Près de trois millions de Sénégalais, sur une population totale d’un peu plus de douze millions, vivent à l’étranger. Auparavant orienté vers les anciennes colonies françaises d’Afrique et la France, pour des raisons géographiques, historiques et linguistiques, le champ migratoire sénégalais est devenu multipolaire. Les Sénégalais se dirigent également en Arabie et en Europe de l’Est. Mais, la part des itinéraires vers l’Europe du Sud et l’Amérique du Nord ne cesse de croître. Les Sénégalais qui émigrent vers les Etats-Unis correspondent à une émigration forte différente de celle de la France. Débutée au début des années 1980, l’émigration des Sénégalais vers Etats-Unis prend le dessus sur celle orientée vers la France en matière de dynamisme économique et organisationnel.Les Etats-Unis offrent plus d’opportunités et moins de contraintes pour l’épanouissement culturel et le développement économique des immigrés. Les femmes, occupant une place non négligeable dans cette émigration, sont plus jeunes et souvent célibataires au moment de leur arrivée sur le sol américain. En France, l’immigration sénégalaise est plus ancienne mais est confrontée à plus de contraintes au plan économique, administratif et socioculturel. Plus de 70 % des Sénégalais de France exercent des métiers faiblement qualifiés et épargnent moins que leurs homologues installés aux Etats-Unis. Ainsi, pour une meilleure réussite et venir davantage en aide à leurs familles restées au Sénégal, beaucoup de Sénégalais, plutôt que la France, choisissent les Etats-Unis où ils exercent pour la plupart des activités commerciales.Les raisons économiques et familiales n’expliquent pas, à elles seules, l’émigration des Sénégalais. En effet, ce ne sont pas uniquement les plus pauvres qui partent. A ces motifs, il faudra ajouter les « nouvelles logiques » migratoires liées à la mondialisation. L’émigration sénégalaise a des conséquences sur les régions de départ dont les plus visibles constituent les transferts de fonds des migrants et des investissements plus ou moins encadrés par des structures étatiques ou privées de développement solidaires. / Nearly three million Senegalese population out of twelve million just over, live abroad. Before directed to the former French colonies in Africa and France, for geographical historical and linguistic reasons, Senegalese migration field has become multipolar by the new opportunities offered by the others countries. The Senegalese emigration’s movement has been widened to Arabia and eastern Europe. But the trends show a growing portion of new candidates choose Southern Europe and North America. The profile of Senegalese emigrant to the U.S. is very different at many ways that the migration category in France. Starting in the early 1980s, the emigration of Senegalese in the United States outnumbers that one in France due to the economic and organizational dynamism and better incentive structure. The United States offers more opportunities and fewer constraints for the cultural and economic development to migrants. Women occupy a substantial place in this migration, they are younger and often single at the time of their arrival on American territory. In France, the Senegalese emigration is older but is facing more constraints on the economic, administrative and cultural aspects. Over 70% of the Senegalese France engaged in low skilled, paid jobs and save less than their counterparts located in the United States. Thus, for better success and more coming to their families support in Senegal, many Senegalese, rather that France, choose the United States where they mostly work in commercial activities. The family and economic reasons do not only explain, the emigration of Senegalese because they are not the sole poorest who leave. For these reasons there is "new logic", migration-related globalization. These departures have consequences on Regions starting with the most visible are the remittances from migrants and investment, more or less supervised by state or private structures working with inclusive approach.

