Opções de política comercial

Opções de política comercial
6.4 Políticas destinadas a estabelecer processos democráticos e participativos.
Políticas que afetam a sustentabilidade são de cinco tipos (FAO n. d., 48-9):
& # 183; Políticas econômicas e sociais gerais destinadas a influenciar o crescimento econômico global, o comércio, os níveis de preços, o emprego, o investimento e a população, alcançados principalmente pela utilização de instrumentos monetários e fiscais.
& # 183; Políticas relativas ao desenvolvimento agrícola e rural. Políticas desse tipo geralmente têm a intenção de influenciar fatores como a base de recursos agrícolas, a produção agrícola, o consumo de produtos agrícolas, os níveis e a variabilidade dos preços agrícolas, a renda rural e a qualidade dos alimentos. Eles geralmente são implementados por meio de instrumentos como impostos e subsídios, produção direta do governo e prestação de serviços, e controle direto por meio de regulamentação.
& # 183; Políticas relativas a mercados, incluindo o estabelecimento de instituições e regras de mercado, e a circunscrição de direitos de propriedade.
& # 183; Políticas destinadas a estabelecer um processo democrático e participativo destinado a envolver todos os grupos interessados ​​na tomada de decisões e na implementação do SARD.
& # 183; Políticas projetadas especificamente para influenciar o uso de recursos naturais e proteger o meio ambiente. Essas políticas utilizam: (i) comando e controle (efetuado, por exemplo, proibindo ou limitando certos usos de recursos ou estabelecendo limites para emissões, com penalidades por não conformidade); (ii) incentivos econômicos, como impostos e subsídios; e (iii) medidas persuasivas, como educação e publicidade.
As quatro primeiras categorias acima não se destinam principalmente a alcançar o SARD, e são adotadas para atingir outros objetivos. No entanto, todos são essenciais para a SARD. Portanto, o desafio na formulação de políticas é integrar as considerações ambientais e de sustentabilidade na formulação de políticas gerais, tanto no setor agrícola quanto no geral.
Nas subseções seguintes, essas cinco categorias principais são discutidas em mais detalhes.
As políticas fiscais incluem gastos do governo, impostos e subsídios. Os impactos directos no SARD resultam de despesas com investigação e extensão agrícola e obras públicas em áreas rurais. Os impostos, por outro lado, podem ser direcionados para ajudar a regular o uso de recursos, como impostos sobre aluguel de recursos ou impostos sobre os poluidores. Alguns exemplos específicos de gastos direcionados e impostos são discutidos em subtítulos posteriores.
Muitos governos, especialmente em países industrializados, elevam a maioria de seus impostos de impostos de renda progressivos. Se as rendas líquidas dos trabalhadores aumentarem com o crescimento econômico geral, os custos trabalhistas para os empregadores devem subir mais acentuadamente para cobrir o imposto extra. Diante de uma conta de salários mais alta, as empresas acharão lucrativo substituir outros recursos naturais menos tributados pelo trabalho. Claramente, tal sistema de taxação levará a uma utilização excessivamente alta de recursos naturais, renováveis ​​ou não, em relação ao trabalho. A polarização do sistema tributário mais fortemente para os impostos sobre recursos deve ajudar a promover um desenvolvimento mais sustentável. Nos muitos países em desenvolvimento, onde o imposto de renda não é tão difundido, a questão será menos a troca entre a renda e a tributação dos recursos naturais do que entre a segunda e outras formas de tributação.
De um modo mais geral, a curto e médio prazo, a gestão fiscal prudente é importante para a SARD. A razão é que, sem ela, pode ser criada uma instabilidade econômica que provavelmente desestimula o investimento privado, e crises frequentes de orçamento podem atrapalhar a prestação de serviços públicos importantes. No longo prazo, um setor público muito grande, com altas taxas de tributação e altos gastos do governo, pode "expulsar" o desenvolvimento de atividades do setor privado, das quais a agricultura é geralmente uma. Também no longo prazo, a forma como o governo aloca os gastos entre setores e atividades, e a forma como os impostos são cobrados diferencialmente em várias fontes de renda, atividades e ativos, influencia tanto a composição setorial do PIB quanto a distribuição de renda. Assim, os governos que alocam recursos principalmente para as áreas urbanas, e taxam a agricultura, direta ou indiretamente, desencorajarão a SARD, seja intencionalmente ou não (Markandya e Richardson, 1994).
As políticas monetárias podem afetar a inflação, as taxas de juros e a oferta de crédito. O efeito da inflação na SARD é provavelmente complexo e não é facilmente previsível. No entanto, medidas para limitar a inflação, tais como o controle de preços colocados em itens básicos como alimentos, obviamente danificarão o setor agrícola e, portanto, provavelmente desestimularão a SARD. Além disso, a inflação conduz a distorções económicas que, em geral, também são susceptíveis de serem inconsistentes com a realização do SARD.
A visão geral sobre a relação entre as taxas de juros e SARD é que as taxas baixas são preferíveis para incentivar os proprietários de recursos a fazer investimentos em medidas de conservação de recursos que geram benefícios apenas a longo prazo. No entanto, se as taxas de juros baixas são alcançadas pela manutenção artificial das taxas, o resultado pode ser "repressão financeira", o que significa que o desenvolvimento do setor financeiro será inibido. Isso desencorajará a poupança formal e, assim, limitará os recursos que as instituições financeiras podem emprestar como crédito. As pessoas rurais estão frequentemente 'no fim da linha' para a entrega de crédito por instituições financeiras formais. Como resultado, a taxa de investimento rural tende a diminuir, com implicações negativas para o SARD.
Esse grupo de políticas inclui impostos sobre importações e exportações e controles sobre comércio. Tais políticas tendem a reduzir os preços internos ao produtor para os produtos de exportação e a elevar os preços domésticos dos itens importados. Estes impactos afetarão as commodities e os setores diferencialmente, e é impossível dizer com certeza qual será o efeito sobre a SARD. No entanto, na medida em que os impostos de exportação são impostos aos produtos agrícolas, a renda rural sofrerá. O dano pode ocorrer diretamente e também através dos efeitos sobre os preços dos alimentos produzidos internamente, à medida que os produtores abandonam a produção para exportação. Como o SARD é parcialmente sobre meios de subsistência rurais sustentáveis, as intervenções que reduzem a renda rural também prejudicam a sustentabilidade. Os direitos de importação sobre insumos agrícolas, ou restrições à sua importação, provavelmente terão um efeito similar, exceto no caso de insumos como produtos químicos agrícolas que causam sérios riscos ambientais e à saúde humana.
Em um cenário global, uma estrutura de comércio exterior mais aberta, com menos impostos e restrições sobre importações e exportações, geralmente é considerada boa para o desenvolvimento sustentável. O argumento para o livre comércio é que ele permitirá que a produção ocorra de acordo com o princípio econômico da vantagem comparativa. Isso, por sua vez, significaria que seriam necessários menos recursos e outros insumos agregados para atingir um determinado nível de produção, o que deveria ser bom para todos e para o meio ambiente. No entanto, como discutido acima na subseção 4.1, o livre comércio, apesar de geralmente ter os benefícios esperados no crescimento e eficiência econômicos, pode ter efeitos negativos sobre o patrimônio líquido, pelo menos a princípio. O meio ambiente também pode sofrer se, por exemplo, o livre comércio permitir que os países ricos exportem alguns dos seus problemas de poluição para países pobres.
No que diz respeito à política cambial, alguns países, preocupados com o impacto de balanços externos negativos em seu poder de compra internacional, buscaram manter uma alta taxa de câmbio oficial limitando as importações. A experiência e a lógica econômica sugerem que tais políticas provavelmente não terão êxito a longo prazo. No entanto, enquanto estão em vigor, transformam os termos de troca domésticos em contraposição àqueles setores da economia que produzem bens comercializáveis, inclusive a agricultura. E as distorções induzidas podem ser massivas, ultrapassando de longe quaisquer subsídios que possam ser oferecidos aos agricultores, como recompensas por fertilizantes. Claramente, tais distorções podem ser devastadoras para a SARD.
As políticas salariais cobrem normalmente apenas a parte da força de trabalho sindicalizada e do setor formal. Em muitos países menos desenvolvidos, a proporção da força de trabalho em tal emprego é pequena, de modo que as políticas salariais têm impacto limitado sobre os níveis salariais globais ou SARD. (O mesmo pode não ser verdade para os países industrializados.) No entanto, as políticas salariais podem afetar a alocação de mão-de-obra entre os setores. Além disso, se grandes diferenciais entre os salários urbanos e rurais resultarem, eles podem levar a uma aceleração indesejada da migração rural-urbana, com problemas concomitantes de congestionamento urbano e poluição.
