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.