Effects of territorial management on the Rural Development Index for Family Agriculture in the Citizenship Territories in Bahia state, Brazil

Abstracts

Abstract

After the interruption of the Territories of Citizenship (TC) Program by the Brazilian federal government, Bahia was one of the few Brazilian states that maintained the territorial approach, the “Territories of Identity”. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of territorial management for the TC-Bahia (treatment group) in comparison to TC-Brazil (control group). A Rural Development Index for Family Agriculture (RDI-FA) was developed for two time periods to calculate its evolution for each group. The results showed that the RDI-FA had a significantly higher evolution for TC-Bahia in relation to TC-Brazil (p-value < 0.01). In ten years, TC-Bahia index increased by 0.07 while the rest of TC-Brazil grew by 0.04. We concluded that institutionalization and improvements of Bahian territorial approach has benefited family farmers, especially in the institutional dimension of territorial heritage.

Keywords:
family farming; territorial development; rural development index; territorial public policies; Territories of Citizenship

Resumo

Após a paralisação do programa federal Territórios da Cidadania (TC), a Bahia foi um dos poucos estados brasileiros que manteve a abordagem territorial, por meio dos Territórios de Identidade. Assim, o objetivo do estudo é avaliar o efeito da gestão territorial para os TC do estado da Bahia (grupo tratamento) em comparação com os demais TC do Brasil (grupo controle). Para tanto, um Índice de Desenvolvimento Rural da Agricultura Familiar (IDR-AF) foi desenvolvido para dois períodos, permitindo calcular a sua evolução para os dois grupos. Os resultados evidenciaram uma evolução significativamente superior do IDR-AF nos TC da Bahia em comparação com os TC do Brasil (p-valor < 0,01). Em dez anos, o índice da Bahia cresceu em 0,07, enquanto que o restante do Brasil progrediu em 0,04. Concluiu-se que a institucionalização e os aprimoramentos da abordagem territorial baiana beneficiaram a agricultura familiar, especialmente na dimensão institucional do patrimônio territorial.

Palavras-chave:
agricultura familiar; desenvolvimento territorial; índice de desenvolvimento rural; políticas públicas territoriais; Territórios da Cidadania

INTRODUCTION

The territorial approach was consolidated in Brazil in the 2000s as the country's main rural development strategy. This orientation had been (partially) experimented at the end of the 20th century in the Infrastructure and Services line of the National Program for Strengthening Family Farming (PRONAF), with public funding at the inter-municipal level, under the management of a local rural development council (Schneider et al., 2009). However, it was with the emergence, in 2003, of a new government perspective - more participatory and inclusive - that the territorial approach took hold, making dominant the actors who until then had been on the margins of public arenas (Grisa & Schneider, 2014). In the same year, it was created the Secretariat for Territorial Development (SDT), within the Ministry of Agrarian Development (MDA), which was responsible for designing the country's first territorial development policy, the Program for the Sustainable Development of Rural Territories (PRONAT).

With PRONAT drafting, the process of defining the Rural Territories (TR) in Brazil began. At first, 164 TRs were formed, which later grew to 239 TRs, by grouping together municipalities with similar social, economic, and demographic characteristics, as well as geographical proximity. At the same time, the Development Territorial Committee (CODETER) was established in each TR, which was responsible for drawing up a Territorial Rural Development Plan (PTDR). The CODETER brought together various municipalities of the TR, through representatives of civil society and the public authorities. This committee marked, for the first time, social participation in public management at a territorial level. The PTDR represented the project of the Territory's population to boost the regional economy and social well-being (Rosa & Ferreira, 2018).

However, PRONAT had a very sectoral bias, prioritizing agricultural actions and actors. In addition to this, poverty in the Brazilian countryside remained deep, which led to demands for greater attention to certain TRs. It was in this context that the Territories of Citizenship Program (PTC) was established on February 25, 2008. The PTC was a regional development strategy that aimed to “bring economic development and universalize basic citizenship programs” (Brasil, 2008, p. 2). Its operation was also based on integrating the actions and policies of the federal, state, and municipal governments, through the PTDR, drawn up in conjunction with civil society.

The innovation of PTC was the proposal for joint action by the various ministries. The program was coordinated by the Federal Government Civil House and proposed integrating the actions of nineteen ministries, later expanded to twenty-two, in addition to providing a considerable amount of financial resources, mainly through the Infrastructure and Services Program (PROINF) (Favareto, 2009; Rosa & Ferreira, 2018). The mission was to make the actions of public authorities in the territories more efficient, helping to improve the Human Development Index (HDI), reduce the rural exodus, and overcome regional inequalities. For example, actions were developed:

[...] combining funding from the National Program to Strengthen Family Farming (PRONAF) with the expansion of technical assistance; the construction of roads with the expansion of the Light for All Program; the recovery of the settlements' infrastructure with the expansion of Bolsa Família; the establishment of Social Assistance Reference Centers (CRAS) with the expansion of the Family Health, Popular Pharmacy and Smiling Brazil Programs; and the construction of schools with basic sanitation works and the construction of cisterns (Brasil, 2008, p. 2).

The Territories of Citizenship (TC) were defined based on the TRs, of which 120 were incorporated into the PTC, prioritizing those with a predominance of family farming, lower territorial HDI, low economic activity, a higher concentration of beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família Program (“Family Grant Program”, which is a public cash transfer program) and a lower Education Development Index (Brasil, 2008). In all, 1,852 municipalities took part in the program, covering more than 13 million people and 46% of the rural population (Andrade et al., 2016; Rosa & Ferreira, 2018).

However, after four years in operation, PTC began to suffer severe demobilization and major reductions in investment (Favareto & Lotta, 2017; Zimmermann et al., 2014). The funds previously earmarked for PROINF, the main funding program for the TC, were allocated to the Growth Acceleration Program (PAC) and Brazil Without Poverty Program (Antunes Junior et al., 2021). As a result, the PTC, which was already hostage to the adhesion of federal bodies and their resources, had its budgetary structure weakened (Leite & Wesz Júnior, 2012). As a result, the management of the TCs, which was already facing difficulties (such as the permanence of actions for the agricultural sector, the lack of diversity and autonomy of the CODETERs, and the imposition of projects from the top-down by the federal government), was weakened (Favareto, 2010b; Fornazier & Perafán, 2018; Rosa & Ferreira, 2018). In 2016, with the dismissal of the government and MDA, the program came to a complete standstill, marking the end of the country's territorial development strategy.

However, some (few) Brazilian states, recognizing the relevance of this approach, implemented their own territorial development strategy alongside the national policy. The case of Bahia is the most emblematic, as it was a pioneering state in drawing up a State Territorial Development Policy. As Ortega et al. (2016) point out, the Bahian government linked the Federal Government's program to its development strategy “because it believed that the concept of territories would make it easier to link the actions developed by the state government with the federal programs operating in the Bahia territory” (Ortega et al., 2016, p. 65).

This policy is known as Territories of Identity (TI). The design of the program began in 2003, encouraged by PRONAT, but was implemented as a state planning policy in 2008 by the government of Jaques Wagner. In 2010, TI became more robust and was formalized by Decree No. 12.354, of August 25 (Bahia, 2010). As in the federal program, the TI is a territorial development strategy that aims to integrate different public policies, expand mechanisms for social participation in public management, and value the social, cultural, economic, and geographical diversity of populations (Bahia, 2010).

The TIs were also formed by grouping municipalities with relatively similar economic, social, cultural, and geographical characteristics. It's worth noting that nine TCs in the state of Bahia, selected to take part in the PTC, were fully incorporated into the TIs; they continued with the same composition and management groups. These Territories are: Baixo Sul, Chapada Diamantina, Sisal, Irecê, Itaparica, Litoral Sul, Semiárido Nordeste II, Sertão do São Francisco and Velho Chico.

What sets the Bahia policy apart, however, is that all the municipalities in the state are part of one TI. In other words, its scope is not just rural areas. Today there are 27 TIs, covering Bahia's 417 municipalities. Furthermore, in 2014, the state of Bahia went ahead and enacted Law No. 13.214 of December 29, transforming its policy into a State program. This law also formalized the State Council for Territorial Development (CEDETER) and the CODETERs as participatory collegiate bodies for territorial policy (Bahia, 2014).

