172

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

Reconsidering the consistency between

principles and practices for Technical

Cooperation between Developing Countries:

A critical analysis of ProSavana

Reconsiderando a consistência entre princípios

e práticas para a Cooperação Técnica entre

Países em Desenvolvimento: Uma análise crítica

do ProSavana

DOI: 10.21530/ci.v11n3.2016.354

Niels Søndergaard

Abstract

The present article analyses the relationship between principles and practices for Technical

Cooperation between Developing Countries (TCDC), in the case of Brazilian-Mozambican

collaboration within the ProSavana programme. The notion of horizontality can be identified

as a strong part of the ideational basis for Brazilian development cooperation. Such egalitarian

conceptions are also strongly reflected within the discourse of the ProSavana programme, but

their effectuation encounters a range of complications related to the practical implementation

and difficulties with aligning the multitude of different motivations, development perceptions

and particular interests permeating the programme. Analysis aimed at the implications of

the initiative at the local level indicates that a series of socio-economic issues, related to

land tenure and community inclusion might conflict directly with the notion of horizontal

cooperation. The article therefore argues that a layered approach, with a focus beyond

inter-governmental relations, and comprising of local community consultancy and civil

society inclusion, is necessary for such cooperation projects to be consistent with their

basis of principles.

Keywords: Cooperation, development, agriculture, South-South relations, Mozambique.

1 Doutorando no Instituto de Relações Internacionais (IREL) da Universidade de Brasília, (UnB).

Artigo submetido em 08/03/2016 e aprovado em 18/07/2016.

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

173

Niels Søndergaard

Resumo

O presente artigo analisa a relação entre princípios e práticas na Cooperação Técnica entre

Países em Desenvolvimento (CTPD), no caso da colaboração Brasileira-Moçambicana dentro

do programa de ProSavana. O conceito de horizontalidade pode ser identificado como uma

parte substancial da base ideacional na cooperação pelo desenvolvimento do Brasil. Tais

concepções igualitárias também refletem fortemente dentro do discurso do programa de

ProSavana, porém, a sua efetuação encontra uma série de complicações relacionadas à

implementação prática e dificuldades de alinhar a multiplicidade de diferentes motivações,

percepções sobre o desenvolvimento e interesses particulares que permeiam o programa.

Análise focada nas implicações dessa iniciativa no nível local indica que uma série de

questões socioeconômicas, relacionadas à posse de terra e inclusão de comunidades, possa

contrariar a noção de cooperação horizontal. O artigo portanto argumenta que uma abordagem

abrangendo diferentes níveis de foco, indo além das relações inter-governamentais, e que

compreende consulta das comunidades locais e inclusão da sociedade civil, é necessária

para que tais iniciativas sejam coerentes com a sua base de princípios.

Palavras chaves: Cooperação, desenvolvimento, agricultura, relações sul-sul, Moçambique.

Introduction

South-South cooperation, and the question of whether such initiatives

represent a fundamentally alternative model for development assistance, has gained

evermore attention along with its increasing proliferation from the turn of the

millennium. The present article evaluates the consistency between the conceptual

basis and practical implementation of Technical Cooperation between Developing

Countries (TCDC) in the case of the Brazilian engagement within Mozambique,

through the ProSavana trilateral development initiative. The concept of horizontality

and principles adjacent to this notion are reviewed within literature focusing upon

South-South cooperation, and scrutinized in relation to their appearance within

Brazilian TCDC. The underlying principles for Brazilian cooperation practices have

gained a more concrete character within the Brazilian Cooperation Agency´s (ABC)

essential guidelines for development projects

. These guidelines serve to structure

the analysis of ProSavana in order to evaluate to what extent the dimensions to

2 The central guidelines for Brazilian technical cooperation are formulated by the ABC as: 1) emphasis on home

country development priorities, 2) preference for programs which deepen political and economic relations,

3) emphasis upon knowledge transfer, 4) emphasis upon human recourse training, consultancy and institutional

infrastructure support, 5) preference for programs with local recourse mobilization, 6) prioritization of projects

with high multiplier effects and, 7) orientation towards projects with concentrated results. (ABC, 2005).

174

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

which they relate are characterized by horizontal interactions between Brazil

and Mozambique. Though the trilateral constitution of ProSavana also comprises

Japan, emphasis is put on the Brazilian engagement within Mozambique, which

is considered a significant case in displaying the opportunities, limits and trade-

offs that result from cooperation strategies with highly multifaceted objectives.

The article applies a dual analytical focus upon official governmental interactions

as opposed to local stakeholders and rural communities, in order to understand

how the differentiated consequences produced at these two levels entail different

sets of conclusions regarding the horizontal nature of the ProSavana initiative.

Perspectives on cooperation between developing countries

Cooperation between Third World countries emerged as an alternative

development path in the 1960´s, inspired by the same ideological currents that led

to the Non-Aligned Movement, and has strong roots stretching back to Bandung

Conference of 1955. Its incipient institutionalization began with the Buenos

Aires Plan of Action, created at the UN Conference of 1978, within which it was

formulated as Technical Cooperation between Developing Countries (TCDC).

Today, it is often treated as a phenomenon within the category of South-South

cooperation, which is defined by the United Nations Development Program as

‘a broad framework for collaboration among countries of the South in the

political, economic, social, cultural, environmental and technical domains.’ When

South-South cooperation is supported by traditional donator countries or

by multilateral organizations, it is characterized as ‘triangular cooperation’

(UNDP, 2016).

The surge in cooperation initiatives amongst developing countries after the

turn of the millennium has also spurred a great amount of academic interest in

mapping, critically scrutinizing and conceptualizing this type of international

engagement. Fantu Cheru (2011) ascribes great importance to the room of maneuver

which the translocations within the international system, from a bipolar towards

a more multipolar order, have left for developing countries (CHERU 2011, p. 47).

Cheru stresses how this has resulted in a newfound ‘policy space´(Ibid) within

which developing countries have gained an unprecedented opportunity to pursue

an offensive strategic engagement in order to alter global economic arrangements

to their favor (Ibid, p. 45). Some of the essential changes around which the

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

175

Niels Søndergaard

interests of developing countries may converge are pinpointed by the author as

a more democratized system for global governance, an increasingly horizontal

international trade regime as well as the re-evaluation of aid conditionality (Ibid

2011, p. 50-52).

Francisco Simplício similarly perceives the present momentum for cooperation

amongst developing countries as a unique historical opportunity, due to the

unprecedented monetary and technical recourses that have become available in

these parts of the world (SIMPLÍCIO 2011, p. 35). The task at hand is to define a

range of institutional and financial mechanisms through which these capabilities

may be transformed into a mutually beneficial cooperation between the partners

involved (Ibid, p. 19). Simplício also underlines the importance of the logic

permeating South-South cooperation being essentially different from that of

North-South arrangements, through an increased attention to home countries

development priorities, combined with an aspiration towards mutual gain which

serves to dissolute the ‘donator-recipient’ paradigm (Ibid, pp.4-5). The surging

trend of Southern cooperation initiatives is even characterized by Patrick Clairzier

(2011) as directly consequential of the negative experiences faced by developing

countries, due to the free-marked oriented conditionality of North-South official

development assistance (CLAIRZIER, 2011).

Thus, cooperation amongst developing countries may, in this perspective be

seen as a trend of collective contestation of an externally imposed developmental

vision. An analogous perspective is expressed by Diego Rodrigues (2010), who

underlines how the institutionalization of coalitions of developing countries has

become a strategic recourse in order to confront inequalities embedded within the

international system, through more horizontal modes of cooperation (RODRIGUES,

2010). The notion of horizontality as opposed to verticality, is also central to Caicedo

and Castro (2010), and lies at the hearth of their explanation of how the power

to define ideas and their concomitant development models, has been deprived

from the South. The horizontal mode of cooperation is, thus, born out of, and

simultaneously foments, a crucial ability to reflect upon themselves as generators

of legitimate development experiences (CAICEDO; CASTRO 2010, p. 93). Yet,

Caicedo and Castro also draw attention to the danger of South-South cooperation

assuming the same vertical character as that of North-South relations, and thereby

spur inequality within the South (Ibid, p. 99). In relation to this question, Renu

Modi accentuates how the nature of relationships between emergent intermediate

states and African countries is of a somehow more ‘genuine’ nature, and involves

176

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

projects with a broader development impact, empowering African countries and

stimulating their independent engagement at the global level (MODI, 2011).

