Entre o mercado e a construção social: uma análise da experiência da implantação doPRONAF-infraestrutura e PRONAT nos territórios do Mato Grande-RN e sertão do Apodi-RN (1997 - 2010)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyzes the development experience in the Territories of Mato Grande and Sertão do Apodi in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, evaluating the actions of the National Program for Strengthening Family Agriculture, specifically the line of infrastructure (PRONAF-INFRA), and the National Program for Sustainable Development of Rural Territories (PRONAT) in these territories. Summarizes the various rural development approaches and takes the theoretical assumptions of territorial development, the concept of constructed territory and market-plan territory, further the cycle model to analyze public policies selected these experiences. Thus, we propose to test the hypothesis that most of the actions implemented would lead to the formation of market-plan territories, in other words, perceived only as a platform for the presentation of projects. The literature and documents, combined with case studies, interviews and direct observation of the meetings of committees, showed that, despite two boards are under the same laws, rules and formal regulations, have clear differences when considering the theory and concepts that were used as reference. The Apodi s territory is closer to a constructed space thus the search for a broader agenda, more autonomous and more appropriate to the reality experienced by local actors. On other hand the Territory of Mato Grande had the characteristics of a market-plan territory more present. As the result, the territory of Sertão do Apodi accesses not only as part of a greater number of policies and funding sources, ensuring a greater and more diverse investment volume than the territory of Mato Grande. Despite these differences, studies have shown that territorial boards surveyed are still far from becoming the main forum for managing the development from conception planning socially constructed. Showed, finally, that territorial development strategy is relevant, but requires a long walk and a deep and continuous learning process to be successfully implemented in rural areas of Northeast Brazil
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".