It is therefore worth noting that Bahia, in addition to implementing its own territorial policy, has also strengthened its management at a territorial level. According to Favareto & Lotta (2017), Bahia was the state that best managed to institutionalize the territorial approach. So, given this scenario, the aim of this paper is to assess the effect of Bahia's territorial planning on its TCs, in comparison with the other TCs in Brazil. Our hypothesis is that Bahia has achieved a superior evolution in important family farming indicators compared to the other Brazilian Territories.

In the following sections, we present a brief theoretical background to territorial development, as well as descriptions of the materials and methods used in this research. Then, the results and discussion are developed and, finally, the final considerations are presented.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

In order to guide the discussion of the territorial development approach, we first look at the concept of territory. To this end, the historical and dialectical materialism proposed by the Brazilian geography renewal movement, which took place from the 1970s onwards, offers some of the most pertinent elements for this line of thinking. This movement debated the concepts of landscape, region, space, and territory, understanding them as the result of the historical relationship between society and nature, giving greater relevance to human interventions (Saquet, 2011).

The great forerunner of this movement was Manuel Correia de Andrade, who presented the concept of region in his work “A terra e o homem no Nordeste” (Andrade, 1963), considering the interactions between elements of nature and society. In this analysis, the author focused mainly on social subjects, presenting aspects related to the use and occupation of land, as well as labor relations (Saquet, 2011). In other words, human issues took center stage in the geography debate, as opposed to the natural elements of physical geography, which had predominated until then.

Human intervention was also highlighted by the author years later, when he discussed the concept of space, pointing out that “when studying space and its production, one must consciously take into account that the space produced is the result of man's action transforming the natural environment according to his needs” (Andrade, 1984, p. 16).

In a more complex way, Milton Santos (Santos, 1978) also discussed geographical space in order to help understand the territory. According to the author, space is a large category, constructed procedurally and historically from a structure organized by forms of social relations, which are manifested through processes and functions, and can undergo changes over time and in line with each society. In the words of Saquet & Silva (2008, p. 31), “geographical space is organized by men living in society, and each society historically produces its space as a place for its own reproduction”.

In the 1990s, there was a greater reflection on the concept of territory, incorporating the idea of power, based on political and economic forces (Andrade, 1995). Raffestin (1993) reinforced this issue, stating that the construction of geographical space is the result of power relations, which are based on political-institutional, socio-economic, cultural, and symbolic- material terms (Fuini, 2014).

Territory, therefore, “can be considered as delimited, constructed and deconstructed by power relations involving a wide range of actors who territorialize their actions over time” (Saquet & Silva, 2008, p. 31). In other words, it is “the processes resulting from this relationship that will dictate the form and function of each spatial arrangement” (Dallabrida, 2020, p. 64).

In this debate, it is important to address the concept of development, which, according to Furtado (2004), cannot be confused with mere economic growth and increased productivity. For the author, development is only characterized when “the social project prioritizes the effective improvement of the living conditions of this population” (Furtado, 2004, p. 484), being the “path of access to social forms that are better able to stimulate human creativity and respond to the aspirations of the community” (Furtado, 2004, p. 485). For Dallabrida et al. (2021b), this perspective should be followed in the territorial development approach.

In the public sphere, territorial development has emerged as a new unit of reference for state action and the implementation of public policies (Schneider, 2004). This approach began in the 1970s, especially in European countries, in the context of the crisis symptoms of social democracy. The reaction to the impacts of globalization also contributed to the spread of the territorial approach, such as the exemplary cases of the constitution of local territories in France and industrial districts in Italy (Pecqueur, 2005). At the same time, there were developments in the debates on the “industrial economy”, the “rural economy” and the “regional and urban economy”, spreading the appreciation of the “local” scale for public planning, with incentives for decentralization and the strengthening of local administrations, as a way of increasing the competitive capacity of territories and overcoming the economic disparities of less dynamic regions (Veiga, 2016). In this sense, Veiga (2016) also highlighted the advantage of adopting the term territory, since it is not used to describe regions. It can simultaneously express all dimensions, from “regional” to “national”, or even to “continental”.

Schneider (2004) also pointed out that the term territorial development was born out of an attempt by the state to respond to strong criticism of its inefficiency in solving urgent social problems such as poverty and unemployment. From this point of view, in addition to the decentralization of public policies, emphasis was placed on valuing the participation of civil society actors and the local spheres of public administration, which implied proposals to create a local governance structure to manage the territory. In this line of approach, “the intervention actions resulting from this shift came to be called territorial development” (Schneider, 2004, pp. 102-103).

With this perspective of including local actors in public management, Pecqueur (2005) reinforced the importance of considering the territory's specific potential for the development process. Thus, the author gave relevance to the socio-cultural dimension of the actors, breaking with the strictly economic bias of development.

As an effect of this line of conception, it is useful to understand territorial development as the result of the continuous process of the society-nature relationship, which can be expressed in the different dimensions of territorial heritage (Dallabrida et al., 2021a). The latter can be listed and characterized as follows:

(i) productive heritage - financial resources, land, machinery, equipment and infrastructure; (ii) natural heritage - natural landscapes (whether or not they have been anthropized), soils, fossils, minerals, fauna and flora; (iii) human and intellectual heritage - know-how, academic and professional training, levels of knowledge and creativity; (iv) cultural heritage - values and codes of conduct, cultural goods and corporate culture; (v) social heritage - socially shared values, forms of association, locally established social networks; (vi) institutional heritage - public and private institutions of a social, cultural, political or corporate nature (Dallabrida, 2020, p. 70).

The first public policies with a territorial focus were implemented in the 1990s, mainly aimed at impoverished rural areas. The Program “Links Between Activities for the Development of Rural Economy” (LEADER), implemented in 1991 in the European Union, was an emblematic example. The program, as it stood at the time, aimed to overcome the failure of traditional top-down policies by introducing Local Action Groups (LAGs) and adopting a multisectoral approach in the most disadvantaged rural territories (European Union, 2021).

This European policy influenced the development of territorial strategies in Brazil, which, as mentioned above, intensified in the early 2000s, with the main aim of combating poverty and social inequality in the countryside. According to experts (Beduschi & Abramovay, 2004; Favareto, 2006; Schneider, 2004; Veiga, 2001), this would only be possible through an intersectoral approach, aimed at overcoming the barrier of the strictly agricultural rural and involving social and cultural dimensions in public actions. It was in this scenario that the Territories of Identity, understood as a municipal grouping formed on the basis of “social, cultural, economic and geographical criteria, and recognized by its population as the historically constructed space to which it belongs, with an identity that expands the possibilities of social and territorial cohesion” (Bahia, 2010, Art. 1, § 1), began to be designed in the state of Bahia, aimed mainly at developing the rural areas (Blatt & Gondim, 2013).

METHODOLOGY

The objective of this study is to quantitatively evaluate the effect of the State Territorial Development Policy of the state of Bahia (the Territories of Identity). To perform this analysis, we used the precepts of the Differences in Differences method (Gertler et al., 2011), but with a small addition. This methodology aims to apply a double difference, that is, it seeks to compare the changes in a variable of interest between the treatment group and the control group, between two time periods.

The control group is the one that has not been intervened by the public policy, while the treatment group is the one that has been interfered by the public policy. These groups need to have relatively similar characteristics so that it is possible to reliably capture the result of the policy intervention. In this way, the best option was to compare the TCs in Bahia (TC-Bahia) with the TCs in the rest of Brazil (TC-Brazil), since they are all Citizenship Territories and therefore have certain similar characteristics. The study by Andrade et al. (2016) helped ratify this choice, showing that the municipalities selected to take part in the PTC mostly met the same eligibility criteria, considering economic, social, and demographic issues. Thus, eight TCs in Bahia¹ (made up of 148 municipalities) are our treatment group - those participating in the Bahian public policy -, while the rest of the TCs in Brazil (1,700 municipalities) make up the control group - municipalities that have not been intervened by the Bahia policy. With this method, it was possible to compare the progress (between two periods) of a variable of interest between the TCs-Bahia (treatment group) and the TCs-Brazil (control group).

