ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: POLICIES FOR A COMPETITIVE, GREEN, AND INCLUSIVE AGRIFOOD SECTOR Marie Paviot, Hector Peña, Mauro del Grossi, Elena Mora López, María Florencia Tejeda, Victoria Traverso, Beatriz Garcia, Luisa Leite 2025 © 2025 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org  Some rights reserved. This work is a product of the staff of the World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Although the World Bank makes reasonable efforts to ensure all the information presented in this document is correct, its accuracy and integrity cannot be guaranteed. Use of any data or information from this document is at the user’s own risk and under no circumstances shall the World Bank or any of its partners be liable for any loss, damage, liability or expense incurred or suffered which is claimed to result from reliance on the data contained in this document. The boundaries, colors, denomination, and other information shown in any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages the dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non-commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Attribution Please cite this work as follows: World Bank. 2025. Enhancing São Paulo’s Agriculture Support: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector. Paviot, M., Peña, H., del Grossi, M., Mora López, E., Tejeda, M. F., Traverso, V., Garcia Ferreira, B. M., Leite, L. World Bank: Washington, DC. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to: World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: POLICIES FOR A COMPETITIVE, GREEN, AND INCLUSIVE AGRIFOOD SECTOR Marie Paviot, Hector Peña, Mauro del Grossi, Elena Mora López, María Florencia Tejeda, Victoria Traverso, Beatriz Garcia, Luisa Leite 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 11 ACRONYMS 12 1. INTRODUCTION 14 2. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR (BRAZIL AND SÃO PAULO) 16 2.1 Gross Domestic Product Brazil 16 2.2 Value Added and Contribution to GDP by Economic Sector 17 2.3 Contribution to GDP by State 19 2.4 External trade 19 2.5 National Consumer Price Index 24 2.6 São Paulo 25 2.6.1 State Gross Domestic Product 25 2.6.2 Value Added and Contribution to GDP by Economic Sector 26 3. EVALUATION OF AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT IN SÃO PAULO (2017-2021) 28 3.1 Methodology 28 3.2 Producer Support Estimates (PSE) 33 3.2.1 Level of Support 33 3.2.2 Composition and Structure of the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) by Support Category 35 3.2.3 Analysis of Producer Support by Product 38 3.3 Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) 39 3.3.1 Structure of the Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) 40 3.3.2 Estimated Consumer Support by Product 40 3.4 General Service Support Estimates (GSSE) 41 3.5 Total Agricultural Support Estimates (TSE) 45 3.6 Sources of Funding for Support in São Paulo 47 3.7 Environmental Impact of Support to the Agricultural Sector in São Paulo 48 4. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 51 REFERENCES 55 ANNEX 1. SECTOR SUPPORT ESTIMATE, SÃO PAULO 2017-2021 56 ANNEX 2. STATE PUBLIC BUDGET. SÃO PAULO PROGRAMS 59 ANNEX 3. BUDGET EXERCISED BY SÃO PAULO STATE PROGRAM (OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT) 66 ANNEX 4. BUDGET EXERCISED FOR CONSUMPTION SUBSIDIES OF THE STATE OF SÃO PAULO 74 FIGURES FIGURE 1. 17 ANNUAL CHANGE IN GDP S FIGURE 2 18 ANNUAL VARIATION IN VALUE ADDED BY ECONOMIC SECTOR (2011-2020) FIGURE 3. 