Public Policy Programs for Family Farming and Local Development

Transcription

1 Public Policy Programs for Family Farming and Local Development Regina Aparecida Leite de Camargo UNESP, José Giacomo Baccarin UNESP, João Paulo Galvão Travassos Souza UNESP, Denise Boito Pereira da Silva UNESP, Abstract The country s concentrated agrarian structure may be pointed as one of the factors that led to family farming in Brazil being delegated to a second place in the national agricultural policy scenario. But since the middle of the 1990 s a set of new public policy programs designed for the different categories of producers that can fit under the general denomination of family farmer, pointed to the intrinsic relationship between family farming production, food security and local development. The state support reaches these producers via two main instruments - the subsidized rural credit and the purchase of production by institutional markets. The Food Acquisition Program (PAA) was launched in 2003 as one of the initiatives of the larger "Zero Hunger Program" and the National Program for School Food (PNAE), launched in 2009, includes a law that determinates that at least 30% of the federal funds for public school food should be spent purchasing products from family farmers, preferably from the same municipality. Both programs have the potential to stimulate and strengthen local family farming, promote a sustainable rural development and bridge the needs of producers and local consumers. The paper analyses the conduction and results of the PAA and PNAE in the state of São Paulo. After five years of research on the subject it is possible to discuss the impact of these Programs on the local economy, the difficulties felt by farmers and administrators and the elements that facilitate or hinder the turning into reality of some of the Programs objectives, particularly the promotion of local development. The presentation of two study cases will support the arguments. Key words: Institutional Markets, Food Security,

2 INTRODUCTION Brazil has two ministries responsible for rural affairs - the Ministry of Agrarian Development (MDA) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA). This unusual arrangement can be explained by the way land was distributed and occupied in Brazil since its colonial time. From the very beginning the country s major agriculture activity was direct to the production of commodities for export and the population need for food relegated to the properties or producers that did not fit the molds of large property establishment. Despite the innumerous plans for an agrarian reform and the few initiatives of land distribution through the establishment of settlement areas, the majority of producers that have the family labour as the base of their system of production remained unattended by the major agriculture policies till the 1990s. The country managed to modernize its agriculture and increase production leaving intact its concentrated agrarian structure. The present existence of two ministries indicates the later recognition of family farmers as a category that demands a specific set of public policies programs. The importance of the family sector in the agriculture scenario became self evident when the results of the last agricultural census, conducted in 1996, was published. The census took place after the publication of the Law /2006, which defined the condition a farmer needs to meet to be considered a family farmer. For the first time it was possible to know the number of family farmers in each municipality and their participation in the local and national food production. The year of 1996 marks also the creation of a national policy program aimed to support family farmers. The National Program to Strengthen Family Farming (PRONAF) has its major pillar in the different lines of credit to meet the many profiles and needs of these producers. Although the subsidized Rural Credit in Brazil dates from 1965, only thirty year later a special version of this major policy was created to attend the needs of the less privileged and capitalized group of producers. Prior to PRONAF, another credit program, the National Credit Program for Agrarian Reform (PROCERA), born in 1985, benefited the settlers in reformed areas. Although important for the further creation of PRONAF, the PROCERA was specifically for the few beneficiaries of initiatives in land distribution. Latter the PROCERA became one of the credit lines of PRONAF. It was also around the end of the 80s that the term family farming became current in Brazil replacing terminologies such as small farmer/producer, low income/producer or sub existence farmer. For Schneider (2009) a number of factors contributed for the adoption of a word less derogatory: the demands coming from the social movements such as the rural unionism of the National Confederation of Workers in Agriculture (CONTAG), that had adopted the term "family farm" as a political category that touched a broad base of actors such as small landowners, settlers, tenants, farmers integrated in agribusiness chains, among others, that could no longer be identified generically as rural workers or as small producers; the academic thinking, although the academy, influenced by a Marxist interpretations of classic agrarian question, was slow to incorporate the existence, in Brazil, of a family farming in the molds found in advanced countries influenced by a Marxist interpretations of classic agrarian