It is worth remembering that Bahia's state policy has grouped its municipalities into TI. But, as mentioned earlier, eight of these Territories are also TC. For this reason, these TC units constitute the universe of our study, rather than TI. This choice was made in order to better develop the comparison between Brazil and Bahia. However, we point out that these territorial units, for the state of Bahia, have been called Territories of Identity since 2007.

The next step was to define the target audience of this investigation, that is, the actors impacted by the Bahian policy. This choice fell on family farming since the territorial public policies were primarily aimed at rural areas and, consequently, at their main target audience, family farmers. In fact, there are limitations to this approach. In the debate on territorial development in Brazil, one of the main criticisms pointed out by various authors (Delgado & Grisa, 2014; Favareto, 2009; Favareto, 2010b; Fornazier & Perafán, 2018; Oliveira & Dias, 2015; Rosa & Ferreira, 2018) was the absence of intersectionality and the predominance of family farming in the Collegiate bodies (CODETERs), implying that priority actions were directed towards family farmers. The expansion of groups and sectors beyond agriculture in this process is therefore desirable.

However, it should be emphasized that the main objective of the territorial public policy in Bahia is to reduce inequalities through socio-productive inclusion, especially for these farmers. Therefore, there is nothing more appropriate than assessing whether this objective is being achieved, given that it has never been done before. In any case, if the criticism is pertinent in terms of a territorial development strategy, family farming must be considered in its multifunctionality, capable of being the basis for diversifying activities beyond agriculture. From this point of view, the objective of assessing the impact of public policy on this specific group is quite justifiable, which does not imply neglecting considerations about the intersectoral nature of public management. The latter, incidentally, was notably addressed based on the relationship between the different dimensions of territorial heritage (Dallabrida, 2020) in the process of developing family farming.

In fact, the multifunctionality of family farming deserves more attention here in the definition of this scope. As explained in the work of Maria José Carneiro & Renato Maluf (Carneiro & Maluf, 2003) and ratified by international organizations, family production involves multiple functions² , which have repercussions on sectors other than agriculture, reaching the entire territory and expanding opportunities for the population.

To act as the variable of interest (or comparison), a Rural Development Index for Family Agriculture (RDI-FA) was developed. It is worth noting that other rural development indices have already been devised in the Brazilian literature (Pinto & Coronel, 2014), but none have been exclusive to family farming. More recently, Dallabrida et al. (2023) proposed a Multidimensional Index of Territorial Heritage Activation (IMAP) as a methodological tool for diagnosing the territorial perspective in an integrated, interdisciplinary and multidimensional perspective.

Therefore, based on the multidimensional nature of the territorial development process, the RDI-FA proposed here was inspired by the practical approach of Conterato et al. (2007) and by the theoretical basis of the composition of the territorial heritage, understanding that the components of the territorial heritage are the main guideline for analyzing the performance of the territorial approach (Dallabrida, 2020). However, as will be shown below, some restrictions and changes were considered when conducting the evaluation.

To build the RDI-FA, a database was first created using public information from the 2006 and 2017 Agricultural Censuses of the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). The database has 1,848 observations, which represent the 148 municipalities belonging to TC-Bahia and 1,700 to TC-Brazil. In all, 28 variables were selected and divided into four³ territorial heritage indicators: productive; natural; intellectual; and institutional. The selection of variables followed the suggestion of Dallabrida (2020) - which also influenced the study by Dallabrida et al. (2023) - but with some restrictions, due to the unavailability of information in census data. The intention was to choose variables that represented the different dimensions of the territory, beyond those relating to the economic-productive sphere of family farming, making it possible to represent, for example, the ways of guaranteeing the reproduction and well-being of these families. However, it was not possible to consider the values and attributes of all territorial heritage components, as well as intangible issues specific to the territory's actors (Dallabrida, 2020), representing a limitation of the research.

The variables in the productive dimension refer to issues of income and agricultural production, including equipment and industrialization. The institutional dimension is represented by variables related to public policies on access to citizenship rights offered to this population (the programs Family Grant, PRONAF, Light for All, Water for All, and public technical assistance). The human-intellectual issue is based on the educational background of the household head. Finally, the natural dimension is associated with forms of agricultural cultivation and nature conservation.

The data is exclusive to family farming and was collected from the IBGE's Automatic Recovery System (SIDRA). The periods selected for this investigation were 2006 (before the implementation of the Bahian public policy) and 2017 (after the PTC was halted and TI was implemented).

As the open access information from the Census is available at a municipal level, the data was adjusted so that it could be compared with each other. In other words, all the variables were transformed into the average value or percentage of family farming establishments, as shown in Chart 1.

Chart 1
Variables used to construct the RDI-FA

Dimension	Variable	Description
PRODUCTIVE	Revenue	% of establishments earning revenue from the establishment's production
	Expenses	% of establishments that incurred expenditure
	Production	Average value of total production by establishments (Thousand BRL)
	Temporary crop	% of establishments producing temporary crops
	Horticulture	% of establishments with horticultural production
	Permanent crop	% of establishments producing permanent crops
	Livestock	% of establishments with livestock production
	Agro-industry	Average value of the establishments' agro-industry production (Thousand BRL)
	Tractor	% of establishments with tractors
	Vehicle	% of establishments with vehicles. For 2006, the number of establishments that used means of transportation was taken into account (except for trailers, boats and animal-drawn vehicles, which were not considered in the 2017 Census).
	Irrigation	% of establishments using irrigation
	Employment	Average number of workers per establishment
INSTITUTIONAL	Social Program	% of establishments that participated in government social programs (federal, state or municipal)
	Financing	% of establishments that obtained financing
	Energy	% of establishments with electricity
	Water	% of establishments with water resources
	Cistern/well	% of establishments with water wells and/or cisterns
	Technical assistance	% of establishments that received technical assistance
INTELLECTUAL	Literate	% of establishments where the person running the establishment can read and write
	Primary	% of establishments where the person running the establishment has primary education
	High school	% of establishments where the person running the establishment has completed high school
	Graduation	% of establishments where the person running the establishment has a bachelor’s degree
NATURAL	Legal Reserve Area	% of the establishment area set aside for permanent preservation or legal reserve (Hectares)
	Forest Area	% of the establishment area devoted to woodlands and/or natural forests (Hectares)
	SAF area	% of the establishment area used for Agroforestry Systems (Hectares)
	Pesticides	% of establishments not using pesticides
	Organic	% of establishments declaring to be organic
	Organic fertilizer	% of establishments that used organic fertilization (for 2006, it was considered “green manure”)

• Source: Organized by the authors. Data collected from the 2006 and 2017 Agricultural Censuses (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2009, 2019).

The first step in constructing the RDI-FA was to standardize the data, since all the information needed to be comparable with each other. As in the case of Conterato et al. (2007), we opted for an index that varied between 0 and 1 (similar to the HDI) and, therefore, we normalized the data using the Minimum-Maximum technique, according to the formula below:

$$X_{\text{normalized}}=\frac{X-X_{\min }}{X_{\max }-X_{\min }}$$ (1)

Next, in order to better quantify the impact of land management, the data was weighted using the ABC method, which qualified the variables into three distinct groups. The variables in group A were given a higher weight of 30%, group B 15%, and group C remained the same. The choice of variables to make up each group was based on the main objective of the territorial policy, thus giving greater weight in particular to issues of social and productive inclusion, as shown in Chart 2 below.

Chart 2
ABC weighting structure

GROUP A (x 1,3)	GROUP B (x 1.15)	GROUP C (x 1)
Revenue	Production	Temporary crop
Financing	Expenditure	Permanent crop
Horticulture	Agro-industry	Tractor
Livestock	High school	Vehicle
Technical assistance	Graduation	Legal reserve area
Energy	SAF area	Forest area
Water		Pesticides
Cistern/well		Organic fertilizer
Irrigation
Social program
Literacy
Primary school
Employment

• Source: Organized by the authors.