Também é preocupante a questão do desemprego rural, evidente ou oculto, existente em alguns países. Em países onde os programas de bem-estar social não estão bem desenvolvidos, o subemprego ou o desemprego entre trabalhadores rurais ou urbanos é uma séria ameaça à subsistência sustentável. Enquanto as soluções podem ser buscadas no médio para mais longo prazo encorajando o crescimento econômico e o desenvolvimento de indústrias intensivas em trabalho, no curto prazo, medidas de alívio podem ser necessárias. Esquemas de “alimento para o trabalho” podem proporcionar uma oportunidade de combinar o alívio da pobreza com obras públicas de trabalho intensivo. Essas obras podem ser usadas para conservar ou melhorar a base de recursos, por exemplo, através de programas de florestamento ou obras públicas para controlar a erosão do solo.
Aspectos da política de emprego relacionados ao desenvolvimento de recursos humanos são discutidos mais adiante.
Dado que o objetivo da política de sustentabilidade é transferir o equivalente da base de recursos atual para a próxima geração, a política de investimento é obviamente crucial. Em parte, trata-se de criar um ambiente "amigável" para investidores privados. Muitas barreiras para a entrada de investidores estrangeiros deterão o fluxo internacional de capital, assim como regras muito rígidas sobre a repatriação de lucros. Da mesma forma, tanto a instabilidade econômica quanto a agitação social irão dissuadir todos os investidores, estrangeiros ou locais.
Por outro lado, os investimentos podem ser devastadores para a SARD, caso os investidores não tenham que pagar por externalidades negativas que causam (por exemplo, barragens retirando água de usuários a jusante, poços rebaixando o lençol freático para todos). Claramente, medidas precisam ser tomadas para evitar tais externalidades negativas, ou para fazer com que os investidores paguem por elas.
A importância de evitar intervenções que causem repressão financeira e, assim, negar a potenciais investidores, especialmente aqueles em áreas rurais, o acesso aos mercados de crédito já foi discutido.
Como os fundos públicos são sempre limitados, os investimentos diretos do governo devem ser alocados em áreas onde o fracasso do mercado leva ao subinvestimento. Essas áreas incluem investimentos em capital humano (ou seja, em pessoas). A criação de capital humano para a sustentabilidade provavelmente exigirá investimentos substanciais do governo em serviços de saúde, educação e treinamento. Da mesma forma, investimentos públicos podem ser necessários em recursos de acesso aberto, como muitas áreas de pesca e algumas florestas, bem como em recursos estatais, como a infraestrutura rural. (Ver Bromley and Cernea 1989 para uma discussão dos diferentes tipos de regimes de propriedade de recursos.) Para a SARD, uma proporção apropriada de tais melhorias precisa ser direcionada para áreas rurais onde esses serviços são tipicamente muito inferiores aos das cidades.
Propriedade comum e recursos de acesso aberto importantes para a SARD podem incluir a pesca, florestas e abastecimento de água. Algumas propriedades do estado, como estradas públicas, também possuem características de acesso aberto. Como os investidores privados individuais raramente conseguem captar para si todos os benefícios dos investimentos em recursos de acesso aberto, muitas vezes há necessidade de intervenção. Os governos podem precisar intervir para realizar investimentos que sejam socialmente lucrativos, mas não lucrativos, ou para criar acordos institucionais pelos quais as externalidades sejam internalizadas para permitir que investidores privados obtenham um retorno adequado sobre seu capital. Exemplos do último tipo de intervenção política incluem a privatização de agências de abastecimento de água e a concessão de contratos para a construção e operação de rodovias pedagiadas.
As decisões de investimento do governo precisam basear-se, tanto quanto possível, em uma avaliação cuidadosa do benefício social de cada investimento. Os métodos para a realização de tais avaliações de projetos são bem conhecidos e foram ampliados nos últimos anos para tentar levar em conta os impactos ambientais (Edwards-Jones 1996; World Bank 1991). No entanto, conforme discutido anteriormente, as medidas de desempenho baseadas no fluxo de caixa descontado podem precisar ser usadas como parte de uma análise multicritério, que também inclui outros aspectos, como a eqüidade entre gerações (ver seção 8.5.3).
Em países menos desenvolvidos, onde os fundos do governo são tipicamente muito limitados, a ajuda externa, incluindo empréstimos concessionais, pode ser usada para ajudar a compensar qualquer défice no nível de investimento público necessário para a SARD.
A ameaça à SARD representada pelo crescimento populacional foi indicada na seção 3.1 acima. É claro que, pelo menos a longo prazo, o crescimento populacional deve ser desacelerado e talvez revertido se a sustentabilidade for alcançada. Mesmo no curto prazo, o crescimento populacional apresenta desafios para muitos países menos desenvolvidos. Investimentos substanciais são necessários para expandir tanto a produção de alimentos quanto a prestação de serviços, como educação e saúde, de acordo com os números crescentes. O desenvolvimento sustentável é, portanto, dificultado em tais casos.
O problema é que algumas das medidas de controle de natalidade mais confiáveis ​​não são aceitáveis ​​em todas as sociedades. Isso tende a tornar todo o assunto da política populacional difícil para os formuladores de políticas. No entanto, existem outros meios de abordar o assunto do que um confronto frontal com valores éticos, por vezes, fortemente defendidos.
Políticas que melhorem a educação das meninas e o status das mulheres, incluindo as perspectivas de emprego para as mulheres mais jovens, geralmente levarão a uma redução na fertilidade. Além disso, quando o status da mulher aumenta, é mais provável que eles tomem mais controle de sua própria fertilidade, não confiando mais nas decisões de seus parceiros do sexo masculino, trabalhadores de saúde locais ou líderes religiosos.
Mais geralmente, há evidências de que as taxas de natalidade tendem a cair à medida que a mortalidade infantil é reduzida, a urbanização se espalha e os padrões de vida aumentam. As intervenções políticas para promover tais resultados raramente são controversas e retardarão o crescimento populacional.
Dito isto, muitos consideram que é uma política desejável garantir que nenhuma mulher tenha acesso negado aos meios para limitar a frequência com que ela concebe, independentemente de tabus religiosos ou outros que ditem que métodos estão disponíveis para ela alcançar esse fim.
A política populacional também se estende a medidas para afetar a distribuição geográfica das pessoas. Os governos podem influenciar a taxa de migração para áreas urbanas, principalmente manipulando, conscientemente ou não, os diferenciais de renda real rural-urbana. Políticas para concentrar investimentos públicos e prestação de serviços nas cidades acelerarão a migração rural-urbana e vice-versa. Da mesma forma, os governos podem adotar medidas políticas para tentar influenciar a distribuição da população rural, por exemplo, por meio de esquemas de assentamento de terras, como os programas de transmigração indonésios.
A importância da tributação em afetar incentivos para usar recursos de uma maneira mais ou menos sustentável foi discutida em 6.1.1 acima. Uma segunda consideração na fixação de impostos, no entanto, refere-se à distribuição de renda e riqueza. Tributar os ricos e despojá-los de alguns de seus ativos para atender às necessidades dos pobres desta geração, ou para investir em benefício dos pobres no futuro, pode obviamente ser uma maneira de atingir a meta do desenvolvimento sustentável. Infelizmente, raramente é politicamente possível em qualquer escala substancial! No entanto, onde a riqueza ou a renda vem de rendas econômicas que resultam de investimentos públicos, como aumento de valor ou produtividade da terra devido à construção de infraestrutura pública, pode ser mais aceitável deduzir pelo menos uma parte desses ganhos.
Também podem ser adotadas políticas que visem especificamente os pobres, como programas de auxílio à fome, programas de alimentos para o trabalho ou fornecimento de serviços gratuitos ou subsidiados. A maioria dos países industrializados possui amplos programas de assistência social para ajudar os desfavorecidos, como os doentes, os idosos ou os desempregados. Como esses programas são muito caros, na maioria dos países menos desenvolvidos eles têm um escopo muito mais limitado, ou até estão totalmente ausentes.
O argumento para políticas destinadas a alcançar uma distribuição de renda mais equitativa não é que os pobres causem mais degradação de recursos do que os ricos e, portanto, devem ser ajudados a sair da pobreza. De fato, o contrário é frequentemente o caso, dados os níveis muito mais altos de consumo de itens como os combustíveis fósseis nos países ricos. O objetivo é tornar possível um padrão razoável de vida para os pobres de hoje. Então eles podem ter os meios para proporcionar um futuro mais sustentável para seus filhos, por exemplo, proporcionando-lhes uma boa nutrição, cuidados de saúde saudáveis ​​e uma boa educação.
Embora as políticas econômicas e sociais gerais descritas acima possam ser muito importantes para a SARD, elas, na maioria das vezes, estão fora da área de responsabilidade dos profissionais agrícolas. As áreas políticas discutidas a seguir, por outro lado, referem-se especificamente ao setor rural e, em muitos casos, são da competência dos ministérios da agricultura.
Melhorias na infra-estrutura rural contribuem para o SARD, melhorando a disponibilidade de serviços ou outras instalações que melhorem a produtividade do capital rural privado. Uma estrada de asfalto que reduz o tempo de viagem e reduz os custos de funcionamento do veículo, também reduz os custos de comercialização de produtos agrícolas e reduz o custo de entrega dos requisitos agrícolas e domésticos. Da mesma forma, um sistema de irrigação aumenta a produtividade das terras agrícolas, enquanto um sistema de telefonia reduz os custos de transação no marketing agrícola e melhora a eficiência, dando aos produtores melhor acesso à informação sobre preços.