This raises the question of whether the shared development experiences of

countries of the Global South have indeed produced some sort of kinship and

congenital mutual empathy. Nel & Taylor (2013) have analyzed the notion of South-

South solidarity through use of the Durkheimian distinction between mechanical

and organic solidarity. While the first refers to a more objective identification of

affiliation with an ‘other’ which is in a less fortunate situation than oneself, the

latter is associated with a much deeper appreciation of the distinctiveness of this

‘other´, and with the recognition of the essence of his/her needs. Through an

evaluation of the relationships between a group of relatively powerful emerging

states and less recourse-endowed and smaller countries, Nel & Taylor identify a

clear tendency amongst the dynamic emergent economies to disregard the interests

of their more fragile peers. As the character of South-South cooperation often does

not reach beyond what is termed as mechanical solidarity, the authors underline

that this type of engagement losses its essence and runs the risk of becoming a

fetishisation of growth and trade. (NEL; TAYLOR 2013, pp.1106-1107)

Though some of the prevailing perspectives on technical cooperation amongst

developing countries diverge to some degree over the issue of distribution of

benefits between nations, they do tend to converge to the extent that they all

apply a state-centric perspective. Sanusha Naidu (2011), for example, emphasizes

the differentiated impacts which the entry of emergent intermediate states has

within African countries. This approach begs a range of questions related to how

this affects the ability of civil society and social movements to promote their own

interests and poses the question of whether the “national interests” of African

governments are indeed analogous to the “national interests” of the population

at large (Ibid, p. 211-212). Thus, Naidu draws analytical attention to civil society

struggles for inclusivity and the issue of how South-South cooperation affects

social development (Ibid, p. 215-216).

Brazilian cooperation and the notion of horizontality

Reducing asymmetries within the international system has been a central

Brazilian policy priority since the turn of the millennium. This urge for transformation

has resulted in an activist foreign policy through which the aspiration to create

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

177

Niels Søndergaard

consensus for change within the South has been backed by investment, the

provision of technical assistance and political support for other developing countries

(PINO 2012, p. 194). Since the creation of the Brazilian Agency for Cooperation

(ABC) in 1987, the intention has been to pursue a strategy for international

cooperation emphasizing a non-vertical approximation with other developing

countries (MENDONÇA; FARIA 2015, p. 7). Various Brazilian governments have

sought to distinguish ‘aid’ and ‘assistance’ from ‘cooperation’, which reflects

the will to dissociate Brazilian initiatives from the perceived paternalism and

political interference of traditional development assistance on a more fundamental

ideational level (INOUE; VAZ 2013, p. 509-510).

Cooperation initiatives with other developing countries gained unprecedented

significance during the administrations of the centre-left President Lula da Silva,

and many political and organizational recourses were allocated to this area. Lula´s

restructuring of the Foreign Ministry also meant that the Africa Department was

separated from the Middle East Department, which implied a stronger bureaucratic

specialization in African affairs (MENDONÇA; FARIA, 2015 p. 11). The Lula

government´s spotlight on Africa is illustrated by the number of presidential

visits to African countries, totaling 29, distributed on 12 trips from 2003 to 2010

(MUKWEREZA 2015, p. 5). The 30% increase in the number of Brazilian embassies

abroad during the Lula period was also strongly felt in Africa. This was highly

linked to the increase in cooperation projects, which served as a foreign policy

instrument related to the goal of projecting international influence, the opening of

markets and support for the internationalization of Brazilian companies (INOUE;

VAZ 2013, p. 529). The explicit objective of fomenting the global engagement

of Brazilian companies was a marked foreign policy concern during the Lula

government (CERVO; BUENO 2011, p. 544-545). This goal thereby constituted a

tendency which coincided with the African focus, and also concretely became

manifest through the significant personal efforts of the president as a distinguished

representative of Brazilian business in the continent, which helped secure a range

of major agreements. Though some Brazilian companies have been present in

Africa since the 1980´s, recent diplomatic engagement has served to open many

new doors for businesses exploiting the opportunities of the booming raw material

prices at the time. This has been characterized as a second wave of Brazilian

investment, which not only includes the more established private players within

construction and recourse extraction, but also a range of newly internationally

oriented small and medium companies (RENZIO et al. 2014, p. 11).

178

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

The principles of Brazilian international cooperation can be traced back to

the Bandung Conference (1955) and the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (1978) and

aims at substituting an assistencialist approach with one of mutually beneficial

cooperation (MILHORANCE 2013, p. 6). As a fundamental guideline for Brazilian

engagement in South-South cooperation, the notion of horizontality has come to

assume an outstanding importance (CABRAL; SHANKLAND 2012, p. 3; INOUE;

VAZ 2013, p. 510; PATRIOTA; PIERRI 2013, p. 129;STUENKEL 2014, p. 3;). The

ABC defines horizontality as one of the pillars of Brazilian technical cooperation

and stresses its importance in relation to intensifying partnerships with developing

countries, as well as its essentiality as part of a solidarity-oriented foreign policy

(ABC, 2016 (1)). A range of significant principles for Brazilian TCDC which are

either born out of, or adjacent to the idea of horizontality, can nonetheless be

identified as; solidarity diplomacy (PATRIOTA; PIERRI 2013, p. 129) the principle

of non-interference in domestic affairs (CABRAL et al 2013, p. 2), demand driven

projects (BRY 2015, p. 453), appreciation of local knowledge (LEITE et al. 2014, p.

21), non-conditionality (SANTOS; CERQUEIRA 2015, p. 38), and no association with

commercial interests (BARBOSA, 2012, p. 117-118). Considering these principles

as sub-components of the general concept of horizontality within Brazilian

cooperation, it becomes possible to treat this notion in a more concrete manner. It

also permits the identification of different dimensions of this principle within ABC´s

guidelines for technical cooperation, which are stated as 1) emphasis on home

country development priorities, 2) preference for programs which deepen political

and economic relations, 3) emphasis on transference of knowledge, 4) emphasis

on human recourse training, consultancy and institutional infrastructure support,

5) preference for programs with local recourse mobilization, 6) prioritization

of projects with high multiplier effects and, 7) orientation towards projects

with concentrated results (ABC, 2005). Through these guidelines, principles of

horizontality appear to have assumed a more tangible nature, which thus allows

a more concrete evaluation of the manner in which they characterize particular

projects of Brazilian cooperation.

As Fernando Abreu, General Director of the ABC stressed in a 2013 article, the

horizontal modality of Brazilian cooperation also serves an important functional

purpose within the country´s foreign policy, by intensifying relations with

developing partner countries (ABREU, 2013, p. 7). Some of Brazil´s ‘comparative

advantages’ in terms of development cooperation are formulated by the ABC as

‘Geographical location, cultural heritage, social and economic challenges common

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

179

Niels Søndergaard

to those of beneficiary countries’ (ABC, 2016 (2)). Due to the subordination of

Brazilian cooperation initiatives below the broader foreign policy framework,

an important aspect has to do with the instrumental concern of projecting

influence amongst developing countries, which in term is translated into an

increased legitimacy and weight within international negotiations (PINO 2012,

p. 198). Brazilian engagement in Africa has generally been justified through the

horizontality and Southern solidarity discourse, which nonetheless has been partly

challenged by the practical experiences generated by the increased presence of

its corporations (CABRAL 2015, p. 5). Though the ABC clearly underlines that

Brazilian cooperation is unrelated to any commercial purpose, its market-opening

and trade facilitating potential has been hinted at (INOUE; VAZ 2013, p. 527). Vaz

also underlines that in addition to other foreign policy objectives, the interests of

the Brazilian agribusiness sectors have been a vital part of the country´s strategy

for agricultural cooperation in Africa (VAZ, 2015, p. 166).

