IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Evolução Da Distribuição Da Renda E Da Pobreza Das Famílias Ocupadas E Residentes No Meio Rural Do Estado De Minas Gerais, De 1981 A 2003

  • ROCHA, LUIZ EDUARDO VASCONCELOS
  • BASTOS, PATRICIA DE MELO ABRITA
  • SANTOS, GILNEI COSTA
Registered author(s):

    O presente artigo discute a evolução da distribuição da renda e pobreza das famílias rurais de Minas Gerais diante da nova conformação do espaço rural a partir da década de oitenta, onde observa-se a interseção cada vez menor entre o meio rural e o setor agrícola. Isso ocorre, segundo Graziano da Silva, com a modernização da agricultura, onde as atividades do setor não mais demandam dedicação exclusiva, propiciando o processo de “mercantilização do tempo livre”, que atua modificando o perfil ocupacional destas famílias e por conseguinte a renda das mesmas. Neste contexto, a pesquisa, ao descrever a nova conformação do espaço rural mineiro, em termos de ocupação e renda, pretende contribuir com a implementação de políticas públicas que contemplem as especificidades regionais concernentes ao novo rural. A base de dados utilizada é a Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios (PNAD), nas quais foram realizadas adaptações metodológicas para que haja comparabilidade entre os anos que a pesquisa abarca. Isto posto, realizou-se a decomposição das famílias segundo o ramo de atividade (agrícola, pluriativa e não-agrícola) e condição na ocupação (empregadora, conta-própria, assalariado) constituindo-se nove grupos de análise. Para analisar a distribuição de renda utilizou-se duas medidas: relação da renda média dos 10% mais ricos e dos 40% mais pobres e o índice de Gini. Quanto a análise da pobreza, utilizou-se a família dos índices parametrizados FGT. Os resultados obtidos demonstram que as atividades não-agrícolas apresentam-se como uma alternativa efetiva de ocupação para as famílias rurais. Outrossim, as famílias que mesclaram atividades agrícolas e não-agrícolas foram responsáveis pelos melhores rendimentos médios, concedendo à pluriatividade lugar de destaque neste novo rural. Contudo, as “novas” atividades ainda não foram capazes de diminuir o quadro negativo da concentração de renda. Quanto a pobreza, observou-se queda, principalmente para as famílias de empregados.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/148649
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Sociedade Brasileira de Economia, Administracao e Sociologia Rural (SOBER) in its series 44th Congress, July 23-27, 2006, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil with number 148649.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2006
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:sobr06:148649
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.sober.org.br/Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Banerjee, Abhijit & Solomon, Barry D., 2003. "Eco-labeling for energy efficiency and sustainability: a meta-evaluation of US programs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 109-123, January.
    2. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata, 2002. "Environmental Labeling and Incomplete Consumer Information in Laboratory Markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 113-134, January.
    3. Datta, Souvik & Gulati, Sumeet, 2014. "Utility rebates for ENERGY STAR appliances: Are they effective?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 480-506.
    4. Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2008. "Optimal designs for conjoint experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 2369-2387, January.
    5. Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2, September.
    6. David A. Hensher & William H. Greene, 2011. "Valuation of Travel Time Savings in WTP and Preference Space in the Presence of Taste and Scale Heterogeneity," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and University of Bath, vol. 45(3), pages 505-525, September.
    7. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    8. Amacher, Gregory S. & Koskela, Erkki & Ollikainen, Markku, 2004. "Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 284-306, March.
    9. William Greene & David Hensher, 2010. "Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 413-428, May.
    10. Thomas Bue Bjorner & Lars Garn Hansen & Clifford S. Russell, 2002. "Environmental Labelling and Consumer's Choice - An Empirical Analysis of the Effect of the Nordic Swan," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0203, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    11. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    12. Loureiro, Maria L. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Mittelhammer, Ronald C., 2001. "Assessing Consumer Preferences For Organic, Eco-Labeled, And Regular Apples," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
    13. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2012. "Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1225-1239, November.
    14. Ward, David O. & Clark, Christopher D. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Yen, Steven T. & Russell, Clifford S., 2011. "Factors influencing willingness-to-pay for the ENERGY STAR® label," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1450-1458, March.
    15. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:sobr06:148649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.