The next step was to compose the RDI-FA for the two periods, 2006 and 2017, which was formed by the simple arithmetic average of the four indicators, represented by the productive, institutional, intellectual, and natural dimensions. The indicators, in turn, were calculated from the simple arithmetic mean of the variables that make them up. The impact of the public policy was measured in two stages. In the first, the difference in the RDI-FA between the periods (2017 and 2006) was calculated, and in the second, the difference between the two analysis groups (TC-Bahia and TC-Brazil). By carrying out the first step, the evolution of the RDI-FA was obtained, that is, the progress/stagnation/setback of the index over the ten years. However, before carrying out the second stage of calculating the impact, and with a view to improve this evolution information, a correlation weighting was carried out, since there were strongly correlated variables. The weighting coefficient followed the formula below and was calculated using the Spearman test in the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) program.

$$Weightingcoefficient=1-0.5*corr$$ (2)

Here, corr represented the highest significant correlation (p-value < 0.01) in the evolution of the variable. In this way, the evolution of the RDI-FA (difference between the 2017 and 2006 periods) was obtained, weighted by the correlation for each municipality. To form the evolution of the index for each TC group (Bahia and Brazil), the simple arithmetic average of the values obtained in the “n” municipalities that made up the group was calculated. Finally, to finish calculating the impact, the difference in the evolution of the RDI- FA between the two analysis groups (TC-Bahia and TC-Brazil) was calculated.

Subsequently, the Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests were carried out in the SAS program to check whether the difference in the evolution of the RDI-FA between the two research groups was also statistically significant. In addition, in order to validate this result and also to respond to criticisms about the lack of intersectoral management, the Firjan Municipal Development Indices (IFDM)⁴ for Education and General were mobilized. These indices are equivalent to the HDI (Education and General) and were selected since the latter had not yet been released, due to the delay in carrying out the 2022 Demographic Census. The data for all the municipalities that make up the TC was collected from the FIRJAN System website (Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, 2023) and refers to the years 2006 and 2015. In the same way as for the RDI-FA, the evolution (difference between two periods) of the IFDM was calculated for each TC group and then the same statistical tests were conducted to check for significant differences.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the RDI-FA evolution and the impact of the TI program are shown in Table 1. It should be noted that both groups saw an increase in the index, indicating that the living conditions of family farmers in all TCs improved during the period 2006-2017. This also indicates that there are exogenous factors to public policy. The study by Caniello (2016), for example, corroborates this statement. The author assessed the quality of life of rural families in 37 TCs in 17 Brazilian states, revealing that the socio-economic conditions of farmers in all TCs improved during the decade 2001-2010.

Table 1
Evolution of the RDI-FA in the TCs of Bahia and Brazil

TC	PRODUCTIVE	INSTITUTIONAL	INTELLECTUAL	NATURAL	RDI-FA
2006
BA	0.31	0.32	0.22	0.21	0.26
BR	0.37	0.48	0.26	0.19	0.33
2017
BA	0.37	0.51	0.29	0.26	0.36
BR	0.42	0.55	0.33	0.22	0.38
CORRELATION-WEIGHTED EVOLUTION (2017-2006)
BA	0.050	0.145	0.053	0.030	0.069
BR	0.039	0.047	0.051	0.016	0.038
BA vs. BR comparison	+ 27%	+ 209%	+ 3.4%	+ 83%	+ 81%
Impact (Bahia - Brazil)					0.031

• Source: Research results.

Similarly, the work of Cerqueira & Jesus (2016) showed that the Southern Coast Territory in Bahia showed great progress in socioeconomic indicators between 2000 and 2010, such as a significant reduction in poverty, especially extreme poverty, an increase in HDI and per capita income, as well as a drop in illiteracy. These positive effects on both groups were therefore to be expected, as the decade 2000-2010 was known for its substantial progress in socio-economic indicators in all Brazilian municipalities (Favareto, 2010b; Hoffmann, 2021).

However, our study reveals that the RDI-FA in TC-Bahia (BA) made 81% more progress than TC-Brazil (BR), suggesting a positive effect of the Bahian policy. It should be noted that progress in Bahia was higher in all four indicators, with special emphasis on the institutional dimension, which grew 209% more than in the rest of Brazil. Comparing the indices for 2017 and 2006, it can also be seen that the asymmetry between the groups reduced substantially over the period. In 2006, the difference in the RDI-FA between the groups was 0.07 (0.33 - 0.26) and in 2017 it fell to 0.02 (0.38 - 0.36), suggesting that territorial management has also helped to reduce disparities between TCs.

To check whether this difference in the evolution of the RDI-FA between the two research groups was statistically significant, the Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests were carried out using the SAS program. The results in Figure 1 show that progress in TC- Bahia was significantly higher than in TC-Brazil (p-value < 0.01).

Figure 1
Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare the evolution of the RDI-FA (IDR⁵ ) between TC-Brazil (BR) and TC-Bahia (BA).

However, before we start discussing the possible reasons for the better performance of Bahia state, it is important to point out that quantitative impact evaluations of territorial public policies for rural areas are quite limited in the Brazilian scientific literature. Neder & Lopes (2016) confirm this scarcity of quantitative empirical studies on territorial development programs. Andrade et al. (2016) also mention that quantitative monitoring of the territorial program at the national level (PCT) has been little debated in academia and public management. As a result, there is little quantitative data available on the performance of the territorial public policy. Therefore, we used qualitative studies carried out on both the PTC and TI as a basis for this discussion.

The research by Neder & Lopes (2016) was the only one to actually carry out an impact analysis. The authors measured the effect of the PTC in the state of Minas Gerais, comparing the municipalities that took part in the program with those that were not selected to take part in the TCs. Using data from 2000 to 2010, the results showed that, of the 18 indicators evaluated, only agricultural GDP showed a significantly greater evolution in the TC municipalities. On the other hand, the indicators relating to social infrastructure, such as water supply and sanitation, did not grow significantly in the municipalities that took part in the program, thus indicating that, up to that point (2010), the territorial management designed by the federal government had not provided significant effects in the state of Minas Gerais.

However, as mentioned in the introduction, the case of Bahia is emblematic, since it was the state that best institutionalized the territorial development policy (Favareto & Lotta, 2017). In fact, this intensification of the territorial approach in the state is clear. One of the main innovations applied in Bahia was the use of the TI as a reference for drawing up the state Multiannual Plan (PPA), which has also been done in a participatory manner since 2008. This initiative has made it possible to “plan and implement policies in line with local needs and potentiality” (Bahia, 2012, p. 34). According to Pomponet (2008), the participatory PPA is also of unique importance:

Firstly, because it covers all the programs and projects planned for the following four-year period. Secondly, because of its strategic dimension, given the visibility assigned to the administration's most important initiatives. Thirdly, because the annual budget is linked to and cannot be at odds with the multiannual plan, which reinforces its relevance. Social participation in the formulation of the PPA and in monitoring its implementation is therefore of fundamental importance for the good performance of social policies (Pomponet, 2008, p. 141).

According to Dias (2016), despite the challenges and limitations of the PPA monitoring, this action was very successful over the three editions analyzed, from 2008 (when the first participatory plan was drawn and referenced in the TIs) to 2015, accounting for 69 plenary sessions, the involvement of more than 20,000 participants and the formulation of more than 12,000 proposals, designed in conjunction with civil society. It is also important to note that all State Government Secretariats take part in this process, and some of their representatives have returned to the Territories to give feedback on the proposals selected in the form of Thematic Conferences (e.g., Culture, Human Rights, Education, Health, Rural Development, Technical Assistance and Rural Extension), totaling more than 290 meetings of this nature (Dias, 2016). As a result of this stage, the proposals for the State Conferences are chosen and, in this context, the proposals for the National Conferences are selected, pointing out to the Union the federal public policies that should be prioritized for the state.