The mutual presence of altruistic/solidary as well as pragmatic concerns

in Brazilian cooperation policies, raises the question as to what degree they are

compatible, or whether they might imply some inherently incongruent features

which may compromise their horizontal character. Even though he accentuates

that Brazil´s cooperation efforts in Africa do indeed imply a noticeable economic

aspect, Vaz stresses that it should not be perceived as a primary concern (VAZ 2015,

p. 178). In spite of the large proportion of agricultural projectswithin Brazilian

TCDC, no official policy has yet been formulated in relation to projects specifically

within this sector. This may in part be explained by the fragmented nature of

Brazilian institutions for agricultural governance (CABRAL; SHANKLAND 2012,

p. 12; CABRAL et al 2013, pp.9-10). Hereby, the internal power struggles within

the Brazilian agricultural regime spill over onto the international sphere, where

– as the paper shall explore – new sub- and transnational issue coalitions emerge

with the purpose of contesting or influencing the definition and implementation

of agricultural cooperation projects.

A marked feature of Brazilian cooperation is that it relies extensively on

technical and practical experiences accumulated within a range of public institutions

(PINO 2012, p. 198). The Institute for Agricultural Research (Embrapa), for

example, gained vital significance within the Brazilian cooperation policy (STOLTE

2012, p. 11). As the proportion of projects related to agriculture within Brazilian

international cooperation amounted to 21,9% between 2003-2010 (SCHLESINGER

2013, p. 8), Embrapa has played a central role. In 2008 approximately half of

180

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

ABC´s programs in Africa involved Embrapa´s participation, through transfer

and implementation of agricultural technology, training personnel and provision

of access to Brazilian agribusiness (ARKHANGELSKAYA; KHAMATSHIN 2013,

p. 165; MILHORANCE 2013, p. 13). Embrapa opened its first African office in

Ghana in 2008, and by 2012 the institute was involved in projects in 15 different

African countries, spanning over seed adaption and conservation, improvement

of crop resistance, soil optimization and post-harvest technologies (STOLTE

2012, p. 12). The ABC works closely together with Embrapa, but as it is an

agency of the Foreign Ministry, its autonomy is limited and its function is often

narrowed to coordination of operations (CABRAL; SHANKLAND 2012, p. 12-13;

CABRAL et al 2013, p. 4). Embrapa has been strongly involved in triangular

cooperation in its operations in different African countries, whereby either

an international organization or a developed country finance the transfer and

implementation of Embrapa´s technological expertise (IZIQUE 2008, p. 35).

Triangular cooperation projects have come to constitute around 20% of ABC´s

portfolio, and are highly concentrated in Mozambique (PINO 2012, p. 200). There

is a tendency for such triangular initiatives to become an increasingly common

feature of Brazilian TCDC (INOUE; VAZ 2013, p. 521). It has also been connected

to the country´s recent craving for recognition within multilateral fora and to

gain a leading stand amongst developing countries (GARCIA et al. 2013, p. 14).

Brazil´s foothold in Africa

Although often dated to the wave of decolonization in the 1960´s, the birth

of relations between Brazil and Africa can be traced to the late 1940´s (SARAIVA

2010, p. 174). Relations were carried on and partially intensified throughout the

authoritarian period, but Africa lost some relative weight as a Brazilian foreign

policy priority by the end of the century. With Lula assuming the presidency in 2003,

the emphasis on strengthening ties with the Global South meant that the African

continent, – which had been less prioritized during Fernando Henrique Cardoso´s

years in power – became more significant to the Brazilian international strategy

(FILHO 2012, p. 305). President Lula´s visits to different African countries in 2003

and 2004 were landmarks in the rebirth of the transatlantic Southern approximation

(SARAIVA 2010, p. 179). What has been known as Lula´s presidential diplomacy,

thus, was also emblematic of Brazil´s African relations during his term. This is

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

181

Niels Søndergaard

reflected in a comparison of the number of cooperation agreements signed with

different African countries during the eight years of Cardoso and Lula respectively:

while during Cardoso´s period a total of 36 agreements were signed, during Lula’s

this number surged dramatically to 238 accords (MENDONÇA; FARIA 2015, p. 14).

Agriculture has been one of the main focus points for Brazilian cooperation

projects in Africa, and has accounted for 19% of total resources allocated to the

area (RENZIO et al. 2014, p. 13). The partnership with Brazil became a development

alternative to many African countries, while it simultaneously helped to secure

Brazil some important international leverage, as was the case with the election

of José Granizo da Silva as the Director General of the United Nations Food and

Agricultural Organization (FAO) in 2011 (Ibid, p. 7). The public initiative has

thereby been an essential factor, which has helped to garner diplomatic support

and international standing, but it also appears to have been an important driver

in order to spur intensifying economic relations (STOLTE 2012, p. 9). In the past

decade, trade between Brazil and Africa expanded rapidly, growing from $4,3

billion in 2000 to $28,5 billion in 2013 (MUGGAH, 2015). Brazilian investments

also surged during that period, from a $69 billion in 2001 to $214 billion in 2009,

spread widely beyond Brazil´s initial foothold in the Lusophone African countries

(ECONOMIST, 2012).

The Brazilian history of rapid agricultural production increases in the past

decades has also become a development experience which serves a purpose of

attraction in relation to many African countries (CHICHAVA et al 2013, p. 21). The

efforts to transfer these policies in form of development cooperation have even

been referred to as making Brazil a grand exporter of social technology (STUENKEL

2014, p. 4). Such circumstances have paved the ground for the somewhat

controversial statement by the former Brazilian Foreign Minister, Celso Amorim,

that ‘for every African problem, there exists a Brazilian solution’ (AMORIM, 2011).

ProSavana and Mozambican realities

In Mozambique, agriculture holds a vital economic significance, as it is the

primary source of livelihood for approximately 80% of the population. (CHICHAVA

et al 2013, p. 5). Most of the country is situated on the Guinean Savannah, that

stretches throughout 481 million square kilometers in 25 countries on the African

sub-continent, and which is characterized by climatic conditions and soil types

182

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

that are largely similar to those on the Brazilian Cerrado savannah. At present,

estimates suggest that only 6,8% of the area is occupied by agriculture. (HARBS;

BACHA; HARBS. 2015, p. 63) Because Sub-Saharan Africa never has been through

an agricultural green revolution similar to that of many other developing countries,

it has been deemed the last agricultural frontier on the planet (WOERTZ; KEULERT

2015, p. 786). It is estimated that only around 14% of Mozambique´s 36 million

hectares of arable land are cultivated. Nearly all of the land is farmed by smallholders

with an average farm size of 1,1 hectares (ROSARIO 2012, p. 3). Yet, evaluations

of land use are extremely difficult to make because of crop rotation, and because

land not directly cultivated also may hold a purpose as source of nutrition or even

a specific cultural and religious significance (ROSSI 2015, p. 240). Agricultural

productivity in Mozambique is nonetheless very low. A 2006 FAO study suggested

that 38% of its inhabitants are undernourished (THALOR 2013, p. 148). The main

reasons for the productivity problems in Mozambican agriculture have been singled

out as the long period of internal conflict, the lack of infrastructure and investment

from public and private sources, as well as poor governance (ROSARIO 2012, p. 5).

In Mozambique, all land officially belongs to the state. Access is granted through

the Land Use and Benefit Titles also called DUAT (Direitos de Uso e Aproveito de

Terra). This permits foreign investors to lease the land in periods up to 50 years,

for a fee down to US $1 per hectare a year (CLEMENTS; FERNANDES 2013,

pp. 51-52). Individuals holding a land certificate may choose to sell or rent out

the land, which also creates room for the entry of private foreign capital, though

investors are obliged to seek consultation with the local community regarding the

specific use of the farmland (MILGROOM 2015, p. 592).

The ProSavana initiative was agreed upon in 2009, through a memorandum

of triangular cooperation signed by Mozambique, Brazil and Japan. The goal is an

extensive expansion of agricultural production and productivity in the provinces

of Cabo Delgado, Niassa, Nampula and Zambésia, situated in what is known as

the ‘Nacala Corridor’ in the northern part of the country, spanning over an area

of around 540.000 square kilometers (PATRIOTA; PIERRI 2013, p. 132). These

areas have been selected due to their heavy rainfall and what has been estimated

as a high degree of available arable land (CLEMENTS; FERNANDES 2013, p. 54)

as well as the climatic and topographical similarities with the Brazilian Cerrado

(GARCIA et al 2013, p. 16). Embrapa describes ProSavana as a ‘project for the

improvement of the research capacity and technology transfer for the development

of agriculture in the Nacala Corridor.’ (EMBRAPA, 2016).