Embora os investimentos públicos em infra-estrutura rural sejam importantes para a SARD, também é o fornecimento de sistemas e financiamento para a manutenção da infraestrutura existente. Sem este último, os investimentos em infraestrutura podem ser desperdiçados ou podem render benefícios menores do que deveriam. Um dos impactos mais significativos no desenvolvimento sustentável da crise na África nos anos 80 foi a grave deterioração de todos os tipos de infraestrutura devido à falta de manutenção.
Como a provisão de infra-estrutura é geralmente cara e porque as oportunidades são muitas e os fundos são restritos, surgem grandes questões políticas sobre quais projetos de infraestrutura devem ser priorizados. Em tal situação, a avaliação apropriada do investimento é importante. Tais avaliações devem obviamente explicar os impactos ambientais do projeto proposto. Ao planejar uma nova estrada, por exemplo, a devida atenção ao alinhamento e a tais características de projeto, como o controle do escoamento das águas pluviais, pode adicionar pouco aos custos, mas pode reduzir consideravelmente os danos ambientais.
Dado que o planejamento é bem feito, melhorias na infraestrutura podem promover o SARD:
& # 183; melhorando os termos de troca dos produtores em áreas anteriormente isoladas;
& # 183; permitindo o uso novo ou mais intensivo de terras previamente isoladas demais ou outros recursos, reduzindo assim a pressão sobre outras áreas;
& # 183; permitindo que comunidades rurais previamente isoladas se beneficiem de um melhor acesso a serviços como saúde e educação e extensão agrícola.
A melhoria do capital humano é o aspecto da SARD que muitas vezes pode ser negligenciado no pensamento dos agricultores. No entanto, como observado anteriormente, melhorias no capital humano têm sido a fonte da maioria dos ganhos na produtividade de terras agrícolas e mão-de-obra no passado. Dado que a fronteira terrestre foi alcançada na maioria dos países e que as áreas disponíveis para agricultura e silvicultura provavelmente diminuirão, políticas para aumentar o capital humano rural precisam receber alta prioridade.
A provisão de serviços universais de educação e saúde nas áreas rurais são duas maneiras principais de melhorar a base de recursos humanos agrícolas. Normalmente, nenhum destes será da responsabilidade dos planejadores agrícolas. No entanto, a formação de agricultores e a disseminação de conhecimentos agrícolas para agricultores e outros é geralmente uma questão em que os ministérios agrícolas têm alguma responsabilidade.
Intervenções políticas aqui, portanto, se relacionam com a provisão e operação de instalações de treinamento, e programas para estender esse treinamento em aldeias rurais. O escopo, organização e orientação da extensão agrícola também precisam ser considerados. O serviço de extensão existente pode não estar à altura da tarefa de promover o SARD. As habilidades do pessoal talvez precisem ser melhoradas para proporcionar uma melhor compreensão dos métodos agrícolas sustentáveis. Dado o crescente reconhecimento da importância da participação das pessoas na obtenção do SARD, os serviços de extensão que foram usados ​​para uma abordagem “de cima para baixo” podem precisar passar por uma reforma radical.
O papel dos meios de comunicação social na promoção do SARD também deve ser considerado na revisão da política. Práticas agrícolas mais sustentáveis ​​podem ser promovidas usando meios como o rádio, que, juntamente com outros métodos promocionais, podem ser uma forma relativamente barata e eficaz de mudar atitudes e valores sobre o uso de recursos rurais.
A contribuição da tecnologia melhorada para a SARD já foi enfatizada. As questões de política dizem respeito a como o desenvolvimento de tais tecnologias aprimoradas e sustentáveis ​​deve ser incentivado. Em questão no setor público estará o nível de financiamento para pesquisa agrícola e a alocação desses fundos entre organizações de pesquisa, commodities, disciplinas e projetos. Os méritos de uma abordagem de sistemas agrícolas versus uma divisão disciplinar mais tradicional de atividade precisam ser examinados. Seja qual for a abordagem adotada, os mecanismos para estabelecer prioridades de pesquisa que sejam relevantes e sensíveis às necessidades e circunstâncias dos produtores rurais precisam estar implementados. A pesquisa realizada também precisa ser revisada regularmente para garantir que os fundos estejam sendo usados ​​com sabedoria e bem, e que o progresso em direção aos objetivos pretendidos esteja sendo atingido.
A atenção política também precisa ser dada ao pessoal de esforços de P & D para SARD. Isso significa determinar a alocação de financiamento para faculdades de agricultura de universidades e para faculdades agrícolas. Também levanta a questão de saber se o treinamento em pesquisa em várias sub-disciplinas deve ser fornecido no país ou usando universidades estrangeiras que possam estar melhor equipadas para a tarefa. Em muitos países menos desenvolvidos, a retenção de pessoal de pesquisa treinado pode ser um problema, dada a mobilidade internacional de bons cientistas. Medidas como obrigações e pagamentos de incentivos podem ser necessárias para assegurar o efetivo pessoal dos programas de pesquisa.
Além da atividade de I & D do setor público, iniciativas políticas para promover os esforços do setor privado também devem ser consideradas. Os instrumentos incluem o possível apoio do governo a organizações de pesquisa privadas ou corporativas, talvez aumentando as taxas sobre as vendas agrícolas. Atenção também deve ser dada à legislação de direitos de propriedade, como leis de patentes e direitos de variedades de plantas, a fim de dar aos inovadores a oportunidade de lucrar com seus investimentos. As possíveis isenções fiscais para empresas que executam P & D podem ser outra forma de intervenção que pode gerar benefícios sociais e promover a SARD.
A consideração detalhada de tais questões de política e gestão de pesquisa agrícola como aquelas abordadas acima está fora do escopo destas diretrizes. O Serviço Internacional de Pesquisa Agrícola Nacional (ISNAR) é um centro dentro do CGIAR criado especificamente para ajudar em tais assuntos. A ISNAR publicou vários guias relevantes (por exemplo, Chissano 1994; Crosson e Anderson 1993).
As políticas destinadas a aumentar os preços pagos pelos produtos agrícolas podem ser implementadas pela restrição ou tributação de importações concorrentes, limitando a produção por quotas ou por subsídios diretos. Os preços ao produtor podem ser reduzidos pela restrição ou tributação das exportações agrícolas, pelo subsídio às importações ou pela tributação direta das vendas.
No passado, pelo menos, os governos nos países menos desenvolvidos têm procurado reduzir os preços agrícolas para manter baixos os preços dos alimentos. Muitas vezes, o objetivo era beneficiar os moradores urbanos e restringir o crescimento dos salários urbanos. Os governos dos países industrializados, por outro lado, têm tipicamente procurado pressionar os preços agrícolas para satisfazer grupos de lobby agrícola. Recentemente, tem havido um crescente reconhecimento de que ambos os tipos de distorção causam a má alocação de recursos e, portanto, não favorecem a SARD.
Embora qualquer ineficiência na alocação de recursos possa ser prejudicial para a SARD, existem alguns impactos negativos específicos de preços agrícolas distorcidos. Os baixos preços agrícolas ameaçam o SARD, desencorajando o crescimento da produção agrícola e dificultando a obtenção de meios de subsistência sustentáveis ​​para a população rural. O investimento em recursos agrícolas, como melhorias na terra, será amortecido sob um regime de baixo preço. Preços altos, por outro lado, levam ao uso não econômico de insumos, alguns dos quais, como produtos químicos, podem ser prejudiciais ao meio ambiente. Preços altos podem encorajar o uso intensivo demais de terras marginais. Eles também podem estimular investimentos socialmente não lucrativos e insustentáveis, mas lucrativos em termos privados, como o desmatamento inadequado de florestas e florestas, ou a drenagem de áreas úmidas, para uso agrícola.
Existem duas áreas principais de intervenção política em relação ao risco na agricultura. O primeiro está na redução de risco. Grandes desastres naturais, como ciclones, inundações severas ou incêndios, podem ter impactos negativos significativos na base de recursos. A terra pode ser irreversivelmente danificada por erosão súbita, deslizamentos de terra ou inundações. Da mesma forma, ativos como plantações, árvores, animais e melhoramentos baseados em terra, como cercas, terraços, obras de irrigação, estradas e aldeias, podem ser danificados ou destruídos em grandes áreas.
Os formuladores de políticas precisam dar atenção a medidas justificáveis ​​para prevenir ou limitar os impactos de tais desastres. Os instrumentos incluem a construção de obras de proteção, como bancos de diques ou quebras de incêndio, e o estabelecimento e manutenção de sistemas de alerta de desastres.
A invasão de sistemas agrícolas por pragas, doenças ou ervas daninhas sérias é outro risco potencial que pode ser minimizado por medidas adequadas de quarentena e pela implementação de planos para controlar os surtos antes que eles se espalhem.
Desastres provocados pelo homem, como guerras e distúrbios civis, podem produzir danos pelo menos na mesma escala que muitos desastres naturais. Nestes casos, tanto a prevenção como a mitigação das consequências são obviamente mais difíceis.
