Submitted by Sandra Pereira (srpereira@ufrrj.br) on 2017-05-02T12:52:14Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2016 - Priscilla Grimberg.pdf: 3182045 bytes, checksum: 404e911b71bd7ead3810d1c03107f59e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-02T12:52:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2016 - Priscilla Grimberg.pdf: 3182045 bytes, checksum: 404e911b71bd7ead3810d1c03107f59e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-01-28 / The without precedents pressure over mineral resources expected for the forthcoming decades, added to the energy demand, both motivated by the consumption of almost 10 billion habitants expected for the year 2050, shall make more than double the historic investment rate of the oil and gas extractive sector, for instance. These industries and their respective chains represent approximately 5% of the Global GDP and figure in three among the ten largest world companies; however, more than half of their known reserves are located at non OECD countries, marked by inequality and low human development indexes. These forecasts also intensify the occurrence of a relationship that is not been working: the one of large private investments in territories of their operations. Economic benefits coming from the of large enterprise?s installation are most of times unable to reach local populations and the enormous flow of money and operations of large industrial scale tension the territories? economic, political and social institutions in such manner that that local populations are left in worse situation after the enterprise?s installation . Conflicts are the usual result of such scenario and emblematic cases like the Belo Monte?s Hydroelectric Plant and Rio de Janeiro Petrochemical Complex ? COMPERJ are a constant. The growth of ?non-technical risks? is recently valued by the private sector and evidences the companies? impacts of your bad relationship with the local community, among which: duplication of the time needed for the capital project?s implantation, chronogram delays and cost excess in 50% of large metal mining projects, only in the last decade. Companies invest voluntarily but these investments are not a guarantee of a good relationship and consequent inexistency of conflicts. In the past two decades innumerous publications have been launched by the sector with the common speech that the companies? favorable outcome is directly associated to the thriving development of the businesses operating territories. Such publications have been orienting businesses? policies, however, the social license to operate still figuring as the main risk and challenge for enterprises which operations have greater socio environmental risk. On the other side, the development promotion itself has been object of different explaining apparatus that alone have not been able to explain it. Only in 2012 is made available the conceptual model that evidences in which conditions prosperous territorial dynamics can be promoted. That study intends to interrogate the causes for the failure of the company-territory relationship, directly related to the failure of the territorial development, using the sector?s references for community investment strategies in comparison to the conceptual model for the promotion of successful territorial development. The general hypothesis is that the main blocking for the successful relationships between companies and society, as well as to the territorial development itself, remains in the reproduction of inequality traps that companies foment, based upon a utilitarian mentality and as the main local economic drivers. As a consequence, they promote the perpetuation of unequal situations, of conflicts and failure for both involved. The conditions for the transformation of such scenario are not emphasized and / or followed by the strategies that orient the sector. / A press?o sem precedentes sobre os recursos minerais nas pr?ximas d?cadas, aliada ? demanda de energia, ambas motivadas pelo consumo de quase 10 bilh?es de habitantes previstos para 2050, far? com que a taxa hist?rica de investimento mais que dobre para o setor extrativo e de ?leo e g?s, por exemplo. Essas ind?strias e suas cadeias representam aproximadamente 5 % do PIB global, sendo que tr?s delas figuram entre as dez maiores companhias mundiais. Entretanto, mais da metade de suas reservas conhecidas se encontram em pa?ses n?o integrantes da OECD, marcados pela desigualdade e baixos ?ndices de desenvolvimento humano. Estas previs?es intensificam tamb?m a ocorr?ncia de uma rela??o que n?o vem dando certo: a de grandes investimentos privados com seus territ?rios de opera??o. Benef?cios econ?micos oriundos da instala??o de grandes empreendimentos n?o conseguem, na grande maioria das vezes, atingir as popula??es locais e o enorme fluxo de dinheiro e de opera??es de grande escala industrial tensionam as institui??es econ?micas, pol?ticas e sociais dos territ?rios de tal forma que as popula??es locais s?o deixadas em pior situa??o ap?s a instala??o desses empreendimentos. Conflitos s?o o resultado deste cen?rio e casos emblem?ticos como da Usina hidrel?trica de Belo Monte e do Complexo Petroqu?mico do Rio de Janeiro ? COMPERJ - s?o uma constante. O crescimento dos ?riscos n?o t?cnicos? ? recentemente valorado pelo setor privado e evidencia os impactos para as empresas dessa m? rela??o com a comunidade local. Dentre os quais: duplica??o, na ?ltima d?cada, do tempo necess?rio para a implanta??o de projetos vindouros para as principais empresas internacionais do petr?leo e atrasos no cronograma e / ou excesso de custos em 50% dos grandes projetos de minera??o e metais. As empresas investem voluntariamente, mas esses investimentos n?o s?o garantia de uma boa rela??o e consequente inexist?ncia de conflitos. Nas ?ltimas duas d?cadas, in?meras publica??es s?o lan?adas pelo setor, com discurso comum de que o sucesso do empreendimento est? diretamente associado ao desenvolvimento exitoso dos territ?rios de suas opera??es empresariais. Essas publica??es t?m orientado as pol?ticas empresariais. Entretanto, a licen?a social para operar se mant?m como principal risco e desafio para empreendimentos cujas opera??es possuem maior risco de impactos socioambientais. Por outro lado, a promo??o do desenvolvimento em si tem sido objeto de diferentes aparatos explicativos que, sozinhos, n?o foram capazes de explic?-lo. Somente em 2012, ? disponibilizado um modelo conceitual que evidencia em que condi??es din?micas territoriais exitosas podem ser promovidas. Este estudo procura interrogar as causas para o fracasso da rela??o empresa e territ?rio, vinculadas diretamente ao fracasso do desenvolvimento territorial, utilizando-se das refer?ncias do setor para estrat?gias de investimento comunit?rio em compara??o com o modelo conceitual para promo??o de desenvolvimento exitoso. A hip?tese geral ? que o principal bloqueio ?s rela??es exitosas entre empresas e sociedade e ao pr?prio desenvolvimento territorial est? na reprodu??o de armadilhas de desigualdade, que as empresas - baseadas em uma mentalidade utilitarista e enquanto principais motores econ?micos locais - fomentam. Como consequ?ncia, promovem a perpetua??o de situa??es desiguais, de conflitos e insucesso para ambos envolvidos. As condi??es para transforma??o desse cen?rio n?o s?o enfatizadas e/ ou seguidas pelas estrat?gias que orientam o setor.