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

183

Niels Søndergaard

ProSavana has been structured around three central components: The first

component, also known as the Investigation Plan, which is intended to run from

2011-2016, involves research with focus upon soil and plant properties and a series

of crop tests. The second central component of the program, the Director Plan,

consists of a mapping of the individual region´s producers and characteristics, in

order to define recommendations for cultivation and processing in six different

areas. The third and final stage, the Plan for Model Extension, focuses on the

proliferation of the techniques and models developed as part of the program.

There is a long-term perspective for the gradual implementation of the initiative

towards 2030. (HARBS; BACHA; HARBS 2015, p. 73-74)

The plan for ProSavana aims at contructing different clusters, within which the

production and processing of one or a few similar crops is concentrated, in order

to develop value added activities and reap the benefits of geographic proximity,

concentration of input providers and economies of scale. The plan currently seeks to

establish two clusters focusing on grains, one on horticulture, one on cashew production,

one on tea, and finally an integrated horticulture/grain cluster. (SCHLESINGER 2013,

p. 24) ProSavana relies strongly on the participation of Embrapa, which is responsible

for technical aspects of the initiative, while the project department of the Getúlio

Vargas Foundation´s (FGV Projetos) main responsibility is to define the Master Plan and

to bring private capital into the project. The program is implemented in cooperation

with the Mozambican Agricultural Ministry (MINAG) (MILHORANCE; GABAS 2015,

p. 7). Within the official Mozambican account of the program, the multifaceted

purpose of productivity increases, employment creation, poverty reduction, food

security and the incitement of marked-oriented rural development is emphasized

(GOV. MOZ, 2016).

Although ProSavana wields a strong focus on family agriculture, it also

implies a significant private sector aspect, related to agro-industrial expansion on

the African Savannah. Therefore, while the operational aspects of the program

are within the Foreign Ministry´s area of responsibility through ABC, the Getúlio

Vargas Foundation manages the mobilization of private capital from the Brazilian

agribusiness sector, which so far has displayed a considerable amount of interest in

the project. (VAZ 2015, p. 180) The foundation´s goal is to raise some US$2 billion

amongst Brazilian and Japanese investors, offering a minimum annual return of

10% while aiming at 20-22% (BATISTA, 2012). The Nacala Corridor Fund focuses

strongly on generation of returns for investors, through the implementation of an

integrated and competition oriented agribusiness model (FUNDAÇÃO GETÚLIO

184

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

VARGAS, 2015). The FGV works in close conjunction with the DWS Investments,

a Management enterprise below Deutche Bank (SCHLESINGER 2013, p. 9).

In 2011, chairman of the cotton producers’ association in MatoGrosso, Carlos

Ernesto Augustin, emphasized cheap access to farmland, absence of environmental

regulation and the relative proximity to the Chinese marked, as factors that

should raise interests amongst Brazilian agribusiness in repeating the agricultural

expansion in the Cerrado region, some 30 years ago (MELLO, 2011). In 2012, the

Mozambican Prime Minister at the time, Aires Bonifácio Baptista, also strongly

urged Brazilian agricultural investors to come to the country, assuring them that

they would face a favorable operational environment (CLEMENTS; FERNANDES

2013, p. 51). On the Japanese side, the main interest has been associated with

depressing the price of certain strategic agricultural commodities imported by the

country, by increasing the global supply.

Controversies and resistance

Issues pertaining to land distribution have been some of the most controversial

aspects of ProSavana, and have given birth to much questioning and contestation

regarding the program. The schism between traditional family farming and

commercial agriculture, which so strongly characterizes Brazilian agricultural

debates, seems to have been reproduced within a Mozambican context. As private

investment is ingrained as a significant element within ProSavana, a large measure

of uncertainty prevails regarding how much land is to be allocated to agribusiness

expansion as opposed to internal food consumption, and where this is to be found

(PATRIOTA; PIERRI 2013, p. 133). The Mozambican government has recently

been very active in facilitating foreign land acquisition, and between 2004 and

2009, more than a million hectares were conceded to international investment.

This made critical voices characterize the FRELIMO government as ‘complicit in

promoting land grabbing practices´. (CLEMENTS; FERNANDES 2013, p. 42)

The uncertainty and arbitrary information about the likely extend of Brazilian

agribusiness expansion in Mozambique has also fueled much concern, as has been

the case with the reports of official promises of designating as much as 6 million

hectares for this purpose (GARCIA et al 2013, p. 31). Although official data indicate

that 93% of the country´s arable land is presently uncultivated, other assessments

set that number much lower, at only around 7 million hectares; a number which is

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

185

Niels Søndergaard

likely to fall markedly in the near future due to the country´s high rate of population

growth (THALOR 2013, p. 150). Projections based on satellite pictures of the

Lurio River Valley in the northeast of Mozambique point towards a more serious

perspective of potentially up to 500.000 people affected and 100.000 displaced in

that area alone (REUTERS, 2015).The divergence between official narratives of

“land abundance” and the perceptions of the local population is often remarkable.

The Niassa province serves as an example, as it is considered by program directors

to be a scarcely populated region, with a high potential for extensive agricultural

expansion. Yet, peasants living there claim that most of the area fit for cultivation

already is occupied, and that there is no space for the introduction of crops which

demand large trenches of farmland (SCHLESINGER 2013, p. 44).

A preliminary version of the Master Plan for ProSavana, which came to the

public´s knowledge in 2013, demonstrated that many projects were in a more

advanced stage of planning, than had so far been presumed. Amongst other

things, the plan aimed at abandoning crop rotation in favor of permanent soil

use, the extension of land titles as part of the identification of suitable areas for

agribusiness expansion, as well as the intensification of production through the

increased use of fertilizer and improved seeds (ROSSI 2015, p. 254-255). In this

regard, the project may be interpreted as an ambition towards an accelerated

enclosure movement implying the commodification of land and the intensification

of its use through modern agricultural inputs. Though the obtainment of land

titles might serve as a means for the local rural population to document its claim

to the land, the practical consequences of implementing a formalized system for

land tenure, in a social context in which traditional norms imply fundamentally

different definitions of the notion of land property, remain to be seen. The leaked

plan also revealed that of 16 projects proposed, 6 implied the risk of non-voluntary

relocations of the rural population (SCHLESINGER 2013, p. 29). In a similar manner,

the use of the term ‘available land’ has come to refer to land that might be open

for investment, – which does not discard the possibility that it already might be

claimed by someone else (Ibid 2013, p. 29). Yet, the proposal for the Master Plan

does not appear to outright exclude family agriculture, which is the focus of many

central projects within it. Rather, it seems to be the case that family agriculture is

sought incorporated into a more intensified and commercially oriented production

model, which apart from the previously mentioned changes also implies the

introduction of contract farming and development based on integration within

product clusters for value added activities (MILHORANCE; GABAS 2015, p. 11).

