Planos plurianuais de investimentos em Mato Grosso do Sul (PPA 2016/2019 e PPA 2020/2023)

Abstract

Planning is not a technique exclusive to socialism. Capitalism was also able to plan in such a way that planning is a common point between the two economic systems. Brazil followed the trends coming from the dynamic center and drew up its plans. Contradictory, unsuccessful or successful, they were crucial to state coordination. However, as the growing strength of neoliberalism as a hegemonic current, from the 1990s onwards the Brazilian State went empty of planning. Multi-Year Plan (MYP) were settled down, incapable of planning the economic development. The states of the federation, obliged constitutionally to prepare their MYP, do so without it occupying prominence within the public administration. However, the plans keep in their content elements that indicate class intentions, which goes the opposite of territory idea. The objective of the research was to analyze the MYP 2016/2019 and the MYP 2020/2023, identifying the perspective of economic development. It was identified that these plans are vague and disjointed and the programs that most require investments are intended to increase territorial competitiveness. No importance is given to urban economic subsystems, in other words, while there are voluminous investments in the area of interests of dominant classes and transnational corporations, there are no investments in the direction of strengthening the space economy of the poorest people. From the totality, it was identified that the plans are permeated by the financialization of the Brazilian economy that requires permanent state fiscal austerity to maintain the public debt service. On the other hand, financialization is part of the reprimarization process and the production of primary products is the economic base of Mato Grosso do Sul. Thus, we clearly have programs that go for interests of classes related to the financial sector and projects for the agribusiness classes. The territory of Mato Grosso do Sul, as indicated in the plans, must be opened for investments, which in practice is the territory used, used as a means for the reproduction of capital. We conclude that the analyzed MYPs are pamphleteers, intended to convince investors, and their development is what we call neoliberal development, in other words, a document that calls to attention to internal and external investors and uses public resources going for their interests. We understand that planning can be elaborated, armed with popular political forces, from a special perspective to the poorest people, going from the perspective of expanding and strengthening public services and activating urban economic subsystems.