Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T13:53:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 JoseALF.pdf: 1637730 bytes, checksum: db373acea969bd17630a6d795c1ec08e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-08-24 / This study aimed to understand the relations inside the organizational Structuring of the shrimp Field - the shrimp agribusiness placed in Rio Grande do Norte State and the strategies adopted by its players. In order to achieve that, semi-structured interviews were conducted with samples of various organizations that act in the field, like cooperatives, associations, enterprises of different links in the chain, universities and state agencies. The interviews built up a large collection of secondary data. As expected, it was found that Field and strategies are related in a recursive way: the configuration of the field, a result from his own biography, has decisively influenced the strategies adopted by its actors, who, as evolved, eventually caused further changes in the Field and outlines the plot of this area of interaction. It was found, for example, that after thirty-five years of its genesis, the Field of shrimp RN still has a low level of institutionalization, which helps to understand the difficulty of its actors in establish strategies based on partnerships and cooperation; Those actions are so necessary to alleviate the effects of the crisis that devastated the industry since 2004. It was noticed, however, that this level of institutionalization is a result, beside other factors, the very strategies that field actors are embracing along its trajectory. Thus, this study hopes to have contributed both to the necessary revival of the agency to institutional phenomenon, cited by Oliver (1991), and to meet the need for more contextualized approaches to organizational strategies (MINTZBERG, 1987; CLEGG, 2004; WHITTINGTON, 2004; 2006; SARAIVA and CARRIERI, 2007). It is an exploratory study that needs further investigation in order to get deep in this research. In this sense, others methodologies and theoretical perspectives need to be used, especially those relating to the seizure of the disputes and discursive aspects of power, as salient in the field investigated. Moreover, in terms of "practical actions", it is suggested that, as soon as possible, the main actors of the field (cooperatives, companies, and state entities in class) can be able of agglutinate efforts to support the shrimp field in RN State and make sustainable actions, which can promote the development of activity in a global view. On the apse of shrimp activities everybody wanted to be the "father of the child," Now, someone has to "stay in the goal." / Este estudo buscou compreender rela??es entre a din?mica de Forma??o e Estrutura??o do Campo Organizacional da Carcinicultura agroneg?cio do camar?o do Rio Grande do Norte/RN e as Estrat?gias adotadas pelos seus atores. Para tanto, procederam-se entrevistas semi-estruturadas com os representantes de diversas organiza??es que atuam no campo - cooperativas, associa??es de classe, empresas de diferentes elos da cadeia, universidades e ?rg?os estaduais e coletou-se um amplo acervo de dados secund?rios. Conforme se pressupunha, constatou-se que Campo e Estrat?gias se relacionam de modo recursivo: a configura??o do Campo, resultante de sua pr?pria biografia, tem influenciado decisivamente as Estrat?gias adotadas pelos seus atores, que, conforme se desenrolam, acabam provocando novas altera??es no Campo e delineando o enredo desse espa?o de intera??es. Averiguou-se, por exemplo, que, passados trinta e cinco anos de sua g?nese, o Campo da Carcinicultura do RN ainda possui um baixo n?vel de institucionaliza??o, o que ajuda a compreender a dificuldade de seus atores em estabelecer Estrat?gias pautadas no associativismo e na coopera??o; a??es t?o necess?rias para aliviar os efeitos da crise que assola o setor desde 2004. Viu-se, contudo, que, tal n?vel de institucionaliza??o ? fruto, dentre outros fatores, das pr?prias Estrat?gias que os atores do Campo v?m adotando ao longo de sua trajet?ria. Dessa forma, esse estudo espera ter contribu?do tanto para a necess?ria reaproxima??o da ag?ncia ao fen?meno institucional, pontuada por Oliver (1991), quanto para suprir a car?ncia de abordagens mais contextualizadas para as Estrat?gias Organizacionais (MINTZBERG, 1987; CLEGG, 2004; WHITTINGTON, 2004; 2006; SARAIVA e CARRIERI, 2007). Por tratar-se de um estudo explorat?rio, prop?e-se que outras investiga??es se aprofundem sobre as descobertas dessa pesquisa, bem como, que outras metodologias e perspectivas te?ricas sejam utilizadas, sobretudo aquelas que possibilitem a apreens?o dos aspectos discursivos e das disputas de poder, t?o salientes no campo investigado. Ademais, no que tange as ditas a??es pr?ticas , sugere-se que, com urg?ncia, os principais atores do campo (cooperativas, empresas, estado e entidades de classe) aglutinem for?as em prol da carcinicultura do RN e delineiem a??es sustent?veis, que consigam promover o desenvolvimento da atividade como um todo. Se no auge da atividade todos queriam ser o pai da crian?a , agora, algu?m tem que ficar no gol!