O segundo tipo de intervenção política é necessário após um desastre, seja natural ou feito pelo homem, ter acontecido. Para que os sistemas danificados se recuperem com o mínimo de ameaça à sustentabilidade, os governos (talvez junto com agências internacionais) podem precisar implementar várias formas de alívio de desastres. Medidas de ajuda adotadas podem incluir o fornecimento emergencial de alimentos, provisão de materiais para o replantio das lavouras, fornecimento de animais reprodutores de substituição e ajuda na reconstrução.
Os governos geralmente se envolvem diretamente (geralmente através de agências governamentais criadas para esse fim) na gestão de recursos rurais, mais freqüentemente na silvicultura do que na agricultura. Eles também freqüentemente participam da oferta de insumos agrícolas, provisão de crédito rural e na comercialização da produção agrícola.
Em relação a toda essa participação, a questão política a ser abordada é se as agências governamentais são tão eficientes e efetivas na obtenção da SARD quanto a empresa privada. Os governos estão cada vez mais se movendo para privatizar esses tipos de funções, na crença de que a resposta para a pergunta é negativa. No entanto, não é prudente ser muito dogmático sobre o assunto. Pode haver casos em que a propriedade pública possa ser vantajosa. Por exemplo, os governos geralmente podem ter acesso ao capital a taxas mais baixas do que as empresas privadas. Pode-se argumentar, portanto, que estão mais bem posicionados do que o setor privado para fazer os investimentos de longo prazo necessários para a produção sustentável, digamos, da silvicultura. Assim, a participação direta do governo na produção e comercialização na agricultura precisa ser analisada caso a caso, e não julgada de qualquer forma doutrinária.
Uma vez que a SARD significa meios de subsistência rurais sustentáveis, agora e no futuro, políticas são necessárias em muitos países menos desenvolvidos (e em alguns países industrializados) para lidar com o persistente problema da pobreza rural. Infelizmente, não é fácil identificar e implementar medidas corretivas apropriadas - se fosse, o problema da pobreza teria sido resolvido há muito tempo.
Reduções sustentáveis ​​da pobreza certamente exigirão a implementação integrada e efetiva de uma ampla gama de iniciativas de políticas sob todos ou na maioria dos tópicos nesta seção das diretrizes. Para ilustrar o que pode estar implicado, o Quadro 7 contém uma lista sugerida das medidas políticas necessárias para ajudar os pobres rurais a alcançar meios de subsistência sustentáveis.
Caixa 7. VIDA SELVAGEM RURAL SUSTENTÁVEL PARA O SÉCULO XXI: IMPLICAÇÕES POLÍTICAS.
Adaptado de Chamber e Conway 1992, pp. 31-33.
O fornecimento de infraestrutura e serviços de habilitação, incluindo:
& # 183; educação para a capacidade de subsistência.
& # 183; saúde, tanto preventiva como curativa, para prevenir incapacidades permanentes.
& # 183; Cestas de escolhas maiores e melhores para a agricultura e apoio às experiências dos agricultores.
& # 183; transportes, comunicações e serviços de informação (sobre direitos, mercados, preços, competências.)
& # 183; crédito flexível para novas pequenas empresas.
Dar prioridade às capacidades e acesso dos mais pobres, incluindo minorias e mulheres, através de:
& # 183; redistribuição de bens tangíveis, especialmente terra e terra para o leme.
& # 183; garantir os direitos à terra, água, árvores e outros recursos, e garantir herança para as crianças.
& # 183; proteção e gestão de recursos de propriedade comum e direitos equitativos de acesso para os mais pobres.
& # 183; o aumento da intensidade e produtividade do uso de recursos e a exploração de sinergias econômicas de pequena escala.
& # 183; direitos e acesso efetivo aos serviços, especialmente educação, saúde e crédito.
& # 183; remover as restrições que empobrecem e enfraquecem os pobres.
III Aumentar a sustentabilidade social.
Reduzindo a vulnerabilidade para que os pobres não se tornem mais pobres por:
& # 183; estabelecer a paz e a lei e a ordem eqüitativas.
& # 183; estratégias contra-sazonais para fornecer alimentos, renda e trabalho para os mais pobres nos maus momentos do ano.
& # 183; suporte imediato em anos ruins e altos preços para ativos tangíveis que as pessoas vendem em perigo.
& # 183; Serviços de saúde que são acessíveis e eficazes em más épocas, incluindo o tratamento de acidentes.
& # 183; condições para diminuir a fertilidade.
O fornecimento de uma dieta adequada e satisfação das necessidades nutricionais para todos são inseparáveis ​​da SARD. As discussed in subsection 3.2, population growth and rising incomes will cause substantial increases in the demand for food. Moreover, progressive reductions in the numbers of poor people who often go hungry are necessary for sustainable development, to reduce suffering and to provide better opportunities for them to live healthy, productive and fulfilled lives.
Food and nutrition policy goals include security of food supply, safe and good quality food and adequate and healthy diets for everyone. To a large degree, these goals are consistent with the broader objectives for SARD. Sustainable agricultural production will mean increased food supplies and increased income-earning opportunities, leading to reductions in poverty and malnutrition. In some countries, however, specific measures to improve the food security of the poor and malnourished may be needed. The appropriate policy interventions here are the same as those mentioned in relation to the previous topic of sustainable livelihoods.
A focus on food security also means correcting any imbalance in the proportion of agricultural research and extension efforts directed to food crops, rather than to export or industrial crops. In the past, there has been a tendency in some countries to neglect roots, tubers, plantains, traditional legumes, oilseeds, vegetables and fruits, which are commonly eaten but which less frequently enter domestic and international trade. Promoting the increased production of some of these crops may lead to better human diets and more sustainable production systems. The reason is that such crops can provide alternatives to the intensive production of the main staples or export crops. More attention may also need to be given to post-harvest systems for all food crops that are affected by significant losses and quality degradation.
Measures to improve the quality and safety of food have direct beneficial effects on health and nutritional status. They include establishing and enforcing food laws, support for consumer organizations, and education to improve food quality, safety and preparation. Measures are needed to prevent the contamination of food with agro-chemicals, or by pests including micro-organisms, as are procedures to detect such contamination in locally produced or imported foods.
Widespread nutrition and diet education, delivered through formal schooling and the mass media, can promote good eating habits and healthy lifestyles, so reducing the incidence of nutrition-related diseases. Especially important for SARD are improvements in child nutrition to make sure that children grow up able to fulfil useful roles in the society of the future.
The main property rights important for SARD are those relating to land and water (including inland and marine fishery resources).
Typically, most land is held in private or communal ownership, fisheries are in public or communal ownership, or are open access, and most water resources are in public ownership. Policy options in relation to these various types of property rights include:
& # 183; policies entailing reallocation of resource property rights between public, communal and private ownership;
& # 183; policies relating to the redistribution of privately owned resources among private individuals;
& # 183; policies that govern the utilization of open access, state and common property resources; e.
& # 183; policies to establish and enforce procedures to encourage the efficient and sustainable use of resources.
All four types of policy interventions are likely to have impacts on sustainability, efficiency and equity. Moreover, particularly for the first two, where there is change of ownership, the full impacts of a particular policy may be difficult to predict and may not necessarily be positive for all three criteria. By their very nature, changes in property rights are likely to make some individuals better off and others worse off, meaning, as noted earlier, that such policies are often politically sensitive and divisive.
A change to property rights may be justified when present rights are leading to degradation of an open access or common property resource through over-use. The intervention may range from assistance with the creation or strengthening, of an organization of users which has the right to manage the resource, to privatization or nationalization of the property. While the modern tendency is more in favour of the former than the latter, case-by-case consideration of likely implications is required. In Burma and Nepal, forests previously in communal ownership were nationalized with the aim of limiting over-use. The result was an increase in illegal cutting of timber since the dispossessed communities no longer saw the forest as 'theirs', and government enforcement of cutting restrictions was weak. In South Asia, the transfer of irrigation tanks at the time of independence from the control of local rulers to village councils or other democratic bodies generally resulted in a decline in standards of maintenance.
Land settlement schemes are a particular case of the transfer of property rights from public to private ownership, although seldom is the full freehold title to the land given to the settlers. On the other hand, it is increasingly common for governments to sell off property rights, such as the privatization of water supply utilities in Britain.
Very inequitable access to resources may exist when a few individuals own disproportionate shares of a resource. Such situations may be incompatible with SARD and may require a reallocation of ownership. Dispossessed owners may or may not be compensated and, if compensated, may receive full or partial compensation. The most familiar example of policies of this kind is land reform carried out under such slogans as 'land to the tiller'. Experience shows that radical land reform is difficult to implement because of the power and influence of the land-owning class. Moreover, the benefits are often not as great as the proponents hope, at least in the short to medium term. However, these are not reasons for doing nothing when the existing ownership pattern is not sustainable.
Box 8. GOVERNMENT AND VILLAGE PARTNERSHIPS: PROGRAMME NATIONAL DE GESTION DES TERROIRS VILLAGEOIS (PNGTV), BURKINA FASO.
