, 2022). Antecedents of research in this field reveal a gap between macroeconomic policies and micro-level outcomes, particularly regarding access to health services and equity (Kliksberg, 2007). This problematization suggests that despite advances in democratic governance, Latin America continues to face structural challenges that directly affect human development indicators (Ocampo, 2020).

The state of the art indicates that although human development has been studied extensively, most analyses emphasize global perspectives, leaving the Latin American context underexplored in terms of epistemological innovation and applied models (Bebbington, 2019). From this standpoint, the study is guided by the following research question: How do governance practices and health disparities influence the epistemological understanding and intervention strategies of human development in Latin

America? The hypothesis states that governance structures mediated by inequality significantly restrict the impact of human development policies, creating a gap between official indicators and lived experiences (Fukuda-Parr, 2003). The proposed intervention focuses on strengthening governance through participatory approaches that align health, equity, and sustainability objectives.

The research design is based on a mixed-methods approach, combining documentary analysis with semi-structured interviews with key informants to triangulate findings (Denzin, 2012). The ethical dimension adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, ensuring informed consent, confidentiality, and respect for the autonomy of participants (World Medical Association, 2019). The critical path of the study included three phases: literature review, fieldwork, and interpretative analysis. Informants included health professionals, community leaders, and policy actors, ensuring a diverse perspective on human development challenges (Maxwell, 2013).

The model adopted integrates Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach with governance and health equity frameworks, enabling a multidimensional perspective (Robeyns, 2017). Analytical categories included inequality, governance, access to health, and epistemological frameworks. Triangulation was performed through convergence of sources, comparing documentary analysis with interview extracts and field observations (Flick, 2018). This process ensured validity and reliability while acknowledging the complexity of Latin American contexts.

Table 1: contrasts observations derived from policy documents with extracts from interviews with key

informants. These findings illustrate discrepancies between institutional discourses of human development and the realities faced by marginalized communities.

These findings show that while policy documents highlight progress in reducing poverty and expanding healthcare, informants emphasize the persistence of structural inequities, limited participation, and insufficient recognition of local epistemologies.

The results indicate a significant dissonance between official discourses and lived experiences, consistent with previous research demonstrating the persistence of inequality despite targeted interventions (Lustig, 2020). Studies on health disparities in Latin America similarly reveal that universal coverage policies often mask deep inequalities in access and quality of services (Gwatkin, 2017). Our findings corroborate this evidence, as community leaders and health professionals stress that coverage is not synonymous with effective access.

Comparisons with international literature highlight the specificity of Latin American contexts, where governance deficits amplify the gap between development policies and their outcomes (Grugel & Riggirozzi, 2018). Unlike other regions, epistemological debates in Latin America emphasize collective rights, indigenous perspectives, and postcolonial critiques, which remain largely absent in global indices such as the Human Development Index (Escobar, 2015). Thus, the study contributes by integrating these critical epistemologies into discussions of health and governance.

The scope of this study lies in its integration of genealogy, epistemology, and empirical evidence, offering a multidimensional understanding of human development in Latin America. A key contribution is the demonstration that governance and health disparities are not peripheral issues but central determinants of well-being. The limitations of the study include its reliance on a limited sample of informants and the focus on specific national contexts, which may restrict generalizability. Future research should expand comparative approaches and deepen analysis of community-based interventions. The recommendations derived from this study call for policies that transcend economic indicators, strengthen participatory governance, and promote health equity as a central pillar of human development.