The notion of Mode 2, as a shift from Mode 1 science-as-we-know-it, depicts science as practically relevant, socially distributed and democratic. Debates remain over the empirical substantiation of Mode 2. In particular, our understanding has been impeded by the mutually exclusive framing of Mode 1/Mode 2. Looking at how academic science is justified to diverse institutional interests – a situation associated with Mode 2 – it is asked, “What happens to Mode 1 where Mode 2 is in demand?” This study comprises two sequential phases. It combines interviews with 18 university spinout founders as micro-level Mode 2 exemplars, and macro-level policy narratives from 72 expert witnesses examined by select committees. An interpretive scheme (Greenwood and Hinings, 1988) is applied to capture the internal means-ends structure of each mode, where the end is to satisfy demand constituents, both in academia (Mode 1) and beyond (Mode 2). Results indicate Mode 1’s enduring influence even where non-academic demands are concerned, thus refuting that means and ends necessarily operate together as a stable mode. The causal ambiguity inherent in scientific advances necessitates (i) Mode 1 peer review as the only quality control regime systematically applicable ex ante, and (ii) Mode 1 means of knowledge production as essential for the health and diversity of the science base. Modifications to performance criteria are proposed to create a synergy between modes and justify public investment, especially in the absence of immediate outcomes. The study presents a framework of Mode1/Mode 2 coexistence that eases the problem with the either/or perception and renders Mode 2 more amenable to empirical research. It is crucial to note, though, that this is contingent on given vested interests. In this study, Mode 1’s fate is seen through academic scientists whose imperative is unique from those of other constituents, thereby potentially entailing further struggles and negotiation.

The notion of Mode 2, as a shift from Mode 1 science-as-we-know-it, depicts science as practically relevant, socially distributed and democratic. Debates remain over the empirical substantiation of Mode 2. In particular, our understanding has been impeded by the mutually exclusive framing of Mode 1/Mode 2. Looking at how academic science is justified to diverse institutional interests – a situation associated with Mode 2 – it is asked, “What happens to Mode 1 where Mode 2 is in demand?” This study comprises two sequential phases. It combines interviews with 18 university spinout founders as micro-level Mode 2 exemplars, and macro-level policy narratives from 72 expert witnesses examined by select committees. An interpretive scheme (Greenwood and Hinings, 1988) is applied to capture the internal means-ends structure of each mode, where the end is to satisfy demand constituents, both in academia (Mode 1) and beyond (Mode 2). Results indicate Mode 1’s enduring influence even where non-academic demands are concerned, thus refuting that means and ends necessarily operate together as a stable mode. The causal ambiguity inherent in scientific advances necessitates (i) Mode 1 peer review as the only quality control regime systematically applicable ex ante, and (ii) Mode 1 means of knowledge production as essential for the health and diversity of the science base. Modifications to performance criteria are proposed to create a synergy between modes and justify public investment, especially in the absence of immediate outcomes. The study presents a framework of Mode1/Mode 2 coexistence that eases the problem with the either/or perception and renders Mode 2 more amenable to empirical research. It is crucial to note, though, that this is contingent on given vested interests. In this study, Mode 1’s fate is seen through academic scientists whose imperative is unique from those of other constituents, thereby potentially entailing further struggles and negotiation.