As an example, for the preparation of the PPA-P 2008-2011, the strategy adopted led to the process being divided into two major development axes. The first encompassed the themes of education, health, security, human rights, culture, sport, leisure, social assistance, and digital inclusion, as well as social infrastructure (housing and urban planning, sanitation, and energy), while the second addressed sustainable economic growth with job creation and income distribution (Bahia, 2012). It can therefore be seen that all dimensions of the territory were discussed in this joint process of defining territorial development strategies.

It is also worth mentioning the importance of the Bahia Planning Secretariat (SEPLAN) in coordinating these actions. SEPLAN, with the support of the territorial development agents and the territorial coordination coordinators, has the role of leading the preparation of the participatory PPA, as well as coordinating and monitoring the implementation of public policies and the PTDR. To support it in these matters, SEPLAN also has the PPA Monitoring Council (CAPPA), the State Coordination of Territories (CET), and the State Territorial Development Council (CEDETER).

The participation of civil society in the process of drawing up the PPA takes place through the Social Hearings, which are characterized by public consultations in the form of plenary sessions, to collect demands and proposals from the population. CODETER, which functions as a territorial governance structure, plays a key role in this process, mobilizing civil society to participate in the plenary sessions. In this sense, Dias (2016) highlights the institutionalization and proper functioning of these Committees, which are also responsible for drawing up the PTDR. According to the author, the vast majority of the TIs in Bahia have made progress in formalizing their Committee, through the implementation of internal regulations and other devices (such as the establishment of a leadership nucleus and thematic forums/committees), strengthening the Territories and differentiating themselves in relation to Brazil:

In addition to social participation, the Identity Territories of Bahia, in relation to those in Brazil, which were also encouraged by the SDT/MDA, have made the most progress in terms of territorial governance. In the state, most of the 27 Territories have Collegiate Bodies set up in accordance with Resolution 52 of the National Council for Rural Development and Support for Family Farming (CONDRAF), which provides for the composition of these institutions with criteria of plurality, representativeness and diversity of representatives (Dias, 2016, p. 101).

Despite facing difficulties in the process of territorial governance, Oliveira & Dias (2015), when carrying out a study on the Sisal Territory in Bahia, also revealed that the formalization of the Committee led to greater democratization in the TI, increasing the participation of local actors in the process of managing public policies. As pointed out by Dallabrida (2015), strong territorial governance guarantees the convergence of interests between the different actors - such as public bodies, companies, associations, cooperatives, etc. - also enabling innovative proposals to be drawn up for the territory (Cazella et al., 2020).

Another distinguishing feature of territorial management in Bahia is the Intermunicipal Public Consortia (PC). Today, Bahia is the state with the largest number of formalized and functioning PCs: there are a total of 28 devices of this nature, covering all TI (Bahia, 2022). According to Dias (2016), these bodies were formed under the direct influence of territorial governance, because it was “from the public policy of territorial development that the Territorial Committee began to take ownership of the legislation and set up these public institutions in conjunction with the Territories” (Dias, 2016, p. 107). This is a way of directly impacting the Territory's institutional capacity to implement new actions, improving the provision of public services, such as sanitation, the construction of cisterns, the acquisition of agricultural equipment, and environmental management (Silva, 2015). In this sense, Carvalho et al. (2016) pointed out that several actions were carried out in the municipalities of Bahia through the PCs, registering advances in the optimization of public resources and improvements in the quality of services provided. In addition, the PCs are members of the CODETERs and therefore take part in discussions on prioritizing investments in the TI.

In this way, it becomes clearer why the institutional dimension performed better in TC-Bahia compared to TC-Brazil. Both family farming programs (PRONAF) and federal infrastructure programs (Light for All, Water for All, and Family Grant) were boosted by improved territorial governance, thus reaching a larger portion of the rural population.

As for the productive dimension, although Bahia has achieved greater progress compared to Brazil, the effect of the territorialization of public planning does not yet seem to be significant. The difficulty in boosting the economy and promoting the productive inclusion of farmers was also highlighted by Nunes et al. (2015) in other TCs in Brazil. This is because the territorial approach in Brazil focused on combating poverty, with a priority and mistaken emphasis on social policies (Delgado & Grisa, 2014). Thus, it has failed to incorporate significant processes of change to boost rural economy (Favareto, 2010a). An example of this is the concentration of resources in policies of the Ministry of Social Development (MDS) to the detriment of investments in agrarian reform actions (Leite & Wesz Júnior, 2012), a fundamental element for reducing poverty and promoting development in rural areas (Mattei, 2012; Medina et al., 2021).

However, it is worth noting that, in recent years, the state of Bahia has made progress in the productive inclusion of family farming through two projects coordinated by the public Regional Development and Action Company (CAR): Productive Bahia and Pro-Semiarid. The Productive Bahia project began in 2015 and aims to strengthen family farming by integrating it into the market, promoting food and nutritional security, and improving the basic infrastructure needed to produce and market agricultural products (Companhia de Desenvolvimento e Ação Regional, 2019). The program is run in partnership with the state government and the World Bank, which provides funds (non-repayable) for the implementation of projects through public calls for proposals. The CODETERs, which also include CAR as a member, are responsible for publicizing the calls for proposals and approving the proposals submitted by family farmers’ associations and cooperatives. By 2020, 15 calls for proposals and USD 260 million (more than BRL 1 billion) had already been applied by the program, benefiting more than 56,000 families, quilombola communities, indigenous communities, bottoms and closures pasture and agrarian reform settlements (Companhia de Desenvolvimento e Ação Regional, 2019).

The Pro-Semiarid project, implemented in 2016, is based on a loan agreement signed with the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), aimed at eradicating poverty and facilitating coexistence with drought. To this end, services and investments are offered directly to families, such as ongoing and specialized technical assistance, promotion of water security activities, sustainable production, agro-industrialization, and marketing of production (Companhia de Desenvolvimento e Ação Regional, 2019). By 2020, BRL 500 million (approximately USD 120 million) had been invested to assist 70,000 families in 32 municipalities in the semi-arid region (Companhia de Desenvolvimento e Ação Regional, 2019).

However, as these actions are more recent (implemented since 2015), there has not yet been enough time to capture all their impacts, as the data covered in this study refers to 2017. Furthermore, it should be noted that these CAR actions still reach a small percentage of farmers, given that the state has approximately 600,000 family farming establishments (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2019). Thus, it is believed that Bahia's policy still has great opportunities for improvement in this area, especially in promoting actions to boost the economy of the Territories.

The intellectual dimension had the least impact when comparing TC-Bahia and TC-Brazil. This shows that territorial planning has not had a significant effect on the average level of schooling of the person who manages the agricultural establishment. However, according to Dias (2016), the state's Department of Education has carried out important initiatives, such as the installation of the Territorial Professional Education Centers (CETEP) in all the TIs. The CETEPs offer courses under the National Technical Education and Employment Program (PRONATEC) and complementary high school training (PROEJA) for young people and adults aged 16 to 29. Fagundes (2015) also showed that the priorities listed by the Bahian population in the PPA-2008-2011 for education have been realized, such as investments in school transportation, including for rural areas, construction, and renovation of school units, acquisition of equipment and training courses for teachers.

However, as the information used to assess the impact of the intellectual dimension refers to the Agricultural Census, which only considers the level of education of the establishment's managers, and the majority of them are over 55 years old (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2019), it was not possible to gauge the impact of the initiatives mentioned above. Therefore, as a way of trying to estimate the effect of territorial planning on education, we used a comparison of the evolution of the IFDM-Education between TC-Bahia and TC-Brazil. Figure 2 below shows that the index actually performed better in Bahia, reaching an evolution of 0.30, compared to 0.21 in the Brazilian Territories (p-value < 0.01).

Figure 2
Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare the evolution of the IFDM-Education between TC Brazil (BR) and TC Bahia (BA).

Sustainable cultivation and the management of natural resources were also more prominent in the TC-Bahia. One possible explanation is the strong promotion of agroecology in recent decades, especially by the Bahia Agroecology Articulation (Oliveira Junior & Lamine, 2013). In this direction, we highlight the state government's adherence to Bill No. 20.114/2012, regulating agroecological production in the state. In addition, both Productive Bahia and Pro-Semiarid projects follow the principles of agroecology and sustainable production in their activities. These actions seem to be having an effect, such as the promotion of the use of Agroforestry Systems (SAF), which, according to IBGE data (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2009, 2019) had a significantly higher evolution in TC-Bahia compared to TC-Brazil. This highlights the importance of territorial policy in expanding the social function of land by encouraging more sustainable forms of production, valuing care for nature, and the conservation of biodiversity and natural resources.

