Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
TRANSFORMANDO AS INSTITUICOES.
CONTRIBUICAO DO SOMAR
A contribuição do SOMA a redução da pobreza rural baseai-se no
reconhecimento de que a capacitação econômica das pessoas pobres do campo
não vai acontecer simplesmente como conseqüência do efeito TRICKLE-DOWN
dos investimentos macro ou setoriais . Ações devem levar em conta os
entraves enfrentados pêlos homens e mulheres pobres do campo e facilitar ( e
não favorecer) suas oportunidades, dentro de suas circunstancias e atividades
especificas..
:
• fortalecer a capacidade do pobre rural e suas organizações;
• melhorar o acesso justo aos recursos produtivos
• aumentar o acesso aos ativos financeiros e mercados
ORGANIZACOES DO POBRE
Grupos e comunidades mais organizados são povavelmente mais ouvidos e
atendidos. Portanto, o pobre precisa, antes de tudo e mais que tudo, serem
municiados da chance de constuir capacitacoes individuais e coletivas para que
possam ter acesso a oportunidades economicas e servicos sociais basicos e
infra-estrutura. Propiciando a base do capital humano e social do pobre do
campo vai capacita-lo a interagir com o poder dominante em bases mais justas
e informadas, negociando assim mais eficientemente nas questoes que
influenciam o seu bem-estar
Types of organizations.
Ios tipos de organizoes a serem trabalhadas pela SOMAR deverao ser definidas
pelo seu Conselho. Basicamente, comunidas agricolas, associacoes de credito
para pequenos produtores, incluindo micro-credito, associacoes de usuarios de
agua, associacoes dos sem terra, associacoes e cooperativas de produtores
agricolas..
.
Desafios das transformacoes organizacionais.
Embora a formacao de capacidade organizacional seja demorada, ela [e critica
para uma efetiva reducao da pobreza. Considerando que as mulheres são
organizadoras e participantes dinamicas em organizacoes de base e são
eficazes na iniciacao e sustentacao das iniciativas de auto-ajud, [e fundamental
que elas estejam no centro da agenda de transormacao das organizacoes e
politicas.
.
ACCESS TO WATER8
Water is often a serious constraint on agricultural productivity, and access to
water
determines the value of the land; they are complementary assets. Also, if
property
rights in land are well defined and difficult to change for political reasons, but
subsurface
water rights are less clearly specified, then initiatives in the water market may
be a partial substitute for land reform. Therefore, institutions that increase
poor people’s
control over water-yielding assets9 contribute to sustainable poverty reduction.
The need for organizational capacity-building. The need for long lead times and
the generally slow rates of implementation for irrigation projects should be
anticipated
and recognized in the light of the time required to implement demand-driven
approaches. This allows for training and establishment of viable water users’
groups
and more fully ensures their participation in all implementation activities, while
taking
into account the capacity constraints of implementing agencies. Flexibility, in
terms of implementation scope, sequence and arrangements, should be the
norm. In
addition, the careful definition of site selection criteria and targeting procedures
are
the most suitable defence against discretionary and external political
interference in
project interventions. Socio-economic criteria are especially important, and
must be
defined in the light of the political context and the existing legal framework
(including
the capacity to enforce it).
ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY
Where pressure on land and water is great, natural resource degradation has
reached
alarming levels. This is a major problem for the rural poor, who often live in
environmentally
fragile zones. Many poor farmers face a choice between restoring the fertility
of their small family plots and common property resources or migrating to the
cities. Appropriate technologies and research to improve farm productivity by boosting
returns to land and labour are essential if the former choice is to be a viable
option. As solutions are often context-specific, technologies need to be developed
through appropriate research and validated working together with the rural poor –
something that is still quite rare. Full appreciation needs to be given to the existing
risk-management strategies of small farmers. These often differ for men and women
farmers, requiring gender-differentiated approaches.
14
Investing in access to technology. To promote access to technology, IFAD supports
technology development and dissemination to smallholder farmers, especially
women farmers, through investment programmes that are increasingly located in
marginal, resource-poor agro-ecologies, in environments for which sustainable
agricultural
technologies are not easily available. The approach followed is pluralistic,
with different models adjusted to the local institutional framework. IFAD also
provided
leadership in establishing the Global Forum on Agricultural Research, which
constitutes a strategic alliance of key stakeholders in global agricultural
research:
developing-country national agricultural research systems; universities; NGOs
and
farmers’ organizations, bringing in their indigenous knowledge systems; the
private
sector; international agricultural research centres; and the donor community.
Fundsupported
programmes aim at addressing the technology access problems of poor
disadvantaged
farming communities, in order to reduce poverty, achieve food security,
and conserve and manage biodiversity and natural resources. Moreover, IFAD
participates
in the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
(with the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme, and the
Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), and provides resources for
research by CGIAR organizations in technologies relevant to smallholder
farmers. In
supporting these technology development and dissemination programmes,
IFAD has
learned a number of lessons regarding pro-poor organizational and policy
transformation.
Organizational development. Access to technology for the wide diversity of
rural
producers is enhanced by the adoption of pluralistic approaches (diversity and
choice
of organizations and rules of access). In some cases, publicly sponsored
research and
extension (R&E) approaches are being pursued. In other cases, IFAD pursues a
market
approach, promoting the growth of private suppliers of technology services, or
combinations of the two approaches. It is correspondingly useful to explore
appropriate
mixes of public- and private-sector funding of R&E. Organizing local extension
systems for effectiveness in delivering new technologies to poor farmers and in
conveying feedback from farmers on the profitability and environmental
sustainability
of new technologies is suitably complemented by identifying new ways of
delivering
extension services, such as farmer field schools and vouchers. Efforts in
strengthening the organizational capacities of the national agricultural research
systems/
centres (NARS/Cs) themselves14 and the linkages between CGIAR and
NARS/Cs have high benefits.
Transforming access rules. Successful development and dissemination of
technology
requires the involvement of key stakeholders in developing R&E systems; the
empowerment of rural civil-society entities, farmer associations and related social
organizational structures, and their inclusion in the technology-generation process. It
is also crucial to allocate adequate public investments for agricultural R&E related to
crops and livestock produced or consumed by the poor. Further, it is a challenge to
identify new ways of financing agricultural R&E, including the establishment of
internal markets for R&E, based on customer/contractor relationships, fostering
strategic partnerships with national and international private firms to access modern
technologies. This needs to take into account the fact that the supply response is
inhibited due to the limited purchasing power of poor rural producers
Rural finance paradigm shift. The ‘old’ rural finance paradigm put emphasis on
the provision of subsidized and targeted credit to farmers, usually by state-owned
agriculture development banks. IFAD’s assessment of this approach highlighted its
limits and shortcomings: subsidized credit usually went to the better-off farmers;
borrowing conditions and collateral requirements excluded the poor; and the types
of services offered were frequently inappropriate to their needs. IFAD, over the past
ten years, has focussed on building viable rural finance institutions that meet the
twofold objectives of (i) providing services that are appropriate to the needs of the
_
rural poor (outreach challenge) and (ii) moving towards self-sufficiency (sustainability
challenge). Rural finance institutions now offer loans that can be used for
purposes deemed the most beneficial by the borrower. Lending is based on the
assessment
of the household’s repayment capacity, and not on the commitment to invest
in a specific activity or technology. Financial services have thus been used by
the rural
poor for a variety or purposes: for income-generating activities, but also for
consumption
smoothing and to face shocks or crises.
REFERENCES
Via del Serafico, 107 | 00142 Rome, Italy
Tel +39-06-54591 | Fax +39-06-5043463
E-mail: ifad@ifad.org | www.ifad.org