186

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

A joint statement signed by a range of Mozambican and international NGOs

in April 2013 also assumed a strongly critical stance towards the formulation of

ProSavana in the leaked documents. These groups were strongly opposed to what

they perceived as the forced abandonment of traditional farming practices, implying

the insertion into a contract farming regime and a production model entailing

dependence upon input purchases from agro-corporations (JOINT STATEMENT,

2013). Other worries have been expressed with regards to the fundamental

restructurings of the socioeconomic rural structure, which local organizations

fear that the ProSavana might bring about, by introducing a new set of employer-

employee production relations and undermining more diverse cultivations for

domestic consumption (GUARDIAN, 2014). Some of the criticism which has been

directed at ProSavana has expressed an essential preoccupation with what appears

to be an attempt to reproduce the Prodecer program for large-scale agricultural

expansion on the Cerrado, from the 1970´s. This critique thereby implies a

contestation of the fundamental model for rural development, which resulted from

the extensive introduction of commercial agriculture in central Brazil. The negative

assessments of the potential impact of capital intensive agribusiness expansion

in Mozambique revolves around the question of food security (CLEMENTS;

FERNANDES 2013, p. 62), neglect of the needs of local communities (RENZIO

et al. 2014, p. 14-15; CABRAL 2015, p. 5) as well as environmental degradation

(CHICHAVA et al 2013, p. 22). The experiences and errors of the Cerrado cultivation

nonetheless appear to have resulted in some measure of attention towards

avoiding some of the potentially negative consequences of this development

strategy. Embrapa does seem to have a certain degree of consciousness in terms

of anticipating and possibly ameliorating environmental impacts. This has been

expressed through Embrapa´s project for soil preservation and recuperation in

northern Mozambique (PATRIOTA; PIERRI 2013, p. 133). The provision of locally

produced food for school meals stands as another initiative that pays attention

to social development, inspired by Brazil´s national program for school feeding

(THALOR 2013, p. 156). Such initiatives, though, still constitute a relatively small

part of the program portfolio, and it remains to be seen whether they may provide

a viable path to guaranteeing a significant element of social and environmental

sustainability within the general project.

Although ProSavana is still only just in its initial stages, the project has

become widely contested by Mozambican farmers and civil society. In October

2012, the National Farmers Union (UNAC) published a statement which rejected

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

187

Niels Søndergaard

the implementation of the model for agricultural expansion on the Brazilian

Cerrado within Mozambique. It also strongly criticized what was perceived as a

top-down implementation of a pre-defined project, which did not take the demands

of the rural population in the Nacala Corridor into consideration (UNAC, 2012).

Particularly, the lack of consultation seems to constitute a very significant obstacle

to the implementation of the programme. According to official sources, only about

1000 farmers were previously consulted, which amounts to about one in every

four thousand peasants in the provinces included within ProSavana (ROSSI 2015,

p. 242). The alleged lack of transparency has led to widespread fear of losing

their land amongst farmers in the northern part of the country, and contributed

to a negative perception of the initiative (CARVALHO, 2015).

The dispute about ProSavana has also gained an international dimension,

as opposing forces in Mozambique have begun to form transnational links with

peasant movements and NGO´s abroad, and launched a joint campaign against it

(MILHORANCE; GABBAS 2015, p. 11-12). In 2013, civil society organizations in

Mozambique, Japan and Brazil published an open letter with a harsh critique of

ProSavana (ROSSI 2015, p. 235-236). At the Second Triangular Peoples Conference

in Maputo in July 2014, the ProSavana´s focus on export-oriented agriculture was

strongly contested, and social movements present at the event called for a fundamental

redefinition of the purpose of the program, in the direction of strengthening the

emphasis on food production for local communities (SUZETE, 2014).

Within Mozambique, lines of contestation can be identified between the

government and a critical movement amongst peasants and rural organizations.

The political elite within the country tends to accentuate the importance of

modernization and the pursuit of a technology-intensive development model

(CHICHAVA et al 2013, p. 24). This has led to a perception of traditional agriculture

as backwards, and to a tendency to exclude smallholders from public policy

programs within agriculture, which lean towards supporting export-oriented

agriculture (MILHORANCE; GABBAS 2015, p. 10). The close ties between the

agrarian and the political elite within Mozambique, also serve to cement a

consensus of agricultural policies favoring foreign investment and more capital

intensive production (CABRAL et al 2016, p. 17). In Brazil, segments within

governmental institutions have characterized the mobilization against ProSavana

as ideologically motivated, and strongly related to well-defined positions within

the Brazilian struggle to define agricultural policies (CABRAL 2015, p. 13).

Intra-institutional divisions nevertheless also appear to be evident in Brazil, as

188

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

the Ministry for Agrarian Development (MDA) – which normally is identified

as supporting smallholders – has begun to distance itself from ProSavana and

portrayed it as a model that should not be followed (CABRAL et al. 2016, p. 18).

Re-evaluating horizontality

In line with Naidu´s (2011) emphasis on the issue of civil society inclusion within

South-South cooperation, the formulation and initial repercussions of ProSavana also

point towards very different reactions and impact perceptions at the official level

and at the local level, respectively. The official guidelines for Brazilian cooperation,

which are strongly nurtured by principles of horizontality, must thereby be evaluated

within both of these dimensions, in order to reach an understanding of whether

the specific formulation and preliminary repercussions of the ProSavana initiative

reflect their ideational basis. Chart 1 illustrates the difference in repercussions and

critical assessments of ProSavana between these two levels of analysis, in relation

to each of the essential guidelines for Brazilian cooperation projects:

Chart 1: Guidelines for Brazilian technical cooperation and their ramifications

within the national and local dimensions of ProSavana

State-to-state level analysis Local level analysis

Emphasize

projects linked

to national

programs and

development

priorities

The ofﬁcial Mozambican

posture is strongly emphatic of the

possibilities which Pro-Savanah

contains in order to confront

some of the crucial development

challenges of the country.

The Director Plan in its present formulation

has character of a top-down technically driven

process, largely negligent to the particular

needs of each region, which the absence of

consultative mechanisms exacerbates.

Give preference

to programs

that provoke

intensiﬁcation

of relations

and open good

perspectives

for political.

commercial

and economic

cooperation with

partners

The central role of private

foreign investment in ProSavana´s

present formulation, has been

strongly endorsed by the

Mozambican government, and does

hold the potential of intensifying

politico-economic relations between

Mozambique and Brazil.

It is highly uncertain whether private

investments will produce constructive impacts

amongst local populations and stakeholders.

They risk becoming "isolated islands" and

object of local recent due to any negative

spillovers of the lax regulation which attracted

investment in the ﬁrst place. Transnational

NGO mobilization against ProSavana indicates

a tendency for this program to backlash

upon the governments involved through the

antagonization of rural communities and civil

society.

continua...

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

189

Niels Søndergaard

State-to-state level analysis Local level analysis

Emphasize

programs that

enable transfer

and absorption

of knowledge

within a critical

perspective

which produces

innovation,

creation and

consequently,

internalization.

The strong emphasis on transfer

of agricultural technology within

ProSavana implies a potential for

signiﬁcant technical innovation,

through active internalization by

Mozambican actors. The cluster-

based development model is

characterized by a strong element

of specialization in the production

of a particular crop, and above all,

the Brazilian technical capacity in

grain and cashew production holds

the potential to boost production of

crops with a high export-potential.

The program contains a goal of

technological transfers to industrialized

agriculture as well as smallholders, but the

balance between these two elements is still

uncertain. Technological innovations imply

differentiated consequences regarding the

socio-environmental impacts of their adoption,

particularly within the agricultural ﬁeld.

The introduction of specialized

monoculture in certain regions of the

country, also means that though tea, cashew

and horticulture – in contrast to large-

scale grain production – might be adopted

by smallholders, this implies a profound

restructuring in direction of commercial

dependency away from self-sufﬁciency.

Expansion of plantation cultures upon land

previously used for a social purposerisks

substituting self-sufﬁcient family farming by

wage labor, spurring the proletariazation of

the rural workforce.

Emphasize

projects which

integrate

the basic

components

of technical

international

cooperation,

such as

consultancy,

formation

of human

recourses,

personnel

training and

complementation

of institutional

infrastructure.

The Master Plan lays a

strong emphasis on supporting

the Mozambican government´s

institutional planning capacity, as

well as a signiﬁcant element of

technological transfer and training.

The aim of technology transfer towards

the Mozambican National Directorate of

Rural Extension does reﬂect a considerable

focus upon human and institutional capacity

development at the local level.

Yet, the strong emphasis upon the

governmental partners in the formulation of

the Master Plan means that so far, it has been

articulated as a top-down implementation

of a production model upon smallholders,

without proper previous consultation and

evaluation of needs formulated at the local

level. Legalization of land entitlement risks

spurring an enclosure movement, and the

commodiﬁcation of land which previously

served a more diffuse, yet essential social

purpose. Such a development collides strongly

with the notion of local consultation and

other fundamental practices of development

assistance.

continuação

continua...

