A carregar...
Publicação
Governança Multiníveis em Territórios de Baixa Densidade: As Comunidades Intermunicipais do Alto Alentejo e da Beira Baixa
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.91 MB | Adobe PDF |
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Em Portugal os territórios de baixa densidade traduzem o despovoamento e o envelhecimento
populacional do interior, que o investimento dos Fundos Comunitários não conseguiram travar. Essa realidade
territorial e a descentralização de competências da administração central através de um processo de governança
multiníveis constituem uma problemática pertinente pela ausência de regiões administrativas no modelo político
administrativo português.
A falta da escala intermédia favoreceu a descentralização do Estado para o nível local, municípios e
freguesias, fragmentando o processo de planeamento e gestão de território e aumentando as assimetrias
territoriais. O vazio legal foi ultrapassado com a reforma da administração local de 2013, que reforça a escala
intermédia, ao nível das NUTS III, alicerçada nas Comunidades Intermunicipais (CIM) e nas Áreas Metropolitanas
(AM). Trata-se de um modelo hibrido, onde os seus órgãos executivos e deliberativos não são eleitos por sufrágio
direto. A legitimidade política destes “órgãos” ou entidades, e o seu contributo para a gestão e coesão territorial
constitui o objeto do estudo comparado das Comunidades Intermunicipais do Alto Alentejo e da Beira Baixa. Os
respetivos territórios, situados nas NUTS II Alentejo e Centro, são adjacentes, periféricos e fronteiriços, com
características físicas comuns e relações socioculturais de proximidade.
Identificadas as causas das fragilidades sociais e económicas dos territórios de baixa densidade, importa
perceber onde falham as soluções. Os processos de planeamento, o modelo de governação e a incoerência das
políticas públicas provocados por diferentes ciclos políticos são analisados e avaliados através do modelo de
funcionamento, das atribuições e competências das CIM e dos instrumentos de gestão territorial e de
desenvolvimento. As relações intermunicipais e o papel das CIM na coordenação das estratégias de
desenvolvimento não são complementados por uma descentralização de competências que permita reforçar a
capacitação institucional destas entidades. O enquadramento legal das CIM faz depender a descentralização de
competências da deliberação dos seus órgãos, constituídos pelos eleitos municipais. A descentralização de
competências da administração central e dos municípios nas CIM não se concretiza por vontade política dos seus
órgãos. As funções formais de gestão dos Fundos Comunitários por descentralização ao nível das NUTS III
constituem a única competência delegada pela legislação em vigor. A sustentabilidade do funcionamento das
CIM depende do financiamento comunitário, comprometendo a autonomia das relações institucionais de
cooperação entre os diferentes níveis da administração e de coordenação setorial das políticas públicas. As
parcerias evidenciam a importância das CIM para a implementação e coordenação das dinâmicas locais de
desenvolvimento socioeconómico, mas revelam repetição de atores sociais, públicos e privados, o que limita a
dimensão da participação no processo de governança.
O estudo comparado identifica um padrão comum no funcionamento das duas CIM, nas estratégias de
desenvolvimento e na evolução das suas atribuições e competências. As diferenças verificam-se nas relações
informais estabelecidas pelas CIM para a implementação das estratégias de desenvolvimento, no âmbito dos
Fundos Comunitários, e de cooperação e coordenação das políticas públicas com impacto nos seus territórios.
