Uma etnografia do Instituto Pensar Agropecuária

Abstract

Resumo Com retrocessos se acumulando no Brasil em relação às questões climáticas e indígenas, especialistas em temas socioambientais têm procurado identificar fatores e agentes que operam para dar sustentação a esse quadro. Um dos principais atores apontados na literatura científica é a Frente Parlamentar da Agropecuária (FPA), um bloco multipartidário com poder em ascensão no Congresso Nacional. Este artigo apresenta uma etnografia do núcleo estratégico no qual se negociam e se definem os posicionamentos oficiais da FPA: o Instituto Pensar Agropecuária (IPA). O primeiro objetivo é analisar os três conjuntos de atores que operam no âmbito do IPA: organizações empresariais, agentes técnicos e parlamentares da mesa diretora da FPA. O segundo é examinar como essa engrenagem tripartite é operacionalizada. O trabalho está baseado em observação participante no IPA e no Congresso Nacional, em entrevistas com agentes privados, técnicos e políticos que integram o instituto e em documentos corporativos e estatais. Os resultados indicam que a consolidação do IPA inflexionou de maneira expressiva a representação de interesses das elites dos sistemas alimentares que operam no país.

Homogenizing machine: the agribusiness caucus’s building of voting convergence in the Brazilian Congress

“…On the same day, the associations at the IPA also defined the main cross-cutting themes that were to be worked on by the institute during the year. The definition was followed by activities in the specialized commissions created in the IPA to deal with each of these themes (Pompeia 2022a;2022b). One of them was the environment commission, which was then beginning to be coordinated by the Brazilian Tree Industry (Indústria Brasileira de Árvores, or IBÁ) and the SRB (IPA 2019).…”

“…It is worth contextualizing that this second ring was formed during the 2010s, following the growing complexity of the command structures of the caucus, a process that was driven mostly by the consolidation of the IPA. Between 2011 and 2019, the functions undertaken by the caucus's board of directors increased by 188.9% in terms of the number of formally designated positions, revealing a significant increase in internal subdivisions and their respective specializations (Pompeia 2022a). The third ring of the agribusiness caucus was composed of members of Congress who attended the IPA (albeit irregularly) but did not hold official positions on the board of directors (unlike politicians of the first and second rings).…”

“…12 Returning to the amendments presented by the first ring of the caucus, one should draw attention to the identical phrases that some of its actors used. 13 Considering this and other factors -the systematic nature of these members' work in the IPA, in constant negotiations with private actors (Pompeia 2022a), and the decision recorded by the associations in the institute's environment commission to prepare amendments to MP 867 -, one can point out, with a reasonable degree of confidence, that a portion of these amendments came from an agreement in the IPA between some politicians and associations. However, there were also amendments proposed by members of the caucus that contained relevant differences when compared to each other, as happened in relation to the ones greatly affecting the regularization initiatives of the PRA.…”

“…In the months during which the abovementioned measure was passing through Congress, it was the object of divided public positions of associations funding the Instituto Pensar Agropecuária (IPA, or institute). Operating through three sets of actors -agribusiness associations, technical agents and members of Congress -, the IPA has become the main political forum for the negotiation and definition of the agendas that are advanced by the agribusiness caucus in the Legislative branch (Pompeia 2022a). Nonetheless, later on, when the MP was finally voted upon in the Chamber of Deputies, the divergent positions among the associations did not translate into significant differences within the caucus (Câmara dos Deputados 2019a).…”

A força da Bancada do Boi: a Frente Parlamentar da Agropecuária na definição da política fundiária

“…Assim, institucionaliza-se uma estrutura capaz de fazer com que os anseios de grupos de interesse específicos (no caso, grandes corporações do agronegócio e latifundiários) consigam eficientemente influenciar na agenda rural brasileira. Ressalta-se que a atuação da FPA vai muito além da pauta fundiária, que é o foco desta pesquisa, abrangendo crescentemente pautas mais transversais, como a ambiental, indígena e alimentar (Pompeia, 2022).…”