Brazilian Legal Time of Sustainable Development …
369
The authoritarian military period (1964–1984) has somehow interrupted some
elements of the previous phase while underscored certain others. Fragile democratic
institutions were broken, national industry of machinery was weakened while a number of strategic state companies (banks, petroleum, aviation, telecommunications,
energy, roads, seaports) along with private agribusiness was definitely set up. All
these along with a massive urban marginalization far dissociated from any perspective of universal social welfare or environmental preservation. This is a very interesting moment because it offers a robust evidence on how industrialization jointly
with authoritarian social policy, instead of enhancing well-being, might rather widen
inequalities, stigmatize certain groups, as well as worsen human development conditions. Both South Africa in the Apartheid regime and Brazil within this years
were labelled as models of such perverse inversion (Titmuss 2008 141). Either way,
throughout those twenty years 7 new National Development Plans were elaborated.
At the outset, the Castelo Branco Government’s Economic Action Plan (1964–1967)
was established. Then, between 1967–1976, the ambitious Ten Year Plan, the first
experience of long-term developing planning. Then, between 1968 and 1970, the
Strategic Development Program. Soon after, between 1970–1973, the Program of
Goals and Bases for the Action of the Garrastazu Medici Government. Shortly thereafter, 1972–1974, another First National Development Plan, called PND-I, during
the Ernesto Geisel Government (1974–1979). After that, the second National Development Plan PND-II (1975–1979) was enacted and, barely in the end of the military
regime (1979–1985), the third National Development Plan, the PND-III.
Industrial growth was the main goal of this cycle. To get a better view, industrial
growth reached the annual average of 7.9%, while GDP did 7.8% (Malan 1983,
p. 9). Everything was done in name of setting up the national bases for credit, energy,
transportation and urban infrastructure, with a view to establishing an agro-industrial
economy, an urbanized society and attracting foreign investments. Such plans would
produce an unprecedented migratory flows from the rural to the urban areas and, due
to the lack of a universal social security mechanism, a precarious urban labor market,
associated to the explosion of the favela phenomenon.
The next 10 years (1984–1994) form the 3rd cycle. Firstly, such period is characterised by an arduous transition to constitutional democracy. Moreover, due to the
lack of control upon external indebtedness and hyperinflation both helped to deepen
inequalities as well as poverty. Soon it became evident that authoritarian modernizing
plans did not reach social welfare, not even effective basic public services, as health
and education. In spite of that, the transitional government launched the first PND
of the New Republic (I PND-NR) for the period 1986–1989. The period from 1991
to 1995, although circumscribed in the context of the new Constitution, might still
be seen as a transitional regarding its economic and social agenda: inflation control,
state reform and external debt. The new cycle will only initiate in 1994–96, in a
context of inflation control and the adoption of the 2nd Multi-year Government Plan.
This cycle generated an annual average level of 2.2% of GDP growth (PPA 1991).
By that moment it was notorious the mismatch between the modernization of
certain sectors (banking, industrial and agroindustrial) and the precariousness of education, health, social insurance, services of justice along with environmental degra-
369
The authoritarian military period (1964–1984) has somehow interrupted some
elements of the previous phase while underscored certain others. Fragile democratic
institutions were broken, national industry of machinery was weakened while a number of strategic state companies (banks, petroleum, aviation, telecommunications,
energy, roads, seaports) along with private agribusiness was definitely set up. All
these along with a massive urban marginalization far dissociated from any perspective of universal social welfare or environmental preservation. This is a very interesting moment because it offers a robust evidence on how industrialization jointly
with authoritarian social policy, instead of enhancing well-being, might rather widen
inequalities, stigmatize certain groups, as well as worsen human development conditions. Both South Africa in the Apartheid regime and Brazil within this years
were labelled as models of such perverse inversion (Titmuss 2008 141). Either way,
throughout those twenty years 7 new National Development Plans were elaborated.
At the outset, the Castelo Branco Government’s Economic Action Plan (1964–1967)
was established. Then, between 1967–1976, the ambitious Ten Year Plan, the first
experience of long-term developing planning. Then, between 1968 and 1970, the
Strategic Development Program. Soon after, between 1970–1973, the Program of
Goals and Bases for the Action of the Garrastazu Medici Government. Shortly thereafter, 1972–1974, another First National Development Plan, called PND-I, during
the Ernesto Geisel Government (1974–1979). After that, the second National Development Plan PND-II (1975–1979) was enacted and, barely in the end of the military
regime (1979–1985), the third National Development Plan, the PND-III.
Industrial growth was the main goal of this cycle. To get a better view, industrial
growth reached the annual average of 7.9%, while GDP did 7.8% (Malan 1983,
p. 9). Everything was done in name of setting up the national bases for credit, energy,
transportation and urban infrastructure, with a view to establishing an agro-industrial
economy, an urbanized society and attracting foreign investments. Such plans would
produce an unprecedented migratory flows from the rural to the urban areas and, due
to the lack of a universal social security mechanism, a precarious urban labor market,
associated to the explosion of the favela phenomenon.
The next 10 years (1984–1994) form the 3rd cycle. Firstly, such period is characterised by an arduous transition to constitutional democracy. Moreover, due to the
lack of control upon external indebtedness and hyperinflation both helped to deepen
inequalities as well as poverty. Soon it became evident that authoritarian modernizing
plans did not reach social welfare, not even effective basic public services, as health
and education. In spite of that, the transitional government launched the first PND
of the New Republic (I PND-NR) for the period 1986–1989. The period from 1991
to 1995, although circumscribed in the context of the new Constitution, might still
be seen as a transitional regarding its economic and social agenda: inflation control,
state reform and external debt. The new cycle will only initiate in 1994–96, in a
context of inflation control and the adoption of the 2nd Multi-year Government Plan.
This cycle generated an annual average level of 2.2% of GDP growth (PPA 1991).
By that moment it was notorious the mismatch between the modernization of
certain sectors (banking, industrial and agroindustrial) and the precariousness of education, health, social insurance, services of justice along with environmental degra-