O contexto de responsabilidades dos governos estaduais nas políticas setoriais de investimento industrial da Região Metropolitana de Salvador (RMS), 1990-2019

Abstract

The recent actions of the sectorial investment policies cannot be seen as those driving regional policies in the 1960s to 1970s, unlike the first initiatives of the Northeast Development Superintendence planned by the Brazilian federal government. This paper aims to analyze whether the sectorial policies are limited for attracting capital and promoting industry in the Metropolitan Region of Salvador (RMS, Brazilian acronym). This study includes: (a) presenting the conceptual approaches to territory interpreted by Milton Santos, which help on the debate on political interventions and repercussions on using the territory; (b) contextualizing the performance of sectorial policies for the industrial segment in the RMS and their repercussions on using the territory in 1990-2019; and (c) identifying whether there is an association between the living conditions in the municipalities and the vulnerability conditions of the public benefited by the Continued Benefit Program (BPC, Brazilian acronym) and by the Bolsa Família Program (PBF, Brazilian acronym) in the RMS in 2005- 2018, purposing to observe recent social transformations in the municipalities. This thesis construction, based on the historical materialist method, is supported by documentary research such as laws, decrees, government plans, academic research (theses, dissertations, papers), interviews with public managers in the state of Bahia and data from the Atlas of Development and of the Ministry of Citizenship. In the time frame of the 1990-2019, it was sought to understand under what circumstances the states gain autonomy to establish conditions to attract investments recognized as tax or local disputes and, in these cases, to lower the capital cost of the attracted companies. Although the sectorial policies adopted for the RMS having a positive influence on attracting investments, heterogeneity in the development indicators and also a significant number of citizens who meet the conditions to access the BPC and PBF were identified in the territory. Thus, it is concluded that the responsibility context of the state governments in sectorial policies of industrial investment in the RMS is subject to questioning and identifying by what is foreseen in government programs, especially regarding the policy limitations, regarding the progress intentions in infrastructure investments for the development and employment provision, including improving the life quality of citizens and keeping them in their original place.