Abstract
Brazilian federal government has experienced institutional arrangements which aims to build effective public policies in a complex territorial context. In them there are two axes: the attempt to intersectoral thematic and building models of public policy management with coordination among federal agencies and civil society to articulate. This article examines how new institutional arrangements consider the role of territories. The analysis is structured around two central questions: a) what is the centrality given to the concept of territory and to what extent it plays an active or passive role in the design of the arrangement; b) factors that could explain the contours of institutional arrangement and how the territorial dimension is embodied in them. The article analyzes three arrangements: Brazil Without Poverty Plan; Accelerated Growth Program; Territories of Citizenship Program. The analyzes based on official documents of the programs aim to understand, from their operating structure, such as intersectoral issues occur, federal relations and design territory. Analyzing programs, one realizes that, although in varying degrees, there are more juxtaposition than integration of public policies, and the territories in them - understood as the locus of implementation of policies and social forces acting on it - do not occupy an active position, revealing mere repositories of investments. As a consequence, this weakness observed in both double integration as desired territorial articulation, is something that results in loss of efficiency of investment and commitment of the results. These limits are due largely to the weight of sectoral culture that permeates the managers and the behavior of social forces, associated with an institutional culture of privilege of results achievable in the short term. These aspects, in turn, are realized both in regulations governing arrangements and the range of actors involved. In theoretical terms this hypothesis departs from the analyzes that merely takes the arrangements under the administrative or management angle and approaches the institutionalist approaches, for which you can not analyze the institutional arrangements isolated from the institutional environment which are at once part and expression.
KEYWORDS:
territory; public policy; federative relations; institutional arrangements; cross sectoral