In Portugal, low density territories are related with depopulation and ageing of inland population. This trend was not reversed by EU funds. This reality as well as the decentralization of the central administration competences through multi-level governance policies are a relevant problem due to the absence of administrative regions in the current Portuguese political administrative model. The lack of an intermediate scale favoured the State’s decentralisation to a local level, municipalities and parish councils. This leads to a fragmentation in the territory planning and management processes, therefore enhancing territorial asymmetries. The legal void was outmoded by the 2013 local administration reformation, which reinforces the intermediate scale, at the NUTS III level, founded at the Intermunicipal Communities (CIMs) and Metropolitan Areas (MAs). We speak about a hybrid model in which executive and deliberative organs are not elected by direct suffrage. Political legitimacy of this entities and their role on territorial cohesion and territorial management convey the body of the comparative study between Alto Alentejo and Beira Baixa’s CIM. These territories, located at the Alentejo and Centro’s NUTS II are adjacent, peripheral and border areas with common characteristics and sociocultural relations based on proximity. Once identified the causes of the social and economic fragilities from the low density territories it’s key to understand the solutions are failing. The planning processes, the governance model and the incoherent public policies derived from multiple political cycles are analysed and evaluated through the operating model, duties and competences of CIM and territorial and development tools. Intermunicipal relations and CIM’s role in the development strategies’ coordination are not complemented by a decentralisation of competencies which enables the reinforcement of these entities’ institutional qualification. CIM legal framework makes competencies descentralization to depend on the deliberation of its entities, which are formed by its municipal representatives. The descentralisation of competences from the central administration and municipalities to the CIMs does not occur due to a lack of will from its political bodies. EU funds management’s formal functions due to the decentralisation at the NUTS III level form the only delegated competency on the prevailing legislation. The working CIM’s sustainability depends on the community funds. This compromises the autonomy of institutional cooperation relations between different levels of administration and the sectoral coordination of public policies. These partnerships highlight the importance of CIM’s for the implementations and coordination of the local dynamics for socioeconomic development, but also unveil the repetition of both private and public social actors, restraining the participation on the governance process. The comparative study identifies a common pattern on the performance of both CIMs, both at its development strategies and on the evolution of its attributions and competencies. We verify these differences on the unofficial relations established between CIMs for the deployment of development strategies in the scope of the EU funds and in the cooperation and coordination of the public politics with impact on its territories.
In Portugal, low density territories are related with depopulation and ageing of inland population. This trend was not reversed by EU funds. This reality as well as the decentralization of the central administration competences through multi-level governance policies are a relevant problem due to the absence of administrative regions in the current Portuguese political administrative model. The lack of an intermediate scale favoured the State’s decentralisation to a local level, municipalities and parish councils. This leads to a fragmentation in the territory planning and management processes, therefore enhancing territorial asymmetries. The legal void was outmoded by the 2013 local administration reformation, which reinforces the intermediate scale, at the NUTS III level, founded at the Intermunicipal Communities (CIMs) and Metropolitan Areas (MAs). We speak about a hybrid model in which executive and deliberative organs are not elected by direct suffrage. Political legitimacy of this entities and their role on territorial cohesion and territorial management convey the body of the comparative study between Alto Alentejo and Beira Baixa’s CIM. These territories, located at the Alentejo and Centro’s NUTS II are adjacent, peripheral and border areas with common characteristics and sociocultural relations based on proximity. Once identified the causes of the social and economic fragilities from the low density territories it’s key to understand the solutions are failing. The planning processes, the governance model and the incoherent public policies derived from multiple political cycles are analysed and evaluated through the operating model, duties and competences of CIM and territorial and development tools. Intermunicipal relations and CIM’s role in the development strategies’ coordination are not complemented by a decentralisation of competencies which enables the reinforcement of these entities’ institutional qualification. CIM legal framework makes competencies descentralization to depend on the deliberation of its entities, which are formed by its municipal representatives. The descentralisation of competences from the central administration and municipalities to the CIMs does not occur due to a lack of will from its political bodies. EU funds management’s formal functions due to the decentralisation at the NUTS III level form the only delegated competency on the prevailing legislation. The working CIM’s sustainability depends on the community funds. This compromises the autonomy of institutional cooperation relations between different levels of administration and the sectoral coordination of public policies. These partnerships highlight the importance of CIM’s for the implementations and coordination of the local dynamics for socioeconomic development, but also unveil the repetition of both private and public social actors, restraining the participation on the governance process. The comparative study identifies a common pattern on the performance of both CIMs, both at its development strategies and on the evolution of its attributions and competencies. We verify these differences on the unofficial relations established between CIMs for the deployment of development strategies in the scope of the EU funds and in the cooperation and coordination of the public politics with impact on its territories.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Governança multiníveis Territórios de baixa densidade Comunidades intermunicipais Coesão territorial Alto Alentejo Beira Baixa Low density territories Multi-level governance Intermunicipal Communities Territorial cohesion