Adapted from: Toulmin et al, 1992, quoted by Carey 1994.
Where existing land tenure arrangements are not conducive to SARD, revised legal frameworks can help in the establishment of the necessary conditions for what is called 'primary environmental care'. Primary environmental care fosters natural resource management by building on local skills, local resources and forms of cooperation, and participation to empower local communities. Legal revisions need to be directed to granting rights, access and security of tenure to farmers and pastoralists so as to foster responsibility and farsightedness, and the application of appropriate regulations to prevent pollution and resource degrading activities. A good example is the PNGTV in Burkina Faso.
Under this program, land tenure conditions have been established for widespread action at the local level. It follows the enactment of land tenure reform in 1984, to ensure fair access to land and resources and to encourage greater local involvement in managing and restoring degraded land.
The program is carried out in four stages and now involves about 380 villages, most of which are in the first two stages. First, a village-level committee is established after discussions and training. The committee works with program staff to define and demarcate the village boundaries. A resource inventory is then made. The last two stages involve negotiating and finalizing a contract between the government and the village committee about the investment level for better productivity and: management of village resources.
Problems that still need to be resolved include better allocation of formal powers in the village committees and ensuring representation in the committees of all land users, including migrant farmers and herders. In addition, more efficient ways to map, produce resource inventories, and plan land improvements must be found as the current procedure is still too lengthy.
Policies to improve the efficiency of use of public or open access property resources include the introduction or variation of prices charged to users, or the imposition of quotas on use. For instance, rights to use common grazing land, forests or fishery resources may be restricted to avoid over-use. In some cases, former curbs on use of common property may have broken down under pressures such as those resulting from population growth and increased commercialization. As a result, policy measures may be needed to strengthen former rationing institutions or to establish new ones. For example, limits may be set on the number of fishing operators in a given fishery and on the size and nature of each operator's catch.
Water policy issues relate mostly to the private utilization of public, open access or communal resources. Legal and institutional structures governing such utilization vary widely. These structures influence efficiency and sustain-ability of the use of the resources, including the degradation of the resource by contamination. As urban and industrial use of water grows, the management of water for multiple uses (including re-use) will grow in importance, as will the need for mechanisms to improve the efficiency of water allocation between users. Both realistic water pricing and the introduction, where practicable, of 'polluter pays' charges for water contamination appeal to many economists as 'win-win' policy reforms. They encourage the more sustainable use of a valuable resource and generate financial resources that can be invested in sustainable development, such as watershed management or the maintenance of water catchment infrastructure. However, in both cases, the distributional impacts of the new measures need to be considered carefully. Moreover, the near-impossibility of implementing an effective tax on pollution generated by many small-scale farmers limits the feasibility of applying the polluter pays principle in agriculture.
In a similar fashion, the tendency of many governments to charge loggers less than the full competitive value of the timber in public forests leads to forgone income for the public purse. Worse, it also causes inefficient and unsustainable use of the resource.
Property rights are likely to be a source of inefficiency if they do not provide for the transfer of the resources to those best able to use them. For example, in many countries the outright sale of land is prohibited, and in other cases renting land is illegal. Moreover, the lack of a transferable title to land may inhibit the users of that land from gaining access to formal credit. That will have negative implications for efficiency, and also possibly for sustainability if lack of equity capital precludes investments in land improvements. In such situations, tenure reforms more consistent with SARD might be designed.
Even when land is held in individual tenure, the security of that tenure may affect the care with which the land is conserved and used. If access is for a limited time only, as under some leasehold arrangements, there may be no incentive for the land-user to manage the resource with an eye to long-term productivity. The same may apply when the rules prohibit the inheritance of the property rights by the owner's surviving spouse or children.
Security and transferability of title can be of benefit for other forms of property such as rights of access to common property or state-owned resources like fisheries and irrigation water.
In this context, 'institutions' are defined as the rules, conventions and other elements that form the structural framework of social interaction. They establish the cooperative and competitive relationships that constitute a society and, more specifically, an economic order. Organizations are not the same as institutions under this definition, although an organization may be seen as part of the institutional framework.
There are many different types of institutions potentially important for SARD. They may be divided into community-based institutions and market-based institutions. Within the former are various types of cooperative arrangements and value systems that affect agricultural production and rural resource use. These include informal arrangements such as family ties and responsibilities, systems of rank and social status, shared values and beliefs, religious or other taboos, and peer group pressures. The scope for government policy intervention in these areas is obviously limited, but not negligible. Education and media campaigns can contribute to changed attitudes and values. 'Change agents', such as community leaders, can be 'cultivated' by government officials to pass on information and ideas about sustainable development to others in their communities. Similarly, local organizations such as religious establishments or women's groups may be encouraged by government to promote SARD in local communities.
More formal institutions may be established or manipulated by governments. Examples include laws and regulations governing the operation of cooperatives, political parties and lobby groups, land tenure systems, or rules for the operations of financial organizations such as banks and credit unions. Many of these more formal institutions are mentioned under other headings.
Market-related institutions are concerned with production, processing and marketing of agricultural commodities and with the management of agricultural resources. The category also extends to institutions ancillary to agriculture concerned with the delivery of related services.
Consistent with the notion that command and control systems generally do not perform as well as market-based ones, policies to encourage market development will generally be consistent with SARD. Effective intervention may include strengthening many market-related institutions by removing unnecessary regulations and restrictions on the development of business activity and by the establishment of an economic environment in which business entrepreneurship can prosper. Laws on fair trading may need to be improved, and curbs imposed on the power of monopolies. Provision of good market information systems and other measures to promote the development of small businesses in agricultural marketing will tend to benefit both agricultural producers and food consumers through lower marketing margins. Similarly, the appropriate framework may need to be created to facilitate the provision of finance for a growing rural business sector. Action may also be needed to foster the creation of a stock exchange, if none exists, in order to enable business owners to raise equity capital and spread business risks into the wider community. Despite the usual political sensitivity of such matters, consideration may need to be given to relaxing restrictive rules governing foreign investment in agricultural marketing and finance if local resources are inadequate.
Successful policy making for SARD requires that policy makers have a sound knowledge of the systems of production and resource use with which they are dealing. That usually means a need for a close familiarity with farm and rural household systems - something that may not be easy for urban-based policy makers. Since it is the farmers, foresters, fisherfolk and local people who ultimately have to decide what to do in managing rural resources sustainably, it is logical to involve them as fully as possible in decision making about SARD.
Central policy makers, directors of research and extension and the like cannot have sufficient intimate knowledge of all local circumstances to make top-down policy making work. The more decisions can be decentralized, and the more responsibilities can be delegated to local level, including to local communities, the better the system is likely to work. Of course, it would be irresponsible for important policy decisions to be delegated to local level if, at the same time, local people, organizations and governments were not provided with the training, resources and other support needed to carry out those responsibilities.
Decentralization, by itself, will not work unless clear lines of communication are established between the central authority and the local level. Information about local needs and circumstances must be communicated effectively from the local and provincial level to the centre, so that overall resource allocation decisions can be made sensibly. Also, procedures must be in place to identify where weaknesses at the local or provincial level are impeding progress, so that central authorities can take remedial action.
It follows that the important policy decisions are to determine how far it is practicable and wise to delegate both responsibility and funds to provincial, district and local bodies, including local community groups. Such delegation will require that appropriate ways of monitoring these delegated activities be set up and that effective ways of communicating between the levels are devised and used.
There is a large literature on people's participation in SARD and it is impossible to do justice to it all here. For the reasons given above, people's participation is an essential element of any successful SARD policy. Unfortunately, however, much of what is written about participation, while long on rhetoric, is short on practical guidelines for implementation.
The basic problem with a policy to promote people's participation is that many existing agricultural organizations, such as universities, research organizations, extension bodies and regulatory authorities, find it difficult to learn from, and work with, farmers and rural people. This is because 'they are characterized by restrictive bureaucracy and centralized hierarchical authority; their professionals are specialists and see only a narrow view of the world; and they have few systematic processes for getting feedback on performance' (Pretty 1995, p. 202). Pretty, among others, has advocated the need for a dramatic paradigm shift based on the definition of new roles for development organizations and professionals, with new concepts, values and behaviours. He does acknowledge, however, that such a revolution will not be easy to achieve.
Given the likely difficulty in achieving the advocated dramatic transformation in procedures for full and effective people's participation, a more pragmatic approach is taken here. A strategy that is evolutionary rather than revolutionary is outlined. It has several components that are discussed in turn.
First, a truly participatory approach requires reasonable development of democratic processes, including respect for human rights, and concern for the status of women, children and minorities. Moreover, participation requires freedom from the ravages of war and civil disturbance and reasonable standards of law and order and security.
Box 9. CHANGING PROFESSIONALISM FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW.
Taken from Pretty 1995, p. 201.67.
From the old professionalism.
To the new professionalism.
Assumptions about reality.
Assumption of singular, tangible reality.
Assumptions of multiple realities that are socially constructed.
Reductionist and positivist; complex world split into independent variables and cause-effect relationships; researchers' perceptions are central.
Holistic and post-positivist; local categories and perceptions are central; subject-object and methods-data distinctions are blurred.