190

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

State-to-state level analysis Local level analysis

Give preference

to projects that

are clearly

matched by

recourses

mobilized by

the counterpart

and constitute a

substantial part

of the general

budget.

Due to a lack of capital,

Mozambican recourse mobilization

has mostly been expressed as the

promise of designating 6 million

hectares of land to agribusiness

expansion. In some sense, this

does constitute a signiﬁcant effort

of recourse mobilization, but also

raises the question of whether the

close-to-unconditional opening

of land markets to foreign capital

is in line with the notion of non-

conditionality of cooperation.

The difﬁculty of mobilizing recourses

amongst subsistence farmers at the local level

means that these have only gained a limited

inﬂuence within the project formulation, and

may be negatively affected by the concessions

of common lands by the government to

foreign investors. The strong accentuation of

private investments in the project formulation

also raises a critical question, related to

whether the imperatives of capital return are

compatible with inclusive rural development.

Prioritize

projects that

enable the

creation of

multiplier effects

The third stage of the Plan for

Model Extension which implies

the proliferation of techniques

and models developed within the

program contains a potential for

generation of multiplier effects and

important national spillovers within

Mozambican agriculture at large.

Dispersion of the model developed in the

Nacala Corridor, depending on the results

of its ﬁnal implementation, holds the risk

of materializing as an intend to forcefully

disseminate an exclusionary rural development

model. It is furthermore questionable whether

large-scale industrial monoculture will imply

positive spillovers for local production.

Prioritize

projects which

guarantee a

broad results,

thereby avoiding

the pulverization

and dispersion of

efforts

The marked geographical

concentration of the ProSavana

program within the Nacala Corridor

reﬂects a planning structure which

is highly likely to ensure that

productive synergies are achieved

between the different agriculturally

related industries. If successfully

executed, the replication of the

Proceder program of the Cerrado

does hold the potential to spur

production of crops with a high

export potential, and thus provide

broader economic impacts.

At its present formulation, the program

appears to be somewhat characterized

by a uni-dimensional emphasis upon

economic results, in terms of growth and

exports. A more multifaceted perspective

upon the diversiﬁed social, environmental

and economic consequences of such a

development model should be applied, so as

to evaluate the whole scale of results from

such a profound rural restructuring, and how

they interact.

Source: author´s own elaboration

The evaluation of ProSavana´s estimated consequences, its repercussions and

reception so far, indicates a very evident difference between the official and the

local level. On the level of official interactions between Brazil and Mozambique,

continuação

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

191

Niels Søndergaard

there is a consistency between the underlying principles for Brazilian TCDC, the

concrete guidelines they nurture and the resultant initiatives within ProSavana.

Yet, this consistency cannot be identified at the local level, where the estimated

impacts of the program either are not in accordance with the guidelines, or in case

that they are, often fail to produce results reflective of horizontal interactions.

This has become evident through what has come to assume the character of a

top-down implementation of a predefined package of initiatives, with a minimum

of resort to consultancy with the local population. The focus of the initiative

appears to be the proliferation of an agro-industrial development model, and

though smallholder segments are not directly excluded from the scope of the

initiative, the present state of the program´s planning reflects a presumption of

their adaption and eventual insertion into this model.

The differentiated consequences of ProSavana which analysis through a

local-level perspective reveals, also mean that essential elements of Brazilian

technical cooperation such as demand-drivenness, appreciation of local knowledge

and non-conditionality, are hard to identify within this context. Though official

Brazilian-Mozambican relations with regards to ProSavana may be characterized by

these principles, these do not seem to materialize on the level of the communities

directly in contact with the program. The principle on non-interference in domestic

affairs even contains the danger of an interpretation which leads to the neglect of

the needs and demands of localstakeholders, by restricting planning and decision

making to a sphere of intergovernmental exchanges.

Though a genuine intend of spurring inclusive social and economic development

is apparent within the initial formulation of the Master Plan, a lack of attention

to the affected rural populations autochthonous perceptions of development is

evident. This approximates Nel and Taylor´s (2013) notion of mechanical solidarity,

because even though an altruistic intention of aiding someone identified as a less

fortunate ‘other’ is evident, this condescending attitude does not entail an effort

to understand the deeper nature of his/her needs. Such vertical imposition of the

assisting party´s own vision of development is reminiscent of the critique directed

at much of the North-South development assistance.

The transfer of agricultural policies inspired by the Proceder program from

Brazil towards Mozambique, in line with Milhorance (2013) may be perceived as

permeated by a technical logic, which does not account for the capacity of the

home country to absorb these policies, nor of their particular consequences within

different national contexts. ProSavana thereby appears to be highly reflective of

192

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

Naidu´s description of a present situation in Africa, in which rhetoric stressing

a common identity is applied by wealthier developing countries, in order to

push for the expansion of private capital into African markets. This has led to a

dynamic by which the entrance of Southern capital has resulted in the formation

of new class alliances and constellations of political interests (NAIDU, 2011). In

this respect, it is interesting to observe how the nascent triangular constellation

between the Mozambican politico-agrarian elite, and Brazilian public institutions

and agribusiness has constituted the driving force at the core of this particular type

of cooperation project between developing countries. It is equally remarkable how

the opposing forces have consolidated themselves as a transnational movement,

with a foothold in both Mozambique, Brazil and Japan.

The case of ProSavana indicates that new lines of contestation are being

drawn. These materialize as an alignment between political elites and national

champions of intermediate states, LDC ruling classes and international commodity

corporations, in diametric opposition to peasant organizations, local NGO´s,

transnational grassroots networks and civil society organizations. This suggests

the importance of a stronger attentiveness to the subnational level, but also of

considering events and actors engaged at the transnational sphere, when analyzing

the process of formulation and contestation of international cooperation projects.

Conclusion

The analysis of the case of ProSavana indicates that even though horizontal

principles are essential to Brazilian TCDC, they appear to be present mostly at the

intergovernmental bilateral level, while absent at the point of local implementation

of the program. This is grounded in a certain lack of sensibility to the stratified

impact of the project sought implemented, meaning that stakeholders on a range

of different socioeconomic and geographical levels are affected. The same sine qua

non character which is naturally ascribed to official home country participation

and endorsement of development initiatives, does not seem to apply in relation

to the approval of rural communities and civil society concerning ProSavana.

Evaluation of the degree to which the present state of the initiative reflects

a compliance with the central guidelines for Brazilian technical cooperation

therefore leads to a two-folded conclusion, suggesting a horizontal nature of

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

193

Niels Søndergaard

official interactions, contrasted by a vertical imposition in relation to the local

level. This points to the importance of an attentiveness towards the broad range of

national stakeholders which inevitably become involved or affected by large-scale

development programs. It similarly becomes relevant to keep an eye on the process

of transnational mobilization of a range of private and civil society stakeholders,

as part of the process of formation and contestation of such initiatives.

The foregoing analysis also points towards a reevaluation of some of the

constitutive principles below the notion of horizontal cooperation. As in the case

examined, the principle of non-interference implies the danger of an interpretation

which restricts dialogue and joint planning to the governmental level. In a similar

way, examination of ProSavana also clearly indicates the presence of significant

commercial interests, as well as the difficulties related to their reconciliation

with inclusive social development. Yet, the foundational principles for Brazilian

cooperation practices do appear to wield an undisputable power of attraction to

other developing countries. The present analysis, therefore rather than refuting

their intrinsic value, points towards the importance of ensuring their effective

materialization in all of the dimensions of Brazilian TCDC initiatives.

References

ABC. 2016, (1) Vertentes da Cooperação Internacional. Agência Brasileira de Cooperação.

Ministério de Relações Exteriores. 2016. Disponível em: <http://www.abc.gov.br/

CooperacaoTecnica/Vertentes>. Acesso em: 4 jun, 2016.

ABC. 2016, (2) Cooperação Têcnica Brasileira; Agricultura, Segurança Alimentar e Políticas

Sociais. Agência Brasileira de Cooperação, Ministério de Relações Exteriores. 2016.

Disponível em: <http://www.abc.gov.br/training/informacoes/ABC_en.aspx>.

Acesso em: 23 fev, 2016.