3 question; or even the signing of the Treaty of Asuncion in 1991, which would enlarge the economic and trade integration between the countries of the Southern Cone. In the years 2000 two other programs would became a reference in public policies for family farming. In 2003 was launched The Food Acquisition Program (PAA) as one of the initiatives of the larger "Zero Hunger Program" and in 2009 the National Program for School Food (PNAE), included a law that determinate that at least 30% of the federal funds for public school food should be spent purchasing products from family farmers, preferably from the same municipality. Both programs have the potential to enlarge the range of market options for family farmers, including the institutional markets. They also innovate in proposing an inter-ministerial action in planning, budgeting and implementing the programs. Certainly the problems that afflict the less favoured sector of society are multi natured, and cannot be solved unless there is a conjunct effort from the different instances of the public administration. Today one can find no less than sixteen public policy programs for family farming in the site of MDA. They range from the already mentioned credit and market programs to those that stimulates agro-industry, rural tourism, the diversification of sources of income, or special programs of technical assistance and rural extension. But the mere existence of these programs do not guaranty that they are effectively accessed by the farmers, as we will see next. The public policy programs for family farming The major pillars of the Brazilian agricultural policy were raised in the 1960s and 1970s as necessary tools to set in motion the process of modernisation of agriculture. In 1965 was created the National System of Rural Credit that subsidized the purchase of machinery and inputs by the producers. In 1974, the creation of the Brazilian Company of Technical Assistance and Rural Extension (Embrater), centralized the service of rural assistance and extension. Technicians are responsible for bringing the modernizing package of the green revolution to farmers. In 1973 was created the agricultural insurance Proagro, to safeguard the rural credit loans. The rural credit with subsidized interest rates was fundamental for the change in the technical basis of production that occurred in Brazilian agriculture. But in the same way that the technological package of the Green Revolution - chemical inputs, mechanization and improved seeds - benefited, especially, the producers with larger areas, reliefs conducive to mechanisation and soils easily correctable, also the rural credit became gradually directed to the business producer, leaving behind the great majority of less capitalized smaller producers. In 1996 was created by Federal Decree no. 1,946 the PRONAF, whose main front of action is still the provision of special lines of credit for the farmer and family members that have the document called Declaration of Suitability for the Pronaf (DAP). In 1999, the

4 Procera was extinguished and the settlers of agrarian reform became part of Groups A and A/C of Pronaf. The Pronaf Group A approaches the Procera in public attended- settlers at the beginning of the settlement - and the amount of resources - small loans. The A/C group search to benefit the settler consolidated, with greater power of investment. From an operational point of view, the PRONAF has now four main lines: Financing of Production; Financing of Infrastructure and Municipal Services; Training and Professionalization of Family Farmers; Research Funding and Rural Extension. For financing production, the PRONAF offers 15 credit lines: Cost, Investment, Agribusiness, Agroecology, Eco, Forest, Semi-arid, Woman, Youth, Cost and Marketing of family agribusiness, Cooperatives Share, Rural Microcredit, More Food. The Pronaf Infrastructure and Municipal Services was created in 1997 with the objective of providing resources for infrastructure works and services in the municipalities where the family agriculture has an important role in the economy. This line of PRONAF has gained in importance after the creation, in 1999, of the National Council for Sustainable Rural Development. In 2001, Resolution no. 15 determined that to have access to the program it was required the constitution of the Municipal Councils of Rural Development (CMDR) and the elaboration of Municipal Plans for Rural Development (PMDR) (Schneider et al, 2009). The CMDRs represent an interesting instance of negotiations in the municipal arena. Should participate in the CMDRs representatives of the municipal administration, services of ATER, producer organizations, Non-governmental Organizations, etc. The approval of projects of Pronaf Infrastructure must necessarily be based on a consensus negotiated within the CMDRs. But as evidenced by Mattei and Cazella (2009), there is hardly a symmetry of power in decision-making within the CMDRs. The PMDRs end up being drawn mostly, by the technical teams of the municipality council and components of ATER services, reflecting the difficulty for the producers' participation in the formulation and management of the programs and actions of public policies. The amount of resources allocated for the Pronaf in the Plan for Family Agriculture in 2014/15 is R$ 24.1 billions, which is ten times more than the budget of 2.3 billion the Program had in 2002/3. But despite the changes in the Program, aiming to improve its functionality and correct the already historical distortions, such as the predominance of contracts for producers gauchos, who are among the most capitalized; recent studies on Pronaf (Mattei, 2010; Grisa, 2014) shows that the subsidized credit for family farming still benefits mainly the business like family farmers in the southern states, especially the Rio Grande do Sul, and the cereal crops, especially maize and soya. The Bolsa Familia Program was projected as the principal measure for combating hunger in the Lula Government, but the initiative with greater power to constantly improve the living conditions of thousands of rural producers was without doubt the Food Acquisition Program (PAA). The PAA was born in 2003 as an inter sector and inter-ministerial program. Inter sector because it combines a measure of agricultural policy - the incentive for the