Strategy and context of inquiry.
Investigators know what they want; pre-specified research plan or design. Information is extracted from controlled experiments; context is independent and controlled.
Investigators do not know where research will lead; it is an open-ended learning process. Understanding and focus emerge through interaction; context of inquiry is fundamental.
Who sets priorities?
Local people and professionals together.
Relationship between all actors in the process.
Professionals control and motivate clients from a distance; they do not trust people (farmers, rural people etc) who are simply the object of inquiry.
Professionals enable and empower in close dialogue; they attempt to build trust through joint analyses and negotiation; understanding arises through this engagement, resulting in inevitable interactions between the investigator and the 'objects' of research.
Mode of working.
Single disciplinary - working alone.
Multi-disciplinary - working in groups.
Technology or services.
Rejected technology or service assumed to be fault of local people or local conditions.
Rejected technology or service is a failure.
Careers are inwards and upwards - as practitioners get better, they are promoted and take on more administration.
Careers include outward and downward movement; professionals stay in touch with action at all levels.
The extent to which these preconditions are met obviously varies from country to country, and scope for intervention to bring them about when they are lacking may be limited.
Second, there is a need to develop skills and to change attitudes and values both in local communities and among agricultural professionals. SARD issues need to be integrated at all levels of formal and informal education and training. Moreover, according to some commentators, there is a need to 'transform the learning environment', to change rural organizations into 'learning organizations'. An indication of what these commentators have in mind can be gleaned from Box 9. It is less clear what policy measures are needed to effect such a transformation.
Box 10. A TYPOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS.
Adapted from Pretty 1995, p. 173
1. Passive participation. People participate by being told what is going to happen or has already happened. It is a unilateral announcement by administration or project management without any listening to people's responses. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals.
2. Participation in information giving. People participate in answering questions posed by investigators using questionnaire surveys or similar approaches. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.
3. Participation by consultation. People participate by being consulted and external agents listen to their views. These external agents define both problems and solutions, but may modify these in the light of people's responses. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decision making and professionals are under no obligation to accept people's views.
4. Participation for material incentives. People participate by providing resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash or other material incentives. Much on-farm research falls into this category, as farmers provide the fields but are not involved in experimentation or the process of learning. Although often called participation, people have no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.
5. Functional participation. People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives through the development or promotion of externally initiated social organizations. Such involvement is seldom at early stages of project cycles or planning, but rather after major decisions have been made. These institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators, but may become self-dependent.
6. Interactive participation. People participate in joint analysis, which leads to action plans and the formation of new local institutions or the strengthening of existing ones. These groups take control over local decisions and so people have a stake in maintaining structures or practices,
7. Self-mobilization. People participate by taking initiatives to change systems, independent of external institutions. They develop contacts with external organizations for resources and technical advice they need, but retain control over how resources are used. Such self-initiated collective action may or may not challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power.
Third, and related to the organizational transformation just mentioned, there is a need to make agricultural research, extension and support systems more sensitive to the needs and circumstances of their clients. A number of ways of conducting research and extension have been advocated, and some have been tested, based on a participatory approach. While there are often bureaucratic and other impediments to the successful implementation of such methods, a move at least a little way along the road will often be possible. It requires a policy decision in favour of following that route, then that decision to be put into effect, with the necessary reorientation of activities and approaches. Implementation will need to include providing staff with the appropriate training and incentives. In many cases, forging closer links between research and extension will be an important co-requisite for more successful overall engagement with client farmers and rural people.
Fourth, a policy decision to promote and work through local organizations, including NGOs, may circumvent some of the difficulties in transforming hidebound government organizations into people-sensitive entities. This is a matter of delegating both responsibilities and funds to these organizations, and of setting up suitable structures for coordination and consultation, monitoring and evaluation.
Finally, people's participation can be improved by making proper use of appropriate communication and information technology. The two-way flow of information between the rural people and local organizations on the one hand, and policy makers and planners on the other, needs to be as effective as possible. That means using a variety of channels of communication, from local and district meetings and consultations, through to the use of modern electronic media, where appropriate. Finding technological solutions to resource management problems may require local people to be given access, directly or through intermediaries, to relevant electronic or other databases containing information of local relevance. Such information may come from aerial photography or satellite imaging, or may be obtained from the locals themselves. Also relevant is information on prospective improved farming and resource management technologies that have been studied in other, similar environments.
While many of the above policies will have significant impacts on rural resource use and the environment, there is a range of policy options that are directly focussed on these areas. These are considered next.
Where, perhaps because of market failure, there is rural resource degradation or contamination of the environment, governments can act directly to try to correct these problems. For instance, governments can fund and undertake land conservation or rehabilitation works. Such works will often be on public land, but may also be on private land, with or without the agreement of the land-holders, depending on the perceived seriousness of the externalities.
Similarly, governments may opt to bring unused land into use, or under-utilized land into more intensive use, in order to reduce pressure on existing farming areas. This is likely to require works to clear the land, perhaps to shape it, to construct required infrastructure, such as roads, communications systems, irrigation facilities and drainage systems. Many land settlement schemes are based on public investments of these kinds, and often include further public funding to allow the settlers to become established in the new environment.
Both land improvement and land settlement schemes need to be subject to careful prior appraisal, including both environmental impact assessments and social cost-benefit analysis. There are also questions to address about the extent of cost recovery for such works from beneficiaries (or polluters). If the beneficiaries are prosperous, there would seem to be no reason why they should not be required to pay a large share of the cost. However, where relatively poor small holders benefit, cost recovery may not be appropriate. Moreover, it may not prove possible to devise a cost-effective way of recovering the costs, especially when the beneficiaries are ill-defined and widely dispersed. How are taxes to be raised from the beneficiaries of measures to guarantee cleaner air, for example?
While governments may engage in measures to develop rural production, they also commonly invest in measures to conserve resources, for example by the establishment and management of conservation areas and national parks. Of particular importance for SARD are actions to conserve genetic diversity of useful and potentially useful genetic material. In the case of plants, genetic material may be conserved in such forms as tissue culture, seed banks, plant variety conservation plots, botanic gardens or flora reserves. Animal genetic material is more difficult to conserve. However, small herds or flocks of endangered breeds or species may be kept on research farms or in conservation farms, parks or zoos. Frozen sperm, ova or fertilized embryo may be stored for some time.
Governments may also elect to pay farmers or other agriculturalists to continue to farm endangered types of crop plants or animals, or to maintain flora or fauna reserves on their land.
The range of potential control instruments that governments can consider using is wide. It includes regulations, controls and bans on certain types of resource use or agricultural practices. For example, the use of certain chemicals, such as particular toxic sprays, may be prohibited or strictly controlled. Farmers may be penalized for undertaking certain practices thought to be environmentally damaging, such as burning of crop residues. Alternatively, they may be required, under threat of a penalty, to follow other practices, such as control of noxious pests or weeds.
The allocation of some resources may be controlled by governments or government agencies. For example, it is common for irrigators to be allotted quotas for the amount of water they can draw from a public irrigation system, from a river or from an underground source. Users of a forest resource may be restricted in the number and size of trees they can cut. Increasingly, quotas are being imposed on the size and composition of fish catches, or on the fishing gear that may be used.
As discussed earlier, it is one thing for governments to devise such rules and regulations, but it is not always easy to enforce them. For many individual resource users, the private benefit to be gained by breaking or 'bending' the rules may be considerable. Non-compliance may be on a serious scale. There is also the likelihood that some resource users, especially the more prosperous, will bribe officials to overlook breaches of the regulations. If such corruption becomes widespread, it may even undermine the whole process of orderly government. Moreover, because of the geographically dispersed nature of farming, forestry and, especially, fishing, checking on compliance is likely to be very difficult and expensive. While it is easy for governments to devise rules and regulations for the more sustainable use of rural and fisheries resources, these may not always work as well as the policy makers hope. Therefore, it may be best to look first at ways to encourage sustainability using economic incentives that are not so difficult to implement.
According to Markandya (1994, p. 19):
There is a panoply of policy instruments that governments can use to implement an economic incentives approach to environmental management. Some are more applicable to natural resource management, others to environmental protection. Yet others are applicable to both (product and input pricing, taxes, performance bonds, etc). They are based on the same principles of 'getting the prices right' and making property rights clear, secure, and tradeable. Some operate through existing markets (e. g. product pricing), while others imitate the market or seek to create new markets (e. g. tradeable pollution permits). In many cases, such as forest policy and hazardous waste management, it is necessary to employ both sets of instruments to obtain cost-effective and efficient outcomes. An economic incentives package for forest policy would include, at the minimum, concession bidding, resource pricing, resource taxation (royalties), perhaps performance bonds, and investment incentives for replanting.
Markandya then provides a list of the main instruments and a brief description of each. Another, rather more comprehensive list and associated set of descriptions is provided by Panayotou (1994a). For lack of space, these descriptions are presented here in abbreviated form. Some of the listed measures have been mentioned in the discussion above, but others have not. Readers are referred to the original sources for further explanations:
& # 183; Tradeable resource shares - the allocation of a transferable right to a percentage share in an 'invisible' or 'uncertain' common property resource, such as a fishery.
