DISRUPTIVE PLANNING?

DISRUPTIVE PLANNING?

Every country needs strategic planning! In fact, companies and people do too.

Brazil has this at several levels, however, what is planned is rarely fully implemented, as it depends on externalities that are either not considered or beyond one's control.

Thus, there is no point in drawing up a plan, however well-crafted it may be, if the legal framework restricts its execution.

For countries with smaller territorial extension, planning tends to be more effective, integrating various strategic sectors, in theory. In larger countries, national planning should unfold into state and even regional planning.

Thus, national planning can set macro-guidelines, leaving the details to the "factory floor," that is, to where activities actually take place.

It is true that regional imbalance should be avoided, as it can have negative implications, such as migratory flows in search of employment and better living conditions, for example.

In Brazil's case, the Federative Pact and the recent Administrative Reform act in this sphere; the Export Processing Zones regime also does.

The creation of SUDENE in 1959, SUDAM in 1966, and the Manaus Free Trade Zone in 1967, among other institutions, had a similar objective.

Did they show results that would justify their discontinuation, given that the beneficiary states and regions achieved autonomy?

Palliative solutions, such as social welfare, do not solve the problem of lack of education and professional training adequate to market demand, nor the lack of work itself, due to the shortage of investments in infrastructure and productive activities. On the contrary, they tend to generate convenient complacency and/or informal work, burdening health and social security systems, and even economic activities that generate the resources sustaining these benefits, through increased taxation.

For a plan to be feasible, it is not enough for it to point out guidelines or sources of financing. It is also necessary that it indicate what needs to be reviewed or changed so that it achieves the desired results.

There is no point in proposing energy and transport infrastructures to be built within the strategic plan's time frame without considering the laws that may hinder their fulfillment. Point them out and propose solutions, triggering an institutional review process.

The level of detail in strategic plans increases depending on the government level and cannot do without private sector participation. Society's participation is important, but cannot be restricted to political-partisan or ideological interests.

It is necessary to make clear and in a holistic way the consequences of certain proposals and ideas, which may appear socially appealing, but which will be unfeasible even to fulfill the intent of those who suggested them.

The National Logistics Plan (PNL 2050) is under development, before the current one (PNL 2035) has delivered the intended results. The São Paulo State Government, in line with this planning instrument, has been developing its Logistics and Investments Plan (PLI-SP 2050).

The Federal Government is developing the National Plans for Port Decarbonization (PND-Ports) and Navigation Decarbonization (PND-Navegação).

Santos Port Authority contracted the Valenciaport Foundation to develop a decarbonization and energy transition plan for Santos Port.

This makes sense, for aside from macro-guidelines, each port has its own peculiarities.

The same applies to specific port planning instruments:

Master Plans for ports are currently prepared by the Ministry of Ports and Airports, while Development and Zoning Plans are produced by Port Authorities.

This demonstrates that, if the Federal Government is responsible for macro-level planning, detailed planning is the prerogative of those who actually "get their hands dirty". In the case of Santos Port, the 2020 PDZ (Development and Zoning Plan), still in effect, proposed the creation of "clusters", which was not explicit in the Master Plan. Moreover, the lack of alignment between the authors of this planning instrument within the port-city relationship framework and the failure to consider contributions from other local stakeholders led the TCU (Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts) to require the then Special Secretariat of Ports of the Presidency of the Republic to review the Master Plan in 2015.

Thus, what is lacking, beyond overcoming obstacles related to legal and regulatory uncertainty through proactive action by the Executive and Legislative branches, with the Judiciary limiting itself exclusively to its constitutional powers, is for local agents to have autonomy.

The delegation of competencies should allow for this autonomy in a broader manner, with transparency, professionalism and results-based management.

To some extent, this already occurs partially and without being a rule.

Bill 733/2025 foresees greater participation by Port Authority Councils in this process, which may be a first step toward this disruptive innovation.

Disruptive innovation?

I believe a good example of successful disruptive innovation was the establishment of China's first Special Economic Zone in the city of Shenzhen in 1980.

This was the Chinese first capitalist experiment, strategically close to Hong Kong, when it was still under British control.

Today, there are thousands of SEZs or associated enterprises in China; Shenzhen is one of its major ports and the country has become a global economic powerhouse.

Brazilian ports and other assets controlled by the Federal Government need greater flexibility to innovate and seek new markets.

Those who work in the port sector know that cargo runs the port.

Santos Port, being multipurpose, is particularly in demand and should have a PDZ that goes beyond mere detail of the Master Plan.

The growing operation of cellulose in public and private terminals of the local complex is an example of alignment by Santos Port Authority with market trends and demands.

The PDZ can be even more comprehensive, encompassing other strategic aspects that serve as arguments for receiving necessary institutional support without depending exclusively on Brasília to achieve desired objectives.

The development of Santos Port, like any port complex, does not depend on itself alone. Strategic planning makes it possible to identify weaknesses, threats, strengths and opportunities (SWOT analysis).

The weaknesses are widely known, generally associated with the legal framework, its complexities, conflicts and ambiguities.

But threats need to be transformed into opportunities based on existing and potential strengths.

The PDZ should consider the effects of climate change, competition with other port complexes, including the risk of losing cargo due to inability to meet demand. It should also point out the works necessary for its sustained expansion; identify and attract new cargoes, diversifying its export portfolio, especially with higher value-added and high-tech cargoes; create, in partnership with municipalities, attractive conditions for the establishment of port-industry activities, in the best interest of the port-city relationship; invest in R&D.

Santos Port Authority has innovated in several aspects, which has reinforced its status as a national reference.

Currently there are control mechanisms that allow port authorities to act with greater flexibility, agility and accountability. Performance indicators are not in short supply!

The challenge is, as already mentioned, to remove the obstacles that have historically hindered Brazil's sustained development, so as to allow well-crafted strategic plans to be effectively carried out, with multiple benefits to the country and its people.

I am not sure whether this can be considered a disruptive process, but this understanding is possible, even if only in part.

Brazil needs to be disruptive in other sensitive areas, but that implies excluding and punishing some actors who benefit from the status quo.

This also includes making the exploitation of our natural resources by foreigners conditional on the establishment of related industrial plants, scientific research and technology transfer in our country.

For this reason too, China achieved its disruptive innovation.

But that will be the subject of another article.

Adilson Luiz Gonçalves

Writer, Engineer, University Researcher and member of the Santos Academy of Letters