5 production of food by family farmers with a program of a social nature that has as its main objective to combat hunger among the less favored segments of society. The equation is quite simple: - the government buys products of family farmers by a compensatory price, eliminating the exploitation of middlemen, and makes these products available to the population by direct donation or, more indirectly and slowly, through the government stocks. This first approximation with the institutional market, represented by the National Supply Company or by the municipal administration when the Program is conducted by the City Council,, prepares the farmer to participate in other programs, such as the PNAE which demands a production well planed and with better quality. The Program is inter ministerial because it involves the Ministry of Agrarian Development (MDA), the Ministry of Social Development (MDS) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA) through the National Supply Company (CONAB). The Program operate now in six modalities as show in Table 1. Compra de produtores familiares para a formação de estoques públicos para abastecimento social ou venda Table 1: The different modalities of PAA Modality Objetives Origen of resources Purchase Acquisition of produces in with nature or processed from Simultaneous family farmers to be donated MDS Donation through social networks. Direct purchase from family farmers Support stock formation to Promotion of production and consumption of milk Institutional Purchase Acquisition of seeds Source: MDS, Purchase from family farmers for formation of public stocks. Allows family producers to store production for later sale. Encourage the family production of milk and distribute it to vulnerable families Allows states and municipalities to buy from family farmers by public calls, exempting the bidding PAA can buy seeds from organizations of family farmers and convey it to other family farmers MDA and MDS through CONAB MDA and MDA through CONAB MDS Limit by DAP/year R$ 6.500,00 for individual farmers and R$ 8.000,00 for associated farmers. R$ 8.000,00. With a preference for associated farmers. RS 8.000,00 R$ 4.000,00 par semester From the interested Institutions R$ 20.00,00 CONAB R$ 6 milions per organization