& # 183; Individual tradeable quotas - the allocation of a transferable quota for a fixed amount of a common property resource.
& # 183; Tradeable development rights - the allocation of a right to develop a resource in another area in exchange for relinquishing the right to develop a similar resource in an area of special conservation value.
& # 183; Tradeable emission permits - permits that grant polluters the rights over air or water, those rights acquiring an economic value because of the option to sell them to others. An example is the manure permits granted to farmers in the Netherlands.
& # 183; Environmental taxes - taxes on environmentally damaging products such as petroleum products and pesticides, designed to provoke a reduction in the use of these products.
& # 183; Resource taxes - setting royalties, license fees or other charges on government owned or controlled resources at prices that reflect the true value of the resources.
& # 183; Effluent or emission taxes - the familiar 'polluter pays' principle, with charges ideally set in accord with the true cost of the environmental damage caused.
& # 183; User charges - setting charges for irrigation water, waste disposal or other services or inputs supplied by the public sector, mainly as a means of cost recovery, but also to reflect something approximating actual costs.
& # 183; Deposit refund schemes - presumptive charges on products intended to shift the responsibility for controlling pollution to producers or consumers. Examples are refundable deposits on pesticide containers or vehicle batteries.
& # 183; Environmental bonds - economic instruments that ensure adequate funds are available to restore environmental damage, useful, for example, in mining or logging operations.
& # 183; Subsidies - financial assistance to promote sustainable behaviour, for example by encouraging investment in resource conservation.
Markandya argues that all the instruments he lists have been used in one country or another, and policy makers concerned with SARD should be familiar with them. Not all are immediately relevant to agricultural and rural resource management, but many are. For instance, allocated water rights can be made tradeable. Moreover, in areas where water supply is uncertain, the tradeable rights might be based on a resource share, as used in some parts of Australia.
On the other hand, there have been difficulties in using some of the suggested measures. In developed countries, setting environmental taxes in such a way as to control pollution effectively and pricing government-owned resources to reflect their true values have both proved hard to implement. The feasibility of using such measures in less developed countries where administrative systems are less well developed is therefore questionable.

Policy Options.
A role for Indigenous peoples in Canada’s trade talks.
If the Trans-Pacific Partnership is any indication, the government’s policy statements on Indigenous peoples don’t match their actions during trade talks.
21 de dezembro de 2017.
Share Story.
International trade has long had an impact on the livelihoods of Indigenous peoples in Canada – whether historically through the fur trade or more recently as a result of the current and projected exploitation of natural resources on their territories. They have much at stake in any free trade agreement (FTA) to which Canada is party, not only in an economic sense, but more broadly in terms of their legal and political treaty relationships with the federal government. Increasingly, Indigenous peoples have successfully insisted that they have a stake in shaping resource development that must be respected. This has crucial implications for international trade.
The federal government is in the process of renegotiating the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Many of the principles informing these talks also informed the negotiations of the first iteration of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Although the United States withdrew from the TPP, the other 11 countries are still trying to move forward with the deal. Given this, it is instructive to take a careful look at the earlier version of the TPP in terms of the significance of its content for Indigenous peoples and the role they played in the consultation process.
Negotiating the TPP: Process and content.
During the first TPP negotiations, New Zealand (Aotearoa) recognized its constitutional obligations to Māori in a provision that entrenches the pre-eminence of Crown’s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. By contrast, the Canadian government showed limited consideration for the interests of Canada’s Indigenous peoples during the talks. The negotiations that led to the TPP began in 2010, and Canada joined these negotiations in 2012 under Conservative Party leadership. It was the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau that signed the TPP Agreement in early 2016.
To a degree, the process changed gears once the new government took power. Although the Conservative government did undertake stakeholder consultations, there was a marked increase in the number and breadth of these once the Liberals were in power. The new government appeared to adopt a position of greater accountability and transparency than had its predecessors, and it undertook a series of discussions with key stakeholders and the general public on the TPP. However, because these consultations began only after the TPP negotiations had concluded, whether they will have an impact on the agreement is debatable.
The federal government’s “special group” consultations ran between November 2015 and November 2016. According to publicly available records, government representatives met specifically with Indigenous leaders four times. During the public consultations of the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on International Trade (CIIT), only a handful of submissions, including those of Amnesty International, Inter Pares, and the Council of Canadians, addressed the implications of the TPP for Indigenous peoples. The CIIT also held a session that focused exclusively on the perspectives of Indigenous peoples regarding the TPP.
During that session, several Indigenous speakers stressed that they were not opposed to trade but it must be environmentally sustainable, and their rights must be respected. Some addressed procedure, arguing that by not including them in the negotiations, Canada’s signing of the TPP Agreement was unconstitutional, because constitutional recognition of Aboriginal title and treaty rights requires that Indigenous peoples be informed, consulted, accommodated and consent to the TPP negotiations. They stressed that the government had not obtained free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from Indigenous peoples before signing the TPP.
Notably, at a policy level, the government has committed itself to the principle of FPIC through both its adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2016 and its stated principles concerning the government’s relationship with Indigenous peoples. In addition, in his mandate letter to International Trade Minister François-Philippe Champagne, the Prime Minister said “No relationship is more important to me and to Canada than the one with Indigenous peoples.”
And yet, the content of the TPP that refers specifically to Canada makes scant reference to Indigenous peoples, mentioning them only in the following contexts:
government procurement (chapter 15-A), cross-border services (annex II), and state-owned enterprises (annex IV) – earmarking preferential treatment in the purchase of goods and services; the definition of environmental law (chapter 20) – excluding regulations aimed at managing subsistence or Aboriginal harvesting of natural resources; and indirectly in two side instruments signed with Malaysia and Peru, addressing traditional knowledge.
However, a number of broader issues covered by the TPP may be of concern to Indigenous peoples, as they could threaten their lands, resources, self-determination and self-government. This applies not only to unceded territories but also where treaties have been signed.
Chapter 20 of the agreement touches on the environment. UNDRIP, the Canadian Constitution, various modern treaties between the Crown and Indigenous peoples in Canada, and the recent statement of principles regarding government relations with Indigenous peoples all stress the right of Indigenous peoples to have a say over the development of their territories’ resources. In contrast, the TPP parties and their investors have no obligations to respect the Crown’s treaties with Indigenous peoples in Canada, despite the fact that the agreement permits these parties and investors to have a stake in Canada’s environmental laws and policies. This means that in order to respect its TPP obligations, the Crown will be less likely to respond appropriately to Indigenous peoples’ concerns about how resource developments affect their territories. The Crown will also be less inclined to consider Indigenous peoples’ systems of law, values and practices with respect to the environment, despite the requirement that it to do so is included in numerous treaties.
The issue of investor-state dispute settlements (ISDS) – chapter 9, section B of the TPP – has been controversial in previous trade agreements. The settlements can supplant domestic judicial findings, undermining not only national sovereignty but also the inclination to respect nation-to-nation relations, which are essential to Canada’s treaties. According to a report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, ISDS potentially grant transnational corporations greater rights than Indigenous peoples have over how their land and resources will be used. Corporations have used ISDS to challenge judgements that favour Indigenous peoples seeking to protect the environment. For example, in Nova Scotia, despite the opposition of local Mi’kmaq, the American company Bilcon successfully used NAFTA to sue the federal government, whose environmental assessment panel had rejected Bilcon’s proposed quarry development. The TPP holds the potential for more such challenges.
Outcomes of the Commons committee consultations.
During the public consultations on the TPP, despite the fact that people spoke overwhelmingly against the agreement, the final report of the CIIT recommends that the government pursue it. The report concludes with a series of recommendations. Although a number of these have implications for Indigenous peoples, only one refers to them specifically: recommendation 5 stresses the need for broad public consultations that include Indigenous stakeholders. The report also contains a dissenting opinion from the New Democratic Party (NDP) members of the committee, who recommend that the TPP be rejected. Their criticisms of the process include the fact that the government did not uphold its commitments under UNDRIP and did not obtain FPIC from Indigenous peoples before signing the TPP. The NDP’s recommendations include obtaining FPIC before signing any future trade agreements (#7) and undertaking broad consultations that involve Indigenous peoples should the government pursue alternative agreements with TPP countries (#8).
The Trade Minister’s response to the Commons committee’s final report makes few specific references to Indigenous peoples, although it states that it will work with them in the planning, funding and delivery of infrastructure. It also mentions, as part of its “progressive trade agenda,” that the government will ensure Indigenous peoples can share in the opportunities that flow from trade and investment and will prioritize “broad and inclusive consultations” and “open and transparent dialogue” with various stakeholders, including Indigenous peoples. “Consultations” and “dialogue,” however, are a far cry from FPIC.
If the TPP is indicative of what is to come, it seems that the government’s policy statements on trade as they concern Indigenous peoples may not include them in the negotiation process or in the terms of the agreements. Given that the government will be undertaking trade negotiations in the near future – most significantly with China and India – it remains to be seen whether its approach to Indigenous peoples will evolve to more closely reflect the language in its “Principles respecting the Government of Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples.”