Submitted by Tatiana Lima (tatianasl@ufba.br) on 2015-05-08T20:26:51Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Brandão, Pamela de Medeiros.pdf: 11801164 bytes, checksum: ec09f911b3370c5ccdbc3357fcffd115 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Tatiana Lima (tatianasl@ufba.br) on 2015-05-08T20:31:35Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Brandão, Pamela de Medeiros.pdf: 11801164 bytes, checksum: ec09f911b3370c5ccdbc3357fcffd115 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-08T20:31:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Brandão, Pamela de Medeiros.pdf: 11801164 bytes, checksum: ec09f911b3370c5ccdbc3357fcffd115 (MD5) / Esse trabalho avalia em que medida o modelo de gestão descentralizada e participativa adotado pela Política Nacional do Turismo no Brasil tem, de fato, potencializado o desempenho da atividade turística no país. Partiu-se do pressuposto de que a gestão democrática e participativa adotada pela Política Nacional do Turismo Brasileiro não influenciou de forma significativa o desempenho da atividade turística no Brasil nos últimos anos. Para validar esse pressuposto adotaram-se dois procedimentos basilares: avaliar a democraticidade de fóruns/conselhos de turismo enquanto canais institucionais para a participação e para a descentralização da gestão pública; e correlacioná-la com o desempenho turístico auferido em termos do fluxo e receita turística. Utiliza-se o enfoque das redes políticas, numa perspectiva relacional e comunicacional, como um marco de referência analítico-conceitual; e adota a Análise de Redes Sociais como ferramenta analítica. O foco do estudo se concentrou nas relações comunicacionais estabelecidas entre as instituições públicas e privadas durante o processo de deliberação e tomada de decisão. O uso dessa ferramenta resultou na construção de redes e na proposição de um índice para mensuração da democraticidade dos espaços públicos – o IDEP. A aplicação do IDEP nos fóruns/conselhos de turismo dos estados da Bahia, Ceará, Pernambuco e Rio Grande do Norte permitiu diagnosticar os elementos responsáveis por promover uma maior ou menor participação nos processos decisórios da política do turismo, bem como examinar o estado da democracia nesses espaços. A mensuração da democraticidade via IDEP indicou que todos os fóruns/conselhos de turismo investigados apresentaram configurações que os posicionam em níveis de moderada à alta democraticidade. A existência de níveis distintos de democraticidade entre os fóruns e conselhos investigados possibilitou gerar comparabilidade e associá-los com o desempenho turístico desses estados. A análise da correlação entre essas duas variáveis não permitem estabelecer relação de causalidade entre a democraticidade dos espaços públicos e o desempenho turístico. No entanto, numa análise conjunta teve-se que a democraticidade do espaço público se comportou na mesma direção da receita turística. O que leva a pressupor que os estados nos quais se constatou maior democraticidade em seus espaços públicos de turismo, são, também, aqueles que, sistematicamente, tenderam a apresentar melhores desempenhos em termos de receita turística. Já na correlação por estado obteve-se resultados distintos. Desempenhos turísticos positivos foram verificados tanto em destinos turísticos com espaços públicos de maior democraticidade quanto em destinos com espaços públicos mais hierarquizados. Esse achado da pesquisa confirma o pressuposto assumido e leva a defender a tese de que: o desempenho da atividade turística no Brasil, verificado no período de 2003 a 2011, foi determinado por outros fatores não relacionados com um processo decisório mais ou menos participativo que ocorrem no âmbito dos fóruns/conselhos públicos de turismo. / This study evaluates to what extent the decentralized and participatory management model adopted by the National Tourism Policy in Brazil has, enhanced the performance of tourism in the country. It was based on the premise that the democratic and participatory management adopted by the National Tourism Policy did not significantly increase the development of tourism in Brazil in recent years. In order to validate this premise, two basic procedures were adopted: (1) to assess the democratic processes adopted in touristic forums/boards as institutional channels for participation and decentralization of public management; and (2) to correlate them with the development of tourism in terms of flow and revenue. The use of political networks as the focus of this process was used as a framework in a relational and communicational perspective, serving as a framework for analytical-conceptual referencing. The Social Network Analysis (SNA) was adopted as the tool for this analysis. The focus of the study was to evaluate the communication relationships established between public and private institutions during the deliberations and decision-making process. The use of this tool resulted in the formation of networks and the proposition of creating an index to measure democratic participation in public spaces – IDEP. The application (implementation) of IDEP in tourism forums/boards in the states of Bahia, Ceará, Pernambuco and Rio Grande do Norte allowed a diagnosis of the elements responsible for promoting a greater or lesser participation in the decision-making process of tourism policy, as well as the examination of the state of democracy in these locales. The measurement of participatory democracy through IDEP indicated that all the tourism forums/boards investigated had configurations that placed them in moderate to high levels of democratic processes. The existence of different levels of democratic participation among the tourism forums and boards studied allowed for generating comparability and the ability to associate them with the tourism performance in these states. The analysis of correlations between these two variables does not allow for establishing a correlation of causality between democratic processes in public spaces and tourism performance in these states. However, in a joint analysis it was observed that both democracy and the revenue generated from tourism showed parallel behavior. This has led to the estimation that the states that had higher levels of democracy in public spaces of tourism were also those that systematically outperform the others in the generation revenue from tourism. In the correlation per state, different results were attained. Positive tourism performance was recorded in tourism destinations with more democratic public spaces as well as in destinations with more hierarchical public spaces. The findings from the study confirm the initial assumptions, and supports the thesis that the performance of tourism in Brazil between 2003 and 2011 was determined by not related to a more or less participatory decision-making process occurring within tourism forums/boards.