6 In 2009, the Article 14 of Law stipulated that the municipalities must spend at least 30% of the resources transferred by the National Fund for the Development of Education (FNDE) with the purchase of food from family farmers and their institutions, having preference the local producers, the settlers of agrarian reform and the quilombola communities. The PNAE establishes the association between the family and school meals. It is a Law that has resources guaranteed and the obligation of compliance by municipalities. When functioning within its objectives can promote the development of local family farming and provide the students with a healthier diet compatible with the eating habits of the region.for the first time since its appearance, the school food in Brazil has a close connection with the locality with the purchase of the local production and the promotion of the regional food culture. The National Program of School Feeding was created in 1955 and is Brazil oldest program of Public Policy. Following the interventional trend of the Brazilian State, the Program remained with a centralized administration until the year As one of the measures to promote the Brazilian industry, in the 1970s the school feeding was dominated by processed foods such as soups, porridge and canned food in general. Following the guidance of the 1988 Constitution, from 1994 on the resources of the so called "School Lunch" are passed on to the states and municipalities, which are responsible for its management. To enable a participatory management it were created the School Food Councils. The present value of R$ 1.05 billion to be invested in purchasing from family agriculture seems a lot, but the impact decreases when this amount is divided by the number of family producers. In the case of the state of Sao Paulo, for example, in the year of 2011 were transferred by FNDE, R$ 581,2 millions for school meals. The 30% of that value for purchases from family farming would correspond to about R$ 174 millions. This value divided by R$ 20, per farmer, that is currently the limit per DAP per year, we have a total of 8,718 farmers potential beneficiaries of the Program. Considering that in the same year there was in São Paulo 46,246 farmers with the Declaration of Suitability to Pronaf (DAP), it would only take 19% of the eligible family farmers for the fulfillment of the goals of the Program. The limit by DAP per year, which was R$9, in 2009, passed in 2012 to R$ 20,000, making this program more attractive in financial terms than the PAA. But because it is a program coordinated by municipal governments through Public Calls, where there is a fixed quantity of products to be delivered weekly, its operationalization demands greater organizational and entrepreneurial capacity from the producers. But despite the difficulties, the participation in the National Program of School Food opens to family farmers the possibility for greater integration and direct participation in the local economy, as well as to contribute to the maintenance of traditional dietary habits.

7 Among the factors that limit the participation of farmers in PNAE are the degree of processing of the goods listed in a Public Calls and the location and frequency of deliveries. Table 2 shows the data of 63 Public Calls in 35 municipalities in São Paulo state. As can be observed, predominates products of vegetal origin, delivered in nature, or with medium degree of processing, once a week and only to a receiving unit. These data points to a relative adequacy of this program to the producers capacity of production, processing and deliver. Table 2 Operationalization of PNAE according to the origin, processing degree, periodicity of deliver and number of receiving unities in 35 municipalities in the state of São Paulo Critério Classificação Total Total % Total % Total % Origin of the product Processing degree Periodicity of deliver Number of receiving unities Source: Field research and secondary data, 2014 Animal 22 75, , ,9 Vegetal 28 96, , ,2 In Nature 25 86, , ,0 Medium Degree 20 69, , ,9 High Degree 11 37, , ,9 2 a 5/weeks 6 20,7 8 24, ,6 Semanal 14 48, , ,6 1 a 2/month 8 27, , ,0 3 a 5/ month 1 3,4 4 12,1 5 8,1 Other (a few times per year) 3 10,3 4 12,1 7 11,3 Not found or incomplete information 10 34,5 1 3, , , , ,9 2 a ,9 3 9,1 5 8,1 11 a ,2 3 9,1 8 12,9 More than ,2 3 9,1 8 12,9 For the PNAE to meet the goal of strengthening the family agriculture and promote local development there is a need to articulate better the program management and involve producers, municipal managers and the nutritionists responsible for formulation of school menus.

8 The public policies for family farming in São Paulo state Study carried out in the municipality of Barretos demonstrated that the good progress of the Program was the result of a joint effort between technicians working with rural technical assistance and extension and those responsible for school feeding. The difficulties could be divided into three blocks: with regard to the production itself, the representatives of public administration complained about the lack of organization, leadership, autonomy and initiative of producers. However, it was noted by the reported an improvement in the quality of products, mainly because they are more fresh in comparison with the previously provided. As for the farmers the obstacles were: the low prices paid, especially for leafy vegetables such as lettuce and herbs, the challenge of maintaining a continuous production, the requirements concerning packaging and appearance of products and the inconstancy of demands. A third difficulty concerned the adaptation of the municipality legal department to the purchase system by Public Calls, and not by bidding as are normally carried out the State purchases. In the case of the municipality of Barretos, the good progress of the PNAE was fundamental for the revitalization of the family agriculture and even promoted the creation of a law for a Municipal Program for Agriculture of Social Interest (PMAIS). But, on the other hand, although there is the recommendation that the products purchased through PNAE should be preferably from the local family farming, nothing prevents a municipality from state of Sao Paulo to accomplice to the law by buying from a cooperative of family farmers in Santa Catarina, for example. A research carried out with 144 agrarian reform settlers for the agriculture year of 2011/12 showed that the benefits of these programs have not yet reached the majority of family farmers, even though the settlers, in general, have more contact and participate more in these programs. Starting with the subsidized rural credit provided by PRONAF, 76,6 % of the families had not contracted credit for costs or investment in the agriculture year of 2011/12, as can be observed in Table 3

