MATOS FILHO, Jo?o. A descentraliza??o das Pol?ticas de desenvolvimento rural - uma an?lise da experi?ncia do Rio Grande do Norte. 2002. 259f. Tese (Doutorado em Ci?ncias Econ?micas)? Instituto de Economia da Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2002. / Submitted by Rildeci Medeiros (rildeci@hotmail.com) on 2010-10-18T23:41:15Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE.pdf: 949823 bytes, checksum: 71591e86cd6f90e9f5efce1ef220774c (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by clediane guedes(clediane@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2010-12-06T19:37:07Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE.pdf: 949823 bytes, checksum: 71591e86cd6f90e9f5efce1ef220774c (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2010-12-06T19:37:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE.pdf: 949823 bytes, checksum: 71591e86cd6f90e9f5efce1ef220774c (MD5) / Analisa as principais experi?ncias de gest?o descentralizada de programas de desenvolvimento rural no estado do Rio Grande do Norte e procura avaliar em que medida o Projeto de Combate ? Pobreza Rural (PCPR) e o Programa Nacional de Fortalecimento da Agricultura Familiar (PRONAF) est?o contribuindo para o fortalecimento econ?mico e social das organiza??es comunit?rias e dos seus quadros de associados. Examina os distintos significados e a multiplicidade de usos do processo de descentraliza??o nas organiza??es p?blicas e na gest?o dos programas de desenvolvimento rural. Reconstitui as caracter?sticas das experi?ncias de descentraliza??o na trajet?ria dos principais programas de desenvolvimento rural no Rio Grande do Norte. Examina as especificidades do atual padr?o de gest?o descentralizada de pol?ticas de desenvolvimento rural segundo o discurso de lideran?as pol?ticas, sindicais, religiosas e comunit?rias e realiza uma an?lise comparada da gest?o descentralizada do PCPR e do PRONAF no Rio Grande do Norte. Registra que a experi?ncia com a implementa??o descentralizada de programas de desenvolvimento rural n?o ? um fen?meno novo no Rio Grande do Norte; ao contr?rio, ? um fen?meno antigo e recorrente que mais uma vez se apresenta justificado pelo discurso da descentraliza??o e da participa??o social. O que h? de novo ? o aprofundamento do processo de descentraliza??o, materializado na transfer?ncia de recursos financeiros e de poder decis?rio para as prefeituras municipais, conselhos municipais e organiza??es comunit?rias,configurando distintos desenhos institucionais que ora descentralizam, ora re-centralizam a gest?o p?blica no ?mbito local. A an?lise explorat?ria dos dados evidenciou a exist?ncia de desempenho diferenciado entre esses dois programas ou dentro de um mesmo programa, denotando a import?ncia relativa de fatores como capacidade de planejamento, capacidade de assessoramento t?cnico e n?mero de organiza??es comunit?rias executoras de projetos como fatores explicativos desse desempenho. programas de desenvolvimento rural, pol?tica, gest?o descentralizada. ABSTRACT: This thesis analyzes the most important experiences in decentralized management of rural development programs in state of Rio Grande do Norte and looks forward to evaluate in which manner specific programs directed to rural poverty and familiar agriculture are contributing to strength community organizations and to increase the income levels of their memberships. It examines different meanings and multiple uses of decentralization process inside public organizations and on the management of rural development programs. It reconstitutes the characteristics of decentralization experiences on the rural development programs implementation in the state of Rio Grande do Norte. It examines specificities of the actual standard rural decentralized management of rural development policies, according to speeches of politic, syndicate, religious and communitarian leaders. It makes a comparative analyses between two of the most important rural development programs in Rio Grande do Norte, that is, the ?Projeto de Combate ? Pobreza Rural? (PCPR), financed by the World Bank, and the ?Programa Nacional de Fortalecimento da Agricultura Familiar (PRONAF)?, financed by the Brazilian Federal Government. These programs have been implemented by the federal, state and local governments with the participation of the civil society, organized on several institutions, like municipal councils, non-government organizations and civil associations. It concludes that the establishment of rural development decentralized program is not a new phenomenon; to the contrary, it is an ancient and recurrent one, which once more presents justified by decentralization and social participation speech. What is a new fact on that is to deepen the decentralization process, making it real through the transfer of financial resources and administration to local governments, municipal councils, non-government organizations and civil associations, demonstrating different institutional designs which may contributes to decentralize but also to centralize the traditional forms of local government. The exploratory analysis suggests the existence of different performances between the two programs or inside only one program, denoting the relative importance of some factors as: capable of planning, capable of giving technical assistance and the number of community organizations that execute projects as those ones that can explain this performance