This study analyzes the forms of participation exerted by farmers associated to a cooperative, COOPAEXPA, concerning planning and organization of agricultural production, and its flow toward a central of cooperatives, Central Nova Amafrutas, which operated in the Municipality of Benevides, State of Pará, between 2000 and 2007, when it went bankrupt. Through specific objectives, the study describes how the centers of production were formed, showing the participation of farmers in the decision making process when it involved themselves; it describes how the centers of production operated showing their participation in production planning and organization, as well as product delivery to the central of cooperatives; it analyzes the results, in terms of production and delivery of production including the comparison of these results against the plan that was created. The conclusions show that the centers of production, despite their fragilities, in general, worked reasonably well when supplying raw-material to Nova Amafrutas, up until when, through COOPAGRI, it centralized the decision process affecting the farmers, which coincides with the period when COOPAEXPA offers conditions of infrastructure and logistic for implementation of the production of its associates in the mentioned centers. During the collective decision taking process, it was observed that associates were permitted only to make decisions on planning and implementation of actions in the centers of production, and an incipient evaluation of the results during the general assemblies. In general, the associates‟ participation in the general assemblies was limited to the approval of decisions already made by the cooperative‟s leaders and their assistants. It was observed, however, that the degree of control of the cooperative‟s members on more important decisions were restricted to the “Compulsory Consulting”, because the decisions were presented during the general assemblies, and the associates, through vote approved it or not, sometimes without a real understanding of the process. It is evident that the information and formation of the cooperative did not flow toward a preparation for a conscious participation which could make it possible for the leaders and associates to conduct the process cooperatively.
|