ABC. 2005. Formulação de Projetos de Cooperação Técnica Internacional (PCT). Manual de

Orientação. 2016. Disponível em: <http://www.abc.gov.br/imprensa/publicacoes>.

Acesso em: 5 jun, 2016.

ABREU, Fernando. J.M. A Evolução da Cooperação Técnica do Brasil. Mural Internacional.

v. 4, n. 2. 2013, p. 3-16.

AMORIM, Celso. 2011. A África tem Sede de Brasil. Carta Capital, 28/05 2011. Disponível

em: <http://www.cartacapital.com.br/politica/a-africa-tem-sede-de-brasil]>. Acesso

em: 14 fev, 2016.

194

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

ARKHANGELSKAYA, Alexandra & KHAMATSHIN, Albert. South-South Cooperation in

Agriculture: the India, Brazil and South Africa Dialogue Forum, in MODI, Renu,

and Cheru, FANTU, (eds.) Africa Now: Agricultural Development and Food Security

in Africa: The Impact of Chinese, Indian and Brazilian Investments. London: Zed

Books. 2013. Cap. 9, p. 159-169.

BARBOSA, Pedro. H.B. The Instrumental Bias of Brazilian Horizontal Technical Cooperation.

The Perspective of the World Review, v. 4, n. 1, 2012, p. 113-145.

BATISTA, Fabiana. Fundo da FGV quer captar US$ 2 bi para investimentos em Mozambique.

Valor Econômico 4/7, 2012. Disponível em: <http://www.valor.com.br/agro/2738490/

fundo-da-fgv-quer-captar-us-2-bi-para-investimentos-em-mocambique>. Acesso em:

20 fev, 2016.

BRY, Sandra. The production of soft power: practising solidarity in Brazilian South–South

development projects. Canadian Journal of Development Studies. v. 36, n. 4, 2015,

p. 442-458.

CABRAL,Lídia; SHANKLAND, Alex. Brazil´s Agriculture Cooperation in Africa: new

paradigms? in III Conferência Internacional do IESE “Mozambique: Acumulação e

Transformação em Contexto de Crise internacional.” Maputo. Instituto de Estudos

Sociais e Econômicos. 2012. Conference Paper no.23. Disponível em: <http://www.

iese.ac.mz/lib/publication/III_Conf2012/IESE_IIIConf_Paper23.pdf>. Acesso em:

2 fev, 2016

CABRAL, Lídia; SHANKLAND, A., Favareto, A..; VAZ, A. C. Brazil-Africa Agricultural

Cooperation Encounters: Drivers, Narratives and Imaginaries of Africa and

Development. IDS Bulletin, v. 44. n. 4, 2013, p. 1-17.

CABRAL, Lídia; RUSSO, Giuliano; WEINSTOCK, Julia. Brazil and the Shifting Consensus

on DevelopmentCo-operation: Salutary Diversions from the ‘Aid effectiveness’ Trail?

Development Policy Review, v. 32 n. 2, 2014, p. 179-202.

CABRAL, Lídia..Priests, Technicians and traders: the Discursive Politics of Brazil´s

Agricultural Cooperation in Mozambique. China and Brazil in Africa Agriculture

(CBAA), Future Agricultures Working Paper 110. 2015, p. 1-26. Disponível em:

<http://www.future-agricultures.org/publications. Acesso em 12 fev, 2016.

CABRAL,Lídia; FAVARETO, Arilson; MUKWEREZA, Langton; AMANOR, Kojo. Brazil’s

agricultural politics in Africa: More Food International and the disputed meanings of

‘family farming’ Global governance/politics, climate justice & agrarian/social justice:

linkages and challenges. An international colloquium. 2016 Hague. Disponível em:

<http://www.iss.nl/research/research_programmes/political_economy_of_

resources_environment_and_population_per/networks/critical_agrarian_studies_

icas/icas_colloquium/global_governancepolitics_climate_justice_agrariansocial_

justice/. Acesso em 3 fev, 2016.

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

195

Niels Søndergaard

CAICEDO, Jerónimo D.; CASTRO, Alejandro B. Subiendo al Sur:

África y América Latina en las nuevas dinámicas de la cooperación Sur–Sur. Humania

del Sur. n. 8. 2010, p. 89-106.

CARVALHO, Nelson. Camponeses do Norte de Mozambique Rejeitam ProSavana. Deutshe

Welle. 15/5, 2015 Disponível em: <http://www.dw.com/pt/camponeses-do-norte-

de-mo%C3%A7ambique-rejeitam-prosavana/a-18452296 Acesso em 15 fev, 2016.

CERVO, Amado. L.; BUENO, C. 2011. História da política exterior do Brasil. Brasília:

Editora UnB.

CHERU, Fantu. South-South cooperation: what prospects for a new Bandung Consensus? in

MODI, Renu (ed.) South-South Cooperation: Africa on the Centre Stage. Houndmills:

Palgrave McMillian, 2011, Cap.3, p. 42-58.

CHICHAVA, Sérgio; DURAN, Jimena, CABRAL, Lídia; SHANKLAND, Alex; BUCKLEY,

Lila; LIXIA Tang; YUE, Zhang. Chinese and Brazilian Cooperation with African

Agriculture: the case of Mozambique. China and Brazil

in African Agriculture (CBAA), Future Agricultures working paper 049, 2013, Brighton.

Disponível em: <http://www.future-agricultures.org/publications/research-and-

analysis/1637-chinese-and-brazilian-cooperation-with-african-agriculture-the-case-

of-mozambique/ﬁle>. Acesso em: 2 feb, 2016.

CLAIRZIER, Patrick. Paths to Development through Trade: EU-Led Trade Liberalization

vs South–South Cooperation. Socialism and Democracy, v. 25, n. 2, 2011, p. 64–80.

CLEMENTS, Elizabeth A. & FERNANDES, Bernardo M. 2013. Land Grabbing, Agribusiness

and the Peasantry in Brazil and Mozambique. Agrarian South: Journal of Political

Economy, v. 2, n. 1, p. 41–69.

ECONOMIST. A New Atlantic Alliance. The Economist. Available from: http://www.

economist.com/news/21566019-brazilian-companies-are-heading-africa-laden-capital-

and-expertise-new-atlantic-alliance. Acesso em 03 feb, 2016.

FUNDAÇÃO GETÚLIO VARGAS. Nacala Corridor Fund. 2015. Fundação Getúlio Vargas

Projetos. Rio de Janeiro.

FILHO, Pio Penna. África: desaﬁos e oportunidades no novo milênio. Revista de Educação

Pública, v. 21, n. 46, 2012, p. 303-318.

GARCIA, Ana Saggioro; KATO, Karina; FONTES, Camila. A história contada pela caça ou

pelo caçador? Perspectivas sobre o Brasil em Angola e Moçambique. Misereor, PACS,

2013, p. 6-64. Disponível em: <http://www.pacs.org.br/files/2013/03/Relatorio-

Africa.pdf>. Acesso em: 5 fev. 2016.

GOV, MOZ. Government of Mozambique. ProSavanah. What is ProSavanah. Disponível

em: <http://www.prosavana.gov.mz/what-is-prosavana/ Accesso em 15/02, 2016.

GUARDIAN. Mozambique’s small farmers fear Brazilian-style agriculture. The Guardian.

January 1, 2014. Disponível em: <www.theguardian.com>. Acesso em: 7/6, 2016.

196

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

HARBS, Renato; BACHA, Carlos J. C.; HARBS, Ricardo. Poderá a África ser concorrente

do Brasil na Produção da Soja? Revista de Política Agrícola. ISSN 1413-4969. n. 3,

2015, p. 62-76.

INOUE, Cristina Y. A. & VAZ, Alcides C. Brazil as ‘Southern donor’: beyond hierarchy and

national interests in development cooperation? Cambridge Review of International

Affairs, v. 25 n. 4, 2013 p. 507-534.

IZIQUE, Claudia. O PAC da Embrapa. Pesquisa PAPESP, v. 144, 2008, p. 33-35.

JOINT STATEMENT. 2013. Leaked copy of the Master Plan for the ProSAVANAprogramme

in Northern Mozambique conﬁrms the worst. Civil society groups warn secretive plan

paves the way for a massive land grab. April 29, 2013. Disponível em: <www.grain.org.