The impact of Bahia's territorial policy is also reflected in other indicators at a municipal level. Figure 3 (below) illustrates the evolution of the IFDM-General, which performed better in TC-Bahia in comparison to TC-Brazil. TC-Bahia achieved an average increase of 0.14 in the index between 2006 and 2015, while the rest of TC-Brazil increased by an average of 0.10. This result is also statistically significant (p-value < 0.01). The positive effect corresponds to Carneiro & Maluf's (2003) perspective, according to which the multifunctionality of family farming implies the expansion of its activities beyond the agricultural sector.

Figure 3
Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests for comparing the evolution of the IFDM-General between TC Brazil (BR) and TC Bahia (BA).

However, territorial management in Bahia also faces challenges. The monitoring and follow-up of the PPA is one of these limitations. According to SEPLAN, despite the progress that has been made over the years, CAPPA still needs to be strengthened. It needs to be instrumentalized and its participating members trained, in addition to establishing more territorial dialogues for the return of results, which would guarantee greater social control of public management by segments of civil society (Bahia, 2012).

Taking the case of the Sisal TC in Bahia, Silva (2016) also pointed out that the effects of territorial public policy are not symmetrical between the municipalities that make up the Territory. For the author, it would therefore be pertinent to build a local territorial pact, capable of extending the reach of the projects to more distant municipalities, in order to prevent the actions from being appropriated by the economic, political, and social agents around the TI headquarters. In addition, Ortega et al. (2016) mentioned the large spatial extent of the TI in Bahia, with a high number of municipalities, which hinders social cohesion between actors throughout the territory, thus limiting the scope and coverage of territorial development actions.

Furthermore, as stated above, there is still a predominance of Committee actions aimed at the primary sector of the economy and its main representative, family farmers, which account for almost 80% of the state's agricultural establishments (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2019). Indeed, the main institutions represented in the Territorial Committee are strongly linked to rural production, and, therefore, the greatest investment opportunities are directed towards this segment, especially lower-income farmers (Dias, 2016). However, it is important to note that 57% of these municipalities have fewer than 20,000 inhabitants and their economies are centered on family farming (Bahia, 2022), in addition to the high concentration of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross Value Added (GVA) of industry and commerce in a few Territories, mainly in the metropolitan region of Salvador, the state capital (Superintendência de Estudos Econômicos e Sociais da Bahia, 2023). Thus, in the view of Dias (2016), boosting the economy of the TIs is more viable through agricultural activities, which are therefore prioritized by public policies and local actors.

In this vein, Ortega et al. (2016) believe that the leading products or productive activities identified in each Territory could be boosted in local socio-productive arrangements, working as multipliers of skills, resources, values, and attitudes. In this way, “public development policies aimed at rural areas should collaborate to create different possibilities for the rural population to enter new markets, both for products and labor” (Ortega et al., 2016, p. 81).

Another way to help solve this obstacle would be to include other sectors in CODETER's composition, making it possible to expand the Committee’s activities to meet demands not related to agriculture, as well as to bring relations with the market and between urban and rural areas closer together (Delgado & Grisa, 2014; Favareto, 2009, 2010b; Fornazier & Perafán, 2018; Rosa & Ferreira, 2018). To this end, Nunes et al. (2014) believe that the governance structures of these dialog spaces need to be improved. For the authors, it would be necessary to overcome the deficiencies in social management and reduce the weaknesses in the institutional capacities of the collegiate bodies, by expanding the networks of articulation and participation, reducing asymmetries, and training collegiate members.

CONCLUSIONS

Since the creation of the Territories of Identity, the state government of Bahia has implemented important innovations that have improved territorial planning and governance. In fact, Bahia’s TCs have achieved significantly higher growth in their Family Farming Rural Development Index, compared to the rest of Brazil’s TCs, whose territorial management has been paralyzed.

Thus, it can be inferred that the state’s territorial policy has had positive effects on family farming, with a stronger impact on the institutional dimension of territorial heritage. In other words, the territorialization of public actions in the state of Bahia has made it possible to integrate different public policies, expanding the reach of programs such as PRONAF, Light for All, Water for All, and Family Grant to a greater degree.

The conclusion is that the territorial approach proves to be a relevant social inclusion strategy for rural areas. As a result, a new generation of territorial public policies could be reconsidered in the public debate on the future of Brazilian rural development, bearing in mind, however, the need to improve the ways in which they operate, in order to encourage greater dynamization of the Territories economy, including agrarian reform actions, and schooling for older farmers.

Finally, it is important to highlight that the research is still ongoing. This article has presented some of the quantitative results regarding the effects of Bahia's public policy on the RDI-FA, as well as the evolution in the way it is measured. However, it recognizes the need to complement it with other statistical models to confirm the impact, as well as qualitative methodologies to obtain a broader and more multidimensional investigation of the territorial approach, including other dimensions and intangible attributes of the territory, that were not considered at this stage.

• 1
  The TC-Itaparica was excluded from this study because it contains municipalities in the state of Pernambuco.
• 2
  These functions include: maintaining the social and cultural relations, promoting food security, preserving the landscape and natural resources and the economic reproduction of communities (Carneiro & Maluf, 2003).
• 3
  The "cultural" and "social" dimensions were not considered at this stage of the research due to the lack of sufficient quantitative information from census data.
• 4
  The IFDM is a study that annually monitors the socio-economic development of all Brazilian municipalities in three areas: Employment & Income, Education, and Health. The General Index is the mean of the three areas. The index was created in 2008 and is based on official public statistics provided by the ministries of Labor, Education and Health.
• 5
  Portuguese translation of Rural Development Index: Índice de Desenvolvimento Rural (IDR).
• How to cite: Schiesari, C., Moruzzi Marques, P. E., & Sarriés, G. A. (2024). Effects of territorial management on the Rural Development Index for Family Agriculture in the Citizenship Territories in Bahia state, Brazil. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 62(3), e272742. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9479.2023.272742en
• JEL classification: O2; Q18; R58