18 COMPOSITION OF BRAZIL’S GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: 2011 VS 2021 FIGURE 4 19 STATE SHARE OF TOTAL GDP: 2011 VS 2020 FIGURE 5 20 BRAZIL’S FOREIGN TRADE (MILLION USD) FIGURE 6 20 BRAZIL EXPORTS BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FIGURE 7 21 EXPORTS OF MAIN PRODUCTS (SHARE OF VALUE OF TOTAL EXPORTS) FIGURE 8 22 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR EXPORTS, 2022 - 100%= $74.787 MILLION FIGURE 9 23 TOTAL EXPORTS BY COUNTRY OF DESTINATION FIGURE 10 25 ANNUAL VARIATION OF THE N ATIONAL CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (INPC) 2017 – MAY 2023 FIGURE 11 25 ANNUAL VARIATION OF GDP FIGURE 12 26 ANNUAL VARIATION IN VALUE ADDED BY ECONOMIC SECTOR IN SÃO PAULO: 2011 – 2020 FIGURE 13 27 COMPOSITION OF SÃO PAULO GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: 2011 VS 2021 FIGURE 14 27 SÃO PAULO: SECTORAL BREAKDOWN OF GHG EMISSIONS FIGURE 15 30 SCHEME OF TRANSFERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AGRICULTURAL POLICIES FIGURE 16 34 SÃO PAULO PRODUCER SUPPORT ESTIMATE AS A PROPORTION OF TOTAL INCOME (PSE%) FIGURE 17 34 BENCHMARKING PSE% - 2017-2021 FIGURE 18 38 %PSE BY PRODUCT IN SÃO PAULO (AVERAGE 2017-2021) FIGURE 19. 40 SÃO PAULO PERCENTAGE OF CONSUMER SUPPORT ESTIMATE (%CSE) FIGURE 20 43 BENCHMARKING GSSE AS PROPORTION OF AGRICULTURAL GDP – AVERAGE 2017-2021 FIGURE 21 44 BENCHMARKING THE COMPOSITION OF THE GSSE FIGURE 22 45 SÃO PAULO, COMPOSITION OF TSE FIGURE 23 46 SÃO PAULO TOTAL SUPPORT ESTIMATE IN MILLION R$ AND AS PROPORTION OF AGGDP FIGURE 24 46 BENCHMARKING TSE AS SHARE OF AG GDP FIGURE 25 48 BENCHMARKING TSE BY SOURCE OF FUNDINGS TABLES TABLE 1. 24 EXPORTS BY STATE (100% = $334.136 MILLION)SOURCE: MINISTRY OF DEVELOPMENT, INDUSTRY, TRADE AND SERVICES / MINISTRY OF FOREIGN TRADE (BRAZIL). TABLE 2. 36 STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION OF PSE SÃO PAULO (AVERAGE 2017-2021) TABLE 3 37 STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION OF PSE. BAHIA, SANTA CATARINA, SÃO PAULO AND OECD (AVERAGE 2017-2021) TABLE 4 39 %PSE PER PRODUCT PER YEAR TABLE 5 41 %CSE BY PRODUCT IN SÃO PAULO (2017-2021) TABLE 6. 42 SÃO PAULO, GSSE TABLE 7 54 AREAS OF REFORMS FOR A COMPETITIVE, GREEN, RESILIENT --AND INCLUSIVE AGRICULTURE SECTOR IN SÃO PAULO BOXES BOX 1 29 OECD INDICATORS OF SUPPORT FOR AGRICULTURE BOX 2 31 APPROACH TO TSE FOR SÃO PAULO 10 10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 11 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared by a World Bank team led by Marie Paviot (Senior Agriculture Economist, World Bank), and including Elena Mora López (Agriculture Economist, World Bank), María Florencia Tejeda (Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Victoria Traverso (Agriculture Analyst, World Bank), Beatriz Garcia (Intern, World Bank), Hector Peña (Consultant), Mauro del Grossi (Consultant), Luisa Leite (Intern, World Bank). The team is grateful for the guidance and support received from Diego Arias (Practice Manager, World Bank), Eli Weiss (Program Leader, World Bank), Edward Bresnyan (Lead Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Sergiy Zorya (Lead Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Svetlana Edmeades (Lead Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Vanina Daphne Forget (Senior Agriculture Economist, World Bank) and Paolo de Salvo (Senior Sector Specialist for Rural Development, Inter-American Development Bank), Barbara Farinelli (Senior Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Eirivelthon Santos Lima (Senior Agriculture Economist, World Bank), Leonardo Bichara (Senior Agriculture Economist, World Bank). The team expresses its gratitude for logistical and administrative support from Kayo Barbosