Comments on final presentation.
Jorge Ubaldo Colin
Dear studio fellows,
Congratulations for your presentation and for your work during the semester. Below you will find the valuable comments from our faculty, which I am sure will prove very useful in the cognitive path to your final report.
Best
Jorge Ubaldo Colin Pescina reporting live from Avery Library
Lance
* Your recommendations are somewhat complex, so, can your scheme go through even if a specific point does not go through?
* Coming from outside, would a technocratic scheme be the best to go?
* What is your overriding principle / theme?
Bob
* Be more critical about what you propose: It seems that the suggested reorganization you have proposed concentration in technocracy and bureaucrats marginalizing civic engagement.
* Planners should work on the projects rather than the process, and should go back to use projects to drive government organization
E. Sclar
* It seems from your presentation that politics are getting in the way of rational planning, you have to think about what exactly is CONLESTE and how to unpack the politics to get it right. Would Petrobras prefer to deal with a regional body or with different municipalities? Would municipalities charge fees on development if they are competing to attract businesses to their municipalities?
* How can you make development tax progressive?
*Data collection to what end? How would you focus to get coordination by the main actors?
Andrew (Brazilian post Doc)
* In Brazil we do not have the civil society to demand changes and trigger discussion. We should look more at Petrobras’ plans.
Smita S.
* Why previous experiences have not worked even if the proposal might have been similar (or even the same)?
* Talk more about the disjunction between the planning and actions, about the politics of separation and the politics of lack of communication. Lack of communication is arising among other reasons because individuals simply want to hold on to their power.
* What inside do you have as planners? What is the difference between your report and a McKinsey report?
Marcuse
* A great 1/3 of what is needed. It does not go to the issue of what do you want to achieve or the political / power issues.
* What is the link between capacity building and results? How is money redistribution allocated and to whom / for what?
* Who has the power to do anything, and how do you affect the power structure? You should not accept the passive approach of Petrobras. Petrobras, for example, should in fact build the needed housing.
* When speaking about “civil society” you have to acknowledge that this is not a homogenous entity.
King
* The conleste-circles diagram was not clear
* The proposal needs to return to housing and infrastructure.
* What is the property tax today and how do they depend on it? 2nd homes should be taxed differently.
* A regional approach to infrastructure might not necessarily be efficient, since it might lead to over-development in less-populated areas. Region tax sharing can also lead to imbalances / redistribution between more populated areas and those with less population.
*The issue of migration could also lead us to think that this is not a regional, but a national issue. Have you consider this possibility?
Stacey
* Technical capacity is not the same as regionalism; you might form technical capacity and not build a structure for regionalism. See the US case.
* Look more at the political background, who is winning and who is losing by the current state of affairs.
Marcus
* If Brazil is such a large economy why foreign aid form the UN or the IADB? Seems inequality and other issues are more of a national problem.
Carlos (from UFRJ)
* Be modest, acknowledge local knowledge, “work capability” is a weak diagnosis, why doesn’t it work? Can your recommendations be implemented and by whom?