REFERÊNCIAS

• Andrade, M. C. (1963). A terra e o homem no Nordeste São Paulo: Brasiliense.
• Andrade, M. C. (1984). Poder político e produção do espaço Recife: Massangana.
• Andrade, M. C. (1995). A questão do território no Brasil São Paulo: Hucitec.
• Andrade, P. G., Strauch, J. C. M., & Ferreira, G. (2016). Avaliação dos critérios de elegibilidade do programa Territórios da Cidadania. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 54(4), 599-614. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1234-56781806-94790540401
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1234-56781806-94790540401
• Antunes Junior, W. F. A., Borsatto, R. S., & Souza-Esquerdo, V. F. (2021). Why is it so difficult to promote territorial development through public policies? The obstacles faced by Brazilian experience. World Development Perspectives, 24, e100367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2021.100367
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2021.100367
• Bahia. (2010, agosto 25). Decreto nº 12.354 de 25 de agosto de 2010. Diário Oficial do Estado da Bahia, Salvador.
• Bahia. (2012). Caderno SEPLAN. PPA participativo: registro de uma história Recuperado em 13 de setembro de 2023, de https://www.seplan.ba.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/Caderno_PPA_Participativo_Dezembro_2012.pdf
  » https://www.seplan.ba.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/Caderno_PPA_Participativo_Dezembro_2012.pdf
• Bahia. (2014, dezembro 30). Lei nº 13.214 de 29 de dezembro de 2014. Diário Oficial do Estado da Bahia, Salvador.
• Bahia. (2022). A política territorial do estado da Bahia: histórico e estratégias de implementação Recuperado em 4 de setembro de 2023, de https://www.seplan.ba.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/Texto-DPT-Politica-Territorial_-V-2.0-2022.pdf
  » https://www.seplan.ba.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/Texto-DPT-Politica-Territorial_-V-2.0-2022.pdf
• Beduschi, L. C. F., & Abramovay, R. (2004). Desafios para o desenvolvimento das regiões rurais. Nova Economia, 14(3), 35-70. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://revistas.face.ufmg.br/index.php/novaeconomia/article/view/436
  » https://revistas.face.ufmg.br/index.php/novaeconomia/article/view/436
• Blatt, N., & Gondim, P. S. C. (2013). Territórios de Identidade no estado da Bahia: uma análise da regionalização implantada pela estrutura governamental na perspectiva do desenvolvimento local e regional. In Tempos, Espaço e Representações: Abordagens Geográficas e Históricas (pp. 1-19). Vitória da Conquista: Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia.
• Brasil. (2008). Decreto de 25 de fevereiro de 2008: institui o Programa Territórios da Cidadania e dá outras providências. Recuperado em 5 de janeiro de 2020, de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2008/dnn/dnn11503.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2008/dnn/dnn11503.htm
• Caniello, M. (2016). Identidade e qualidade de vida nos Territórios da Cidadania. Sociologias, 18(43), 300-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/15174522-018004313
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/15174522-018004313
• Carneiro, M. J., & Maluf, R. (2003). Para além da produção: multifuncionalidade e agricultura familiar Rio de Janeiro: MAUAD.
• Carvalho, S. M. L., Xavier, T. S., & Pinto, F. L. B. (2016). Trajetória dos consórcios públicos baianos: oportunidades e desafios para uma política de desenvolvimento territorial. In IX Congresso CONSAD de Gestão Pública (pp. 1-27). Brasília: CONSAD. Recuperado em 29 de março de 2023, de http://consad.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Painel-36-02.pdf
  » http://consad.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Painel-36-02.pdf
• Cazella, A. A., Medeiros, M., Desconsi, C., Schneider, S., & Paula, L. G. N. (2020). O enfoque da cesta de bens e serviços territoriais: seus fundamentos teóricos e aplicação no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 16(3), 193-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v16i3.5881
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v16i3.5881
• Cerqueira, C. A., & Jesus, C. M. (2016). O território Litoral Sul. In A. C. Ortega & M. J. S. Pires (Eds.), As políticas territoriais rurais e a articulação governo federal e estadual: um estudo de caso da Bahia (pp. 185-212). Brasília: IPEA.
• Companhia de Desenvolvimento e Ação Regional – CAR. (2019). Carta anual de políticas públicas e governança corporativa Recuperado em 13 de abril de 2023, de http://www.car.ba.gov.br/sites/default/files/2020-10/Carta%20Anual%20da%20CAR.pdf
  » http://www.car.ba.gov.br/sites/default/files/2020-10/Carta%20Anual%20da%20CAR.pdf
• Conterato, M., Schneider, S., & Waquil, P. (2007). Desenvolvimento rural no estado do Rio Grande do Sul: uma análise multidimensional de suas desigualdades regionais. Redes, 12(2), 163-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.17058/redes.v12i2.265
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.17058/redes.v12i2.265
• Dallabrida, V. R. (2015). Governança territorial: do debate teórico à avaliação da sua prática. Análise Social, 50(215), 304-328.
• Dallabrida, V. R. (2020). Território e governança territorial, patrimônio e desenvolvimento territorial: estrutura, processo, forma e função na dinâmica territorial do desenvolvimento. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 16(2), 63-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v16i2.5395
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v16i2.5395
• Dallabrida, V. R., Mueller, A. A., Andrade, A. A. V., Carniello, M. F., Büttenbender, P. L., Gumiero, R. G., Denardin, V. F., Rotta, E., & Menezes, E. C. O. (2023). Índice Multidimensional da Ativação do Patrimônio Territorial: uma proposta de referencial metodológico para estudos territoriais. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 21(59), e14586. http://dx.doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2023.59.14586
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2023.59.14586
• Dallabrida, V. R., Rotta, E., & Büttenbender, P. L. (2021a). Pressupostos epistêmico-teóricos convergentes com a abordagem territorial. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 17(2), 256-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v17i2.6343
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v17i2.6343
• Dallabrida, V. R., Rotta, E., Büttenbender, P. L., Denardin, V. F., & Arenhart, L. O. (2021b). Abordagem territorial do desenvolvimento: categorias conceituais e pressupostos metodológicos. Revista Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Territorial Sustentável, 7(1), 43-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/guaju.v7i1.80437
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/guaju.v7i1.80437
• Delgado, N. G., & Grisa, C. (2014). Políticas de desenvolvimento territorial e pobreza rural no Brasil: análise das institucionalidades e da governança. Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura, 22(1), 132-163. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://revistaesa.com/ojs/index.php/esa/article/view/471
  » https://revistaesa.com/ojs/index.php/esa/article/view/471
• Dias, W. J. V. (2016). Uma visão panorâmica dos principais resultados nos 10 anos da política de desenvolvimento territorial na Bahia. In D. U. Cruz (Org.), O mundo rural na Bahia: democracia, território e ruralidades (Vol. 1, pp. 95-132). Feira de Santana: Z Arte Editora.
• European Union. (2021). The LEADER approach Recuperado em 29 de junho de 2022, de https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/leader-clld/leader-toolkit/leaderclld-explained_en
  » https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/leader-clld/leader-toolkit/leaderclld-explained_en
• Fagundes, H. C. C. (2015). O Plano Plurianual Participativo na Bahia 2008-2011: uma breve análise sobre a educação básica (Monografia). Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira, São Francisco do Conde.
• Favareto, A. (2006). Paradigmas do desenvolvimento rural em questão - do agrário ao territorial (Tese de doutorado). Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
• Favareto, A. (2009). As tentativas de adoção da abordagem territorial do desenvolvimento rural – lições para uma nova geração de políticas públicas. Raízes, 29(1), 52-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2009.v28.300
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2009.v28.300
• Favareto, A. (2010a). A abordagem territorial do desenvolvimento rural-mudança institucional ou “inovação por adição”? Estudos Avançados, 24(68), 299-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142010000100021
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142010000100021
• Favareto, A. (2010b). As políticas de desenvolvimento territorial rural no Brasil em perspectiva – uma década de experimentações. Desenvolvimento em Debate, 1(2), 46-63. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/dd/article/view/31916/18075
  » https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/dd/article/view/31916/18075
• Favareto, A., & Lotta, G. (2017). Inovações institucionais nas políticas para o desenvolvimento territorial em três estados brasileiros. Redes, 22(3), 11-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.17058/redes.v22i3.10409
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.17058/redes.v22i3.10409
• Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Rio de Janeiro – FIRJAN. (2023). Índice FIRJAN de desenvolvimento municipal (IFDM) Recuperado em 17 de janeiro de 2022, de https://www.firjan.com.br/ifdm/
  » https://www.firjan.com.br/ifdm/
• Fornazier, A., & Perafán, M. E. V. (2018). Os arranjos das Políticas Territoriais no estado da Bahia. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 14(5), 17-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v14i5.4087
