Gobernanza y dinámicas locales en los programas de desarrollo territorial en áreas rurales. Análisis de la implementación del programa PESA en dos municipios del Estado de México

Resumen

For decades national governments have been implementing (sectorial, and regional and territorial) policies and programs aimed to reduce social and economic inequalities of rural areas, as well as increase the level of welfare of the poorest people. The notions of “equity” and “efficiency” are very usual in those policies. In Mexico, from 2002 these programs are present, just when the SAGARPA and FAO agree to implement the “Programa Especial de Seguridad Alimentaria” (PESA). The goal of PESA is to improve the life conditions of people that live in the poorest and marginal rural areas through promoting the growing of farming production level in farms. However, spite of these programs poverty in Mexican rural areas is still a problem. It explains the existence of a great number of research projects focused on analyzing the models orienting the current rural development policies (among them, the PESA) and comparing them with other ones in order to understand the problems and difficulties rising at the process of implementation of those policies. One of these problems is related to the way of articulating of varied interest groups existing in rural areas, and their interaction of public institutions, that is the problem of governance. This is why the PhD student has chosen the problem of governance in rural development programs as a topic of his doctoral thesis, focusing on Mexican rural areas. Among conclusions he stresses four ambiguities in the PESA program. Firstly, the PESA is, on the one hand, a program based on a bottom-up approach of development, but it is, on the other hand, interfered by the top-down logic imposed by public institutions, which reduce the autonomy of social players and their capacity of participating in development strategies. Secondly, the PESA is, on the one hand, a sectorial program aimed to grow the farming production in order to improve the level of food security of rural people, but it is, on the other hand, a program whose goal is to contribute to develop of territories where agriculture is not already the most important economic activity. Thirdly, the goal of PESA is, on the hand, an inclusive development program, but it is, on the other hand, an exclusive program aimed at small famers, and not to the rest of rural people. Finally, the implementation of PESA is, on the one hand, based on the role of private agencies of development (ADR), which are considered an important player to encourage of initiatives emerging of rural civil society. However, on the other hand, these agencies are controlled by public institutions, which impose a patronage culture, reducing the social legitimacy of the program. The final conclusion is that the success of PESA depends on the resolution of these four kinds of ambiguities. That is why it is not possible to improve the level of development of rural areas through sectorial programs, but it is necessary to integrate the PESA in the framework of policies aimed to improve the infrastructures, the social services and housing, and the education system and the health level of rural people.