Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Política & Sociedade (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49 |
Resumo: | In the past two decades an evident dichotomy has been established between policies of a productive nature and those aimed at social assistance for family farms in Brazil. The purpose of this article is to analyze this duality in the main public policies for family farming, and presents a quantitative overview of the results. From a methodological perspective the analysis was based on the number of farmers who benefit from the agrarian reform policies, rural credit, institutional food markets, rural social security and income transfer. The main results of this study indicate that the economic support for the productive activities of Brazilian family farming have been concentrated among the intermediary and well-established farms that are inserted in markets. In parallel, most family farmers are relegated to social assistance programs and not integrated to the working agendas of the main professional organizations in agriculture. |
id |
UFSC-18_514abf2227c3637e01414a37fb8633df |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/49347 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-18 |
network_name_str |
Política & Sociedade (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and socialPolíticas públicas de desenvolvimento rural no Brasil: o dilema entre inclusão produtiva e assistência socialIn the past two decades an evident dichotomy has been established between policies of a productive nature and those aimed at social assistance for family farms in Brazil. The purpose of this article is to analyze this duality in the main public policies for family farming, and presents a quantitative overview of the results. From a methodological perspective the analysis was based on the number of farmers who benefit from the agrarian reform policies, rural credit, institutional food markets, rural social security and income transfer. The main results of this study indicate that the economic support for the productive activities of Brazilian family farming have been concentrated among the intermediary and well-established farms that are inserted in markets. In parallel, most family farmers are relegated to social assistance programs and not integrated to the working agendas of the main professional organizations in agriculture.Nas duas últimas décadas, estabeleceu-se uma evidente dicotomia entre as políticas de caráterprodutivo e aquelas destinadas à assistência social das unidades agrícolas familiares no Brasil.Este artigo tem por objetivo analisar esse processo de dualização das principais políticas públicas destinadas à agricultura familiar, elaborando um panorama quantitativo dos seus resultados. Do ponto de vista metodológico, a análise se apoia sobre o número de agricultores beneficiados pelas políticas de reforma agrária, crédito rural, mercados institucionais de alimentos, previdência social rural e transferência de renda. Os principais resultados deste estudo indicam que o apoio econômico para as atividades produtivas da agricultura familiar brasileira tem se concentrado nas camadas intermediárias e consolidadas inseridas nos mercados. Em paralelo, a maior parte dos agricultores familiares é relegada ao assistencialismo social, não integrando as agendas de trabalho das principais organizações profissionais agrícolas.Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)2016-10-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p4910.5007/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49Política & Sociedade; Vol. 15 (2016); 49 – 79Política & Sociedade; Vol. 15 (2016); 49 – 79Política & Sociedade; v. 15 (2016); 49 – 792175-79841677-4140reponame:Política & Sociedade (Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49/33797Copyright (c) 2017 Política & Sociedadeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCazella, Ademir AntonioCapellesso, Adinor JoséMedeiros, MoniqueTecchio, AndréiaSencébé, YannickBúrigo, Fábio Luiz2020-01-21T12:03:31Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/49347Revistahttp://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politicaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/oai||ernesto.seidl@ufsc.br|| ps@cfh.ufsc.br2175-79841677-4140opendoar:2020-01-21T12:03:31Política & Sociedade (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social Políticas públicas de desenvolvimento rural no Brasil: o dilema entre inclusão produtiva e assistência social |
title |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
spellingShingle |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social Cazella, Ademir Antonio |
title_short |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
title_full |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
title_fullStr |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
title_full_unstemmed |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
title_sort |
Rural Development Policy in Brazil: the dilemma between productive inclusion and social |
author |
Cazella, Ademir Antonio |
author_facet |
Cazella, Ademir Antonio Capellesso, Adinor José Medeiros, Monique Tecchio, Andréia Sencébé, Yannick Búrigo, Fábio Luiz |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Capellesso, Adinor José Medeiros, Monique Tecchio, Andréia Sencébé, Yannick Búrigo, Fábio Luiz |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Cazella, Ademir Antonio Capellesso, Adinor José Medeiros, Monique Tecchio, Andréia Sencébé, Yannick Búrigo, Fábio Luiz |
description |
In the past two decades an evident dichotomy has been established between policies of a productive nature and those aimed at social assistance for family farms in Brazil. The purpose of this article is to analyze this duality in the main public policies for family farming, and presents a quantitative overview of the results. From a methodological perspective the analysis was based on the number of farmers who benefit from the agrarian reform policies, rural credit, institutional food markets, rural social security and income transfer. The main results of this study indicate that the economic support for the productive activities of Brazilian family farming have been concentrated among the intermediary and well-established farms that are inserted in markets. In parallel, most family farmers are relegated to social assistance programs and not integrated to the working agendas of the main professional organizations in agriculture. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-10-14 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49 10.5007/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5007/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/politica/article/view/2175-7984.2016v15nesp1p49/33797 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Política & Sociedade info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Política & Sociedade |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Política & Sociedade; Vol. 15 (2016); 49 – 79 Política & Sociedade; Vol. 15 (2016); 49 – 79 Política & Sociedade; v. 15 (2016); 49 – 79 2175-7984 1677-4140 reponame:Política & Sociedade (Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Política & Sociedade (Online) |
collection |
Política & Sociedade (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Política & Sociedade (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||ernesto.seidl@ufsc.br|| ps@cfh.ufsc.br |
_version_ |
1789435205395677184 |