Acesso em 7 jun, 2016.

LEITE,Iara C.; SUYAMA, Bianca; WAISBICH, Laura T.; POMEROY, Melissa; CONSTANTINE,

Jennifer; NAVAS-ALEMÁN, Lizbeth, SHANKLAND, Alex; YOUNIS, Musab. Rising

Powers in International Development. IDS – Institute for Development Studies.

Evidence Report n. 59. 2014.

MODI, Renu. Introduction in MODI, Renu (ed.) South-South Cooperation: Africa on the

Centre Stage,. Palgrave McMillian: Houndmills, 2011. Cap. 1, p. 1-17.

MELLO, Patrícia C Mozambique oferece terra á Soja Brasileira. Folha, 14 aug 2011.

Disponível em: <www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/mercado/me1408201102.htm. Acesso

em 15 fev., 2016.

MENDONÇA, Wilson Júnior; DE FARIA, Carlos Aurélio Pimenta. A cooperação técnica

do Brasil com a África: comparando os governos Fernando Henrique Cardoso

(1995–2002) e Lula da Silva (2003–2010). Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional,

v. 58, n. 1, 2015 p. 5-22.

MILGROOM, Jessica.. Policy processes of a land grab: at the interface of politics ‘in the

air’ and politics ‘on the ground’ in Massingir, Mozambique. The Journal of Peasant

Studies, v. 42, n. 3-4, 2015, p. 585–606.

MILHORANCE, Carolina. A política de cooperação do Brasil com a África Subsaariana

no setor rural: transferência e inovação na difusão de políticas públicas. Revista

Brasileira de Política Internacional, v. 56 n. 2 2013, p. 5-22.

MILHORANCE, Carolina; GABAS, Jean-Jaques. Reframing Development from the South?

A Debate on the Internationalisation of Brazil’s Rural Policies.

International Conference of Public Policy, Milan,1-4 July 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.

icpublicpolicy.org/conference/ﬁle/reponse/1434294554.pdf Acesso em 2 fev., 2016.

MUGGAH, Robert. What is Brazil really doing in Africa? The Hufﬁngton Post, 04 jan

2015. Disponível em: <http://www.hufﬁngtonpost.com/robert-muggah/what-is-

brazil-really-doi_b_6413568.html>. Acesso em: 12 fev, 2016.

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

197

Niels Søndergaard

MUKWEREZA, Langton..Zimbabwe-Brazil Cooperation through the More Food Africa

Programme. China and Brazil in Africa Agriculture (CBAA), Future Agricultures

working paper 116, Brighton, 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.future-agricultures.

org/publications>. Acesso em: 5 dez.

NAIDU, Sanusha. Civil Society in Africa: Perspectives on the Expanding Engagement

with Southern Partners in MODI, Renu (ed.) South-South Cooperation: Africa on the

Centre Stage. Palgrave McMillian: Houndmills, 2011. Cap.12, p. 203-219.

NEL, Philip & TAYLOR, Ian..Bugger thy Neighbour? Ibsa and South–South Solidarity.

Third World Quarterly, v. 34, n. 6. 2013, p. 1091–1110.

PATRIOTA, Thomas C. & PIERRI Franchesco M. 2013. Brazil´s Cooperation in Africa´s

Agricultural Development and Food Security in MODI, Renu, and Cheru, FANTU,

(eds.) Africa Now: Agricultural Development and Food Security in Africa: The Impact

of Chinese, Indian and Brazilian Investments. London: Zed Books. Cap. 7, p. 125-144.

PINO, Bruno Ayllón. Brazil’s contributions to international development: emerging

coalitions and South-South cooperation Revista CIDOB d’afers internacionals,

n. 97-98, 2012, p. 189-204.

REUTERS. 2016.Mozambique agriculture plan could displace 100,000 farmers –

activists. Reuters Bureau, 25 abr. Disponível em: <http://www.reuters.com/article/

mozambique-land-food-idUSL5N0YC35120150525>. Acesso em 15 fev, 2016.

RENZIO, Paulo de; SEIFERT, Jurek; GOMES, Geovanna Z.; ASSUNÇÂO, M. Solidarity

among Brothers? Brazil in Africa: Trade, Investment and Cooperation. BRICS Policy

Center, Policy Brief v. 4, n. 65. 2014, p. 9-16.

RODRIGUES, Diego de Freitas. Cooperação horizontal Sul-Sul: arranjos de concertação

política entre a Índia, o Brasil e a África do Sul. Revista Brasileira de Politica

Internacional. v. 53 n. 1 p. 45-66, 2010.

ROSARIO, Domingos M. From Negligience to Populism: An analysis of Mozambiques

Agricultural Political Economy. FAC Political Economy of Agricultural Policy in Africa

(PEAPA). Brighton, 2012. Southern Agricultures working paper 034. Disponível em:

<http://www.future-agricultures.org/publications>. Acesso em: 3 fev. 2016.

SANTOS, Roberta, F.; CERQUEIRA. Mateus, R.. Cooperação Sul-Sul: experiências

brasileiras na América do Sul e na África. História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos,

Rio de Janeiro, v. 22, n. 1, 2015 p. 23-47.

SARAIVA, José F. S. The new Africa and Brazil in the Lula era: the rebirth of Brazilian

Atlantic Policy. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional. Special edition, 2010,

p. 169-182.

SCHLESINGER, Sergio. Cooperação e investimento do Brasil na África: O Caso do

ProSavanah em Mozambique. FASE – Federação de Órgãos para Assistência Social

e Educacional & Oxfam, Maputo, 2013, p. 5-55.

198

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 11, n. 3, 2016, p. 172-198

Reconsidering the consistency between principles and practices for Technical Cooperation [...]

SIMPLÍCIO, Francisco. South-South development cooperation: a contemporary perspective,

in MODI, Renu (ed.) South-South Cooperation: Africa on the Centre Stage. Palgrave

McMillian: Houndmills. Cap. 2 2011, p. 18-41.

STOLTE, Christina.. Brazil in Africa: Just another BRICS Country seeking Recources?

Africa Programme and Americas Programme, Chatham House Brieﬁng Paper, Royal

Institute of International Affairs, AFP/AMP BP. 2012, p. 1-20.

STUENKEL, Oliver. O Brasil na África: uma ponte sobre o Atlântico? Política Externa,

v. 23, n. 2. 2014, p. 1-7.

SUZETE, Izaura. Parar com ProSavana e redeﬁnir políticas agrícolas inclusivas e

sustentáveis – exigem os povos de Moçambique, Japão e Brasil. Movimento de

Mulheres Camponesas. 2014, Disponível em: <http://www.mmcbrasil.com.br/site/

node/193. Acesso em 16 fev, 2016.

THALOR, Kai. 2013. Brazil, Biofuels and Food Security in Mozambique, in Africa Now:

Agricultural Development and Food Security in Africa: The Impact of Chinese, Indian

and Brazilian Investments. London: Zed Books, 2013, Cap. 8, p. 145-158.

UNAC. 2012. União Nacional de Camponeses. Pronunciamento sobre o Programa

ProSavanah.02 oct. Disponível em: < http://www.unac.org.mz/index.php/7-blog/39-

pronunciamento-da-unac-sobre-o-programa-prosavana. Acesso em 08 fev. 2016.

UNDP. United Nations Development Programme. United Nations Ofﬁce for South-South

Cooperation. What is South-South Cooperation? 2016 Disponível em http://ssc.undp.

org/content/ssc/about/what_is_ssc.html, Acesso em 19 mar 2016.

VAZ, Alcides C. International drivers of Brazilian agricultural cooperation in Africa in

the post-2008 economic crisis. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, v. 58

n. 1. 2015. p. 164-190.

WOERTZ, Eckart; KEULERTZ, Martin.Conference summary: Tropical Agriculture as

‘Last Frontier’? Food Import Needs of the Middle East and North Africa, Ecological

Risks and New Dimensions of South-South Cooperation with Africa, Latin America

and South-East Asia. International Journal of Water Resources Development, v. 31,

n. 4, 2015, p. 785–789.