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.54399/rbgdr.v14i5.4087
• Fuini, L. L. (2014). A territorialização do desenvolvimento: construindo uma proposta metodológica. Interações, 15(1), 21-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1518-70122014000100003
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1518-70122014000100003
• Furtado, C. (2004). Os desafios da nova geração. Revista de Economia Política, 24(96), 483-486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0101-35172004-1639
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0101-35172004-1639
• Gertler, P., Martínez, S., Premand, P., Rawlings, L., & Vermeersch, C. (2011). A avaliação do impacto na prática (2. ed.). Washington DC: Banco Mundial.
• Grisa, C., & Schneider, S. (2014). Três gerações de políticas públicas para a agricultura familiar e formas de interação entre sociedade e estado no Brasil. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 52(Supl. 1), 125-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032014000600007
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032014000600007
• Hoffmann, R. (2021). Insegurança alimentar no Brasil após crise, sua evolução de 2004 a 2017-2018 e comparação com a variação da pobreza. Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional, 28, e021014. http://dx.doi.org/10.20396/san.v28i00.8663556
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.20396/san.v28i00.8663556
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE. (2009). Censo Agropecuário 2006: agricultura familiar - MDA/PRONAF (Lei nº 11.326 de 24/07/2006) Recuperado em 10 de junho de 2020, de https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-agropecuario/censo-agropecuario-2006/dados-sobre-agricultura-familiar-mda-pronaf
  » https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-agropecuario/censo-agropecuario-2006/dados-sobre-agricultura-familiar-mda-pronaf
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE. (2019). Censo Agropecuário 2017 Recuperado em 10 de junho de 2020, de https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-agropecuario/censo-agropecuario-2017
  » https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-agropecuario/censo-agropecuario-2017
• Leite, S. P., & Wesz Júnior, V. J. (2012). Um estudo sobre o financiamento da política de desenvolvimento territorial no meio rural brasileiro. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 50(4), 645-666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032012000400004
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032012000400004
• Mattei, L. (2012). Pobreza rural: um fenômeno histórico-estrutural relacionado à estrutura agrária do país. Observatório de Políticas Públicas para a Agricultura, 41, 1-5.
• Medina, G. S., Gosch, M. S., & DelGrossi, M. E. (2021). Development pathways for family farmers: lessons from Brazil on the need for targeted structural reforms as a means to address regional heterogeneity. Geoforum, 118, 14-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.11.008
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.11.008
• Neder, H. D., & Lopes, T. C. (2016). Efeitos do Programa Territórios da Cidadania sobre indicadores econômicos e sociais dos municípios de MG: uma abordagem de mensuração com métodos de pareamento. Revista Políticas Públicas, 19(2), 551-563. http://dx.doi.org/10.18764/2178-2865.v19n2p551-563
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.18764/2178-2865.v19n2p551-563
• Nunes, E. M., Gondim, M. F. R., Nunes, K. F. G., Oliveira, I. A., & Góis, B. V. (2014). O Índice de Capacidades Institucionais como mecanismo da gestão social e da governança nos territórios rurais. Planejamento e Políticas Públicas, (42), 301-330. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://www.ipea.gov.br/ppp/index.php/PPP/article/view/332
  » https://www.ipea.gov.br/ppp/index.php/PPP/article/view/332
• Nunes, E. M., Tôrres, F. L., Silva, M. R. F., Sá, V. C., & Godeiro-Nunes, K. F. (2015). Dinamização econômica e agricultura familiar: limites e desafios do apoio a Projetos de Infraestrutura (Proinf) em territórios rurais do Nordeste. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 53(3), 529-554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1234-56781806-9479005303009
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1234-56781806-9479005303009
• Oliveira Junior, A. B., & Lamine, C. (2013). Agroecologia na Bahia: dos “malucos” à institucionalização e lutas. Cadernos de Agroecologia,8(2), 1-4. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://revistas.aba-agroecologia.org.br/cad/article/view/14815 VIII Congresso Brasileiro de Agroecologia.
  » https://revistas.aba-agroecologia.org.br/cad/article/view/14815
• Oliveira, I. F., & Dias, A. B. (2015). Territórios de identidade: principais dilemas do processo de gestão – o caso do Território do Sisal. Desenvolvimento Regional em Debate, 5(2), 127-147. https://doi.org/10.24302/drd.v5i2.744
  » https://doi.org/10.24302/drd.v5i2.744
• Ortega, A. C., Cerqueira, C. A., & Silva, F. P. M. (2016). As políticas públicas de desenvolvimento no estado da Bahia: evolução e características. In Ortega, A. C. & Pires, M. J. S. (Eds.), As políticas territoriais rurais e a articulação governo federal e estadual: um estudo de caso da Bahia (pp. 55-84). Brasília: Ipea.
• Pecqueur, B. (2005). O desenvolvimento territorial: uma nova abordagem dos processos de desenvolvimento para as economias do Sul. Raízes, 24(1-2), 10-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2005.v24.243
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.37370/raizes.2005.v24.243
• Pinto, N. G. M., & Coronel, D. A. (2014). O desenvolvimento rural dos municípios e mesorregiões do Rio Grande do Sul. In 7º Encontro de Economia Gaúcha (pp. 1-30). Porto Alegre: Fundação de Economia e Estatística. Recuperado em 16 de março de 2023, de https://arquivofee.rs.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405237eeg-mesa12-desenvolvimentoruralrs.pdf
  » https://arquivofee.rs.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405237eeg-mesa12-desenvolvimentoruralrs.pdf
• Pomponet, A. S. (2008). Envolvimento social na formulação de políticas públicas: o PPA participativo 2008-2011 na Bahia. Bahia Análise & Dados, 18(1), 137-145. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://sei.ba.gov.br/images/publicacoes/download/aed/politicas_sociais.pdf
  » https://sei.ba.gov.br/images/publicacoes/download/aed/politicas_sociais.pdf
• Raffestin, C. (1993). Por uma geografia do poder São Paulo: Ática.
• Rosa, F. A., & Ferreira, D. A. (2018). O programa Territórios da Cidadania: ações e participação social no Pontal do Paranapanema-SP. Geografia, 43(1), 185-203. VI Encontro REA. https://doi.org/10.5016/geografia.v43i1.13906
  » https://doi.org/10.5016/geografia.v43i1.13906
• Santos, M. (1978). Por uma geografia nova São Paulo: Hucitec/EDUSP.
• Saquet, M. (2011). Abordagens e concepções de território e territorialidade. Revista Geográfica de América Central, 2(47E), 1-16. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://www.revistas.una.ac.cr/index.php/geografica/article/view/3039
  » https://www.revistas.una.ac.cr/index.php/geografica/article/view/3039
• Saquet, M. A., & Silva, S. S. (2008). Milton Santos: concepções de geografia, espaço e território. Geo UERJ, 2(18), 24-42. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/geouerj/article/view/1389/1179
  » https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/geouerj/article/view/1389/1179
• Schneider, S. (2004). A abordagem territorial do desenvolvimento rural e suas articulações externas. Sociologias, (11), 88-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-45222004000100006
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-45222004000100006
• Schneider, S., Silva, M. K., & Moruzzi Marques, P. E. (2009). Políticas públicas e participação social no Brasil rural (2. ed.). Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS.
• Silva, A. (2015). Os consórcios públicos na perspectiva da cooperação territorial: exposição e análise do estado da Bahia – Brasil. Élisée, 4(2), 59-78. Recuperado em 13 de setembro de 2023, de https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/elisee/article/view/3678
  » https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/elisee/article/view/3678
• Silva, F. P. M. (2016). O território do SISAL. In A. C. Ortega & M. J. S. Pires (Eds.), As políticas territoriais rurais e a articulação governo federal e estadual: um estudo de caso da Bahia (pp. 151-183). Brasília: IPEA.
• Superintendência de Estudos Econômicos e Sociais da Bahia – SEI. (2023). Territórios de Identidade Recuperado em 13 de setembro de 2023, de https://sei.ba.gov.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2289&Itemid=265⟨=pt
  » https://sei.ba.gov.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2289&Itemid=265⟨=pt
• Veiga, J. E. (2001). O Brasil rural ainda não encontrou seu eixo de desenvolvimento. Estudos Avançados, 15(43), 101-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142001000300010
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142001000300010
• Veiga, J. E. (2016). A face territorial do desenvolvimento. Interações, 3(5), 5-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.20435/interacoes.v3i5.565
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.20435/interacoes.v3i5.565
• Zimmermann, S. A., Grisa, C., Tecchio, A., Leite, S. P., Bonnal, P., Cazella, A. A., Delgado, N. G., Maluf, R. J., & Mattei, L. (2014). Desenvolvimento territorial e políticas de enfrentamento da pobreza rural no Brasil. Revista Campo-Território, 9(17), 540-573. Recuperado em 4 de outubro de 2023, de http://www.seer.ufu.br/index.php/campoterritorio/article/view/23828
  » http://www.seer.ufu.br/index.php/campoterritorio/article/view/23828

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  18 Dec 2023
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  13 Mar 2023
• Accepted
  04 Oct 2023