Gastos Públicos em Agricultura: retrospectiva e prioridades
This paper aims to recast public expenditure on agriculture and the costs allocated to several aspects of agrarian organization, also indicating how the government has spent during 1980 and 2005 vis-à-vis trade, rural credit, agrarian politics, and research & development (R&D). Methodologically, we go over a series of public expenditure analyses presented in previous papers adopting the same methodology throughout the years. We conclude that expenditure was focused in a few secondary functions and in a reduced number of programs. In 2005, 88% of the total budget for agriculture was concentrated on only four programs. Several key programs on productivity, sustainability, training, and research, among others, received almost no funding. Estimates on governmental spending on farmers` debt renegotiation show overvalued costs in relation to what had been previously contracted. During 1988 and 2005, the Union`s expenditure with debt management amounted to R$ 22,60 billions. Also of note is that differently from other major countries that have progressively spent more on R&D in the last decades, Brazil has shown considerable reductions in spending in this area. During 2003 and 2005, Embrapa, the leading research center in agriculture in Brazil, has had a 14% cut in its total budget.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: SBS - Quadra 01 - Bloco J - Ed. BNDES, Brasília, DF - 70076-90|
Web page: http://www.ipea.gov.br
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1225. 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: (Fabio Schiavinatto)
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.