Will the government take these principles into account, combine them with the feedback it received in evidence during the TPP consultations, and reconfigure its approach to FTA negotiations? In mid-August 2017, during a speech on the NAFTA renegotiations, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland talked about the need to include “an Indigenous chapter” as part of Canada’s progressive trade agenda. How this actually plays out in future negotiations, only time will tell. For now, Freeland’s speech suggests that since the government’s response to the CIIT’s final report there has been some evolution in its thinking about Indigenous peoples’ interests in relation to FTAs.
It will also be interesting to see how Indigenous peoples will respond to the various FTA negotiations. After participating in the belated and truncated TPP consultation, will they challenge the status quo to ensure that their voices are heard and their interests translated into substantive content in future agreements? Indigenous peoples are using words like “resurgence,” “decolonization’, and “restitution” in public discourse. Will these find a place in Indigenous peoples’ responses to FTAs?
In New Zealand, there have been careful studies on the TPP’s implications with regard to Māori rights. This has not occurred in Canada. And the UN has made recommendations to reform FTAs so that they respect the rights of Indigenous peoples. Ultimately, all of us in Canada – Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, governmental and nongovernmental organizations – need to take a careful look at the ramifications of FTAs for Canada’s treaty obligations, for they are at the core of the country’s existence.
Photo: Trade ministers and delegates from the remaining members of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) attend the TPP ministerial meeting on the side lines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders summit in Danang, Vietnam in November 2017 (AP Photo/Na Son Nguyen, Pool).
Do you have something to say about the article you just read? Be part of the Policy Options discussion, and send in your own submission. Here is a link on how to do it. | Souhaitez-vous réagir à cet article ? Joignez-vous aux débats d’ Options politiques et soumettez-nous votre texte en suivant ces directives .
21 de dezembro de 2017.
Share Story.
Nicole Gombay teaches in the Department of Geography at l'Université de Montréal. Among other things she researches the links among legal and political processes and Indigenous peoples’ economies.
Tópicos quentes.
Nicole Gombay teaches in the Department of Geography at l'Université de Montréal. Among other things she researches the links among legal and political processes and Indigenous peoples’ economies.

Martin Wolf weighs up trade policy options.
The FT's chief economics commentator highlights the central issues being discussed at the forum, with world leaders focusing on possible trade action against China, while talking down fears of a global trade war.
Filmed by Alpha Grid. Produced by Filip Fortuna. Edited by Paolo Pascual. Footage from Reuters.
Transcrição.
The single most striking thing about the mood in Davos this year is optimism from business. Everybody here believes we are in the middle of a really strong recovery. There's nothing to stop it. They're are also buoyed, particularly the Americans, by the tax cuts.
They don't believe we're going to have a real trade war. Generally the feeling is that at last the economy globally is back with these massive synchronised recovery. And particularly, very important in Davos, the US is back. That's a first really striking thing.
The second really remarkable thing is it's a very different way that leaders have conveyed that message. The Indian prime minister, Mr. Modi, the French president, Mr. Macron, have been selling globalisation. They believe in the future of a globalised economy. Meanwhile, everybody at Davos are concerned that just possibly the US is going to start a trade war.
We began to see trade policy action this year in 2018. For the first time, it was threatened. Now we're seeing it against China. What more is going to happen? Justin Trudeau was here, prime minister of Canada, to talk about the North American Free Trade Agreement. And we don't know whether that will actually continue to exist.
Mr. Trump will be here, and everybody wants to know what he has to say. The whole-- a vast part of the American administration has come here and the message from people like Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, has been-- don't worry, we're not really protectionist. We're just going to try and make trade fairer.
The dominant view is that's going to be all right. It's not going to end up as a really serious trade war. And that again means that people are pretty optimistic. But of course, we don't really know. The optimism may prove to be exaggerated. But at the end, the general feeling here in Davos is Mr. Trump is not really a threat to the globalisation and capitalist system. And everything is just rosy again.
Editor’s Choice.
South Africa's economy and education high on the agenda.
FT's Alec Russell on the legacy of South Africa's fallen star.
Boris Johnson's speech on the split reveals little, argues Janan Ganesh.
Science commentator Anjana Ahuja examines how 'smart' pills can save lives and money.
Últimos vídeos.
Millions are flocking to home villages in China for new year celebrations.
Os investidores em divisas estrangeiras deixaram de fora boa parte da recente volatilidade do mercado.
South Africa's economy and education high on the agenda.
Boris Johnson's speech on the split reveals little, argues Janan Ganesh.
Global business columnist Rana Foroohar's prediction for the year ahead.
FT columnists on #MeToo movement.
FT economics editor Chris Giles on the standout points announced by Philip Hammond.
Will banking remain a lucrative business?
O Financial Times e seu jornalismo estão sujeitos a um regime de auto-regulação sob o Código de Prática Editorial da FT.

Disciplining Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Trade Policy Options for Climate Mitigation and SDGs.
In addition to being environmentally harmful, fossil fuel subsidies depress growth, reinforce inequality, add to health hazards caused by air pollution and slow down the energy transition. The need to reform and ultimately phase out these harmful subsidies is thus urgent.
In spite of pledges made by the world’s largest economies at the G20 and under the universal Sustainable Development Goals to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, countries around the world continue to use them widely. With its binding nature and effective enforcement mechanism, the WTO could have a unique role to play to effectively discipline their use.
Lessons for how to do this could, for instance, be drawn from the fisheries negotiations and from the Agreement on Agriculture. The WTO fisheries negotiations may serve as a good example, both with respect to how to place a sustainability issue at the top of the global trade agenda, and to the technical level in the development of concrete options to discipline harmful subsidies.
The Agreement on Agriculture, on the other hand, may provide particularly useful insights with regard to its ex-ante classification of subsidies based on their presumed impact. Such an approach would not only help restrict fossil fuel subsidies but also provide incentives to move towards cleaner energy sources by providing a safe harbour for clean energy support.
This workshop, organised by ICTSD in cooperation with the World Economic Forum, discussed these and other options for how to curb fossil fuel subsidies through the WTO, including through possible actions at MC11. Discussions were informed by brief expert presentations.
The meeting followed on from previous E15 workshops on disciplining fossil fuel subsidies, and forms part of a series of E15 dialogues on different topics being organised over the course of the year.

South Africa’s way ahead: trade policy options.
* Registration is free of charge and for monitoring purposes only.
This book presents the output of a tralac project focusing on the trade agenda of South Africa and the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) of which South Africa is a member. The proliferation of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) is very much part of SACU and specifically South Africa’s trade agenda, since FTAs are negotiated collectively by SACU member states. The aim of the analysis in this book is twofold. First, the implications of different FTAs that are either being negotiated or being considered, are assessed in the context of the current Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations. Second, the book presents a sober assessment of trade modelling exercises, noting the value as well as the limitations of these exercises in the making of trade policy choices and negotiating trade agreements.
“This book raises many fascinating policy questions. The authors have systematically built a series of policy scenarios for South Africa and its Southern African Customs Union (SACU) trade partners in order to see what the welfare consequences might be of preferential trading arrangements. The simulations are not only limited to situations in which South Africa and SACU enter into variously configured free trade agreements (FTAs), but they also consider what would happen to these countries if third parties from outside the region were to establish FTAs among themselves.” – Patrick Low, Chief Economist, World Trade Organisation.
© 2007 Trade Law Centre for Southern Africa and AusAid.
Publication of this book was made possible by the support of the Trade Law Centre for Southern Africa (tralac) and the Australian High Commission (AusAid). The financial support of AusAid for this project is gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed by the authors are not necessarily the view of any of these institutions.
Readers are encouraged to quote and reproduce the material contained in these books for educational, non-profit purposes, provided the source is acknowledged. Please contact us to obtain authorisation for reproducing this material.
* Registration to the tralac website is required in order to download these files. Registration is free of charge and for monitoring purposes only.

Direcção-Geral do Comércio da Comissão Europeia.
Ferramentas de acessibilidade.
Ferramentas de serviço.
Seletor de idiomas.
de Current language: en es fr it pl.
Localização atual do portal.
Navegação no site.
Conteúdo do site.
Últimas notícias.
EU and US publish TTIP state of play assessment.
Read the joint assessment of the progress made in the negotiations since negotiations started in July 2013.
Report of the 15th round.
Read the detailed report of the round that took place in New York.
15th round final press conference.
Read the outcome of the 15th negotiation round that took place in New York.
14th TTIP Round – read the full report.
A detailed report of the 14th round of TTIP talks is now available. It sets out progress achieved, chapter by chapter.
14th TTIP Round summarised by EU Chief Negotiator.
The EU's Chief TTIP negotiator discusses progress made after 14 rounds of talks.
Transparency: Commission publishes additional documents.
The European Commission publishes a record number of EU proposals from the ongoing 14th TTIP round.
EU negotiating texts in TTIP - Updated on 14 July 2016.
The European Commission is negotiating TTIP as openly as possible.
Factsheets in plain language Negotiating texts EU textual proposals EU position papers.