3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Through the bibliographic survey and pertinent information, federal
policies related to the use, management and conservation of soil and
water in Brazil were identified. Subsequently, the main characteristics
of each of these policies were synthesized, as well as an interpretative
analysis, taking into account the adherence to each of the six strategic
axis that are part of the ongoing Project for Participatory Construction
of the Sustainable Soil and Water Management Plan in Brazil.
The proposed steps for the formulation of the PNMSA are: the definition
of its principles, goals, objectives, strategies, activities, main
results and impacts, the design of its institutional framework and
integration with other multisectoral public policies (Figure 1).
Figure 1 - National Plan for the Sustainable Management of Soil
and Water Framework.
The focus of this research is to contribute with inputs for the design
of the institutional framework and the integration with other policies.
To this end, it was undertaken a documentary research to provide a
general understanding of the objectives and tools of public policies in
Brazil in light of the following criteria: 1) inclusion in its normative
body and scope the awareness of sustainable use and conservation of soil
and water in rural areas; 2) time of operation, with at least one year
under implementation and 3) coordination at federal level.
For each selected policy it was analyzed the institutional framework,
objective and interface within the axis of Legislation, Prevention,
Conservation, Recovery, Monitoring and Integration proposed to the PNMSA
(Figure 2). The analysis seek complementarities and convergence of
actions in support to the construction of the PNMSA, searching for
lessons learned and opportunities from the implementation of these
policies. These axis were proposed in the construction of the
aforementioned project after analyzing a series of documents (TCU, 2019;
Polidoro, 2016; TCU, 2015), which converge on the need to optimize the
efforts of existing policies.
Figure 2 - The six proposed axis for the formulation of PMSA.
Based on the sis axis it was built an analytical framework to guide
policy analysis process showed in Table 1.
Table 1 – Guidelines from the analytical axis for the selected
polices.
This theoretical framework established the basis for a scored evaluation
for the selected public policies. The analysis was made based on a
classification method using a 0 to 2 scale to score the heuristic
judgment of each policy considering the six axis. Score zero meant that
the policy has no interface with the axis guideline; score 1 meant that
the policy partially contemplate the axis; and score 2 meant that it
fully contemplate the axis. Upon this classification it was calculated
an average score per axis for all analyzed policies and an average score
per policy for all axis. It is worth clarifying that it was also
researched the normative body objectives of each policy, as well as its
main instruments, with emphasis on those which Embrapa plays a
predominant role.
The documentary analysis of reports, studies, evaluations and audits
related to the implementation of the selected policies was carried out,
allowing data triangulation on the scope of these policies. The analyzed
documents were official assessments elaborated by Brazilian governmental
institutions in charge of public policies control, monitoring and
evaluation, such as Union General Controllership (CGU) and Federal Audit
Court (TCU). Both institutions are responsible for defending public
assets, transparency and fighting corruption, budgetary and financial
accounting, and operational supervision of asset transactions through
public administration.
The institutional framework analysis aimed to identify how many which
type of policy partner institutions were involved in policy
implementation, management, monitoring and evaluation. To this end, it
was considered five dimensions: 1) governmental at federal level; 2)
governmental at state and municipal levels; 3) teaching institutes and
universities; 4) private sector; 5) civil society and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs). Also important, the typology of governance bodies:
decentralized, participatory, councils, committees, commissions, forums,
networks, articulations, associations and cooperatives.