9 Table 3: Access to rural credit among the interviewed families in the agricultural year of 2011/12 Settlement area Nº * No Yes Araras I 4 50% 50% Araras II 14 78,6% 21,4% Araras III 26 92% 8% Horto Guarani 25 72% 28% Monte Alegre 36 62,2% 35,1% Boa Sorte 7 100% 0% Reage Brasil 3 66,6% 33,3% Nossa terra 3 33,3% 66,6% Formiga 7 100% 0% Córrego Rico 6 67% 33,3% Sepé Tiaraju 6 100% 0% Ibitiuva 4 100% 0% TOTAL ,60% 23,40% Source: Field research, 2012 *Number of families interviewed that answer to the question about rural credit Among those who had contracted some credit predominated the contracts to cover yearly costs. An explanation for the low access to rural credit is on the fact that many settlers have argued that they are in debt with the bank due to borrowings at the beginning of the settlement, when they did not yet know well the land on which they were planting - which led to several crop losses. Nor the participation in the PAA and PNAE programs were significant between the families interviewed, as illustrated in Table 4. When asked about the main difficulties for the participation in these programs, the interviewees mentioned the delay in the implementation of the proposal, the low limit per producer (DAP), the lack of technical assistance and the delays in payment. These answers coincide with the results of other studies (GRISA, 2009).

10 Participation in the PAA and PNAE programs among the interviewed families in the agricultural year of 2011/12 Nº families interviewed Didn t participate in any of the PAA and Settlement area programs PAA PNAE PNAE Horto Guarani 25 68% 24% 4% 4% Monte Alegre 37 75,68% 10,81% 5,41% 8.11% Boa Sorte 7 14,29% 28,57% 0 57,14% Formiga 7 100% Sepé Tiarajú % 0 50% Córrego Rico 6 66,67% 16,67% 16,67% Nossa Terra 3 66,67% 33,33% Reage Brasil 3 33,33% 66,67% Ibitiuva 4 25% 50% 25% Araras 44 65,90% 15,91% 4,55% 13,64% TOTAL % 19,01% 4,23% 13,38% Source: Field research, 2012 As for the products farmers had delivered to these programs, vegetables and yuca were the major ones, as can be seem on Figure Major products delivered to PAA and/or PNAE Products delivered to PAA and/or PNAE Vegetable Yuca Beans Fruits Candies Palm Eggs Figure 1: Major products delivered for PAA and/or PNAE Source: Field research 2012 Although the participation in the PAA and PNAE among settlers was lower than expected, taking in consideration the importance and potential of these programs, it is important to emphasize that its presence in almost 37% of the lots visited is well above the less than 11% of participation in PAA registered to the state of Sao Paulo in This

11 proves the argument that settlers of agrarian reform benefit more from the public policies programs for family farming. It is interesting to note that the majority of those who have accessed some program participated in the PAA. Although with a lower limit per DAP, this Program has the advantage of being older than the PNAE and less demanding in terms of quantity and quality of the products delivered. The modality Purchase with Simultaneous Donation, for example, usually buys what the farmer has managed to produce at that moment. We also examined whether the participation in PAA and PNAE was linked to the access to Technical Assistance and Rural Extension (ATER), and, in fact, we found a higher percentage of families who participate in the institutional market between those who receive these services, which attests to the importance of this service. 100% 80% 81,25% 60% 56,38% 40% 43,61% 20% 18,75% 0% Recieved Technical Did Assistance not recieved technical assistenace Participated in PAA and/or PNAE Didn t participate in PAA and/or PNAE Figure 2: Relation between Technical Assistance and participation in the PAA and/or PNAE Source: Field Research, 2012 On the other hand, access to rural credit did not positively influenced participation in PAA and PNAE, as shown in Figure 3. It is possible that this result is due to the low access to Pronaf by the settlers surveyed. In any case, indicates a lack of harmony between the two programs.

12 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 42,42% 57,58% Accessed rural credit 36,49% 64,81% Didn't access the rural credit Participated in PAA and/or PNAE Didn't participated in PAA and/or PNAE Figure 3: Relation between Rural Credit and participation in the PAA and/or PNAE Source: Field Research, 2012 Final Considerations The participation of settlers in the PNAE foundered on the problems that have been pointed out by Baccarin, et. al.( 2012), such as the adequacy between the products present in the municipal Public Call and the possibilities for its production by family farmers or even in the region where they are located. The requirement to delivery directly in the schools can cause serious difficulties in logistics and take a considerable amount of time from farmers every week. On the other hand, the contract with the Municipal Government demand the delivery of the products agreed, which requires greater organization of production than in the case of PAA. The accomplice of the contract may lead to a network of links between associations or cooperatives of producers and settlers or between associations or cooperatives of settlers and family producers located in the area to generate the amount of products needed. But despite the difficulties, there is no doubt that the involvement of family farmers in the programs aimed to strengthen family agriculture gives greater visibility and legitimacy to these actors and reinforces their role as economic agents and promoters of development. The learning arising from the participation in municipal councils and the negotiations with different administrative spheres leads to gradual independence of the official services for technical assistance. It was possible to identify in the settlements studied how the weakness of these services fostered, in some cases, the development of a greater ability to look for information about novelties or changes in public policies, as well as establish alliances with other institutions capable of providing some type of service, such as, for example, universities and the SEBRAE. To produce and sell products to local markets, such as the institutional markets, reinforce the ideal of autonomy and independence from the massification of the globalized markets (Van der De Ploeg, 2006, 2008), contributing to a new socialization of food (Conterato, et. al., 2011). But this participation needs to be reinforced with the elimination of the barriers identified, a greater presence of technical assistance and rural extension services for a diversification and increase in the volume of production and a greater participation of family farmers in the formulation of policies to which they are the target.

13 References Baccarin, J.G.; Bueno, G.; Aleixo, S.S. & Silva, D.B.P.(2011) Agricultura Familiar e Alimentação Escolar sob a vigência da Lei /2009: adequação das chamadas públicas e disponibilidade de produtos no estado de São Paulo. Anais do 50º Congresso da SOBER, 2012 Conterato, M.A, Nierdele, P.A; Radomsky, G. & Schneider, S. (2011). Mercantilização e mercados: a construção da diversidade da agricultura na ruralidade contemporânea. Em: Schneider, S. & Gazolla, M.(org.) Os atores do desenvolvimento rural. Perspectivas teóricas e práticas sociais. Porto Alegre, Brasil: Editora da UFRGS. Grisa, C. O Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos (PAA) em perspectiva. (2009) Apontamentos e questões para o debate. Trabalho apresentado no Seminário Temático Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos (PAA), Juazeiro (BA), 24 e 25 de agosto de Grisa, C.; Wesz Junior, V.J..; Buchweitz, V.D.( 2014) Revisitando o Pronaf: velhos questionamentos, novas interpretações. In: RESR, Piracicaba-SP, Vol. 52, Nº 02, p , Abr/Jun. Mattei, L; cazella, A. A. Planejamento e gestão do Pronaf Infra-estrutura e Serviços: evidências a partir do estado de Santa Catarina. In: SCHNEIDER, S.; SILVA, M. K; MARQUES, P.E.M (Orgs.). Políticas Públicas e Participação Social no Brasil Rural. (2009) Porto Alegre, Ed. UFRGS. Schneider, S.( 2009). A Pluriatividade na Agricultura Familiar. Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS. Van der ploeg, J. D.(2008) Camponeses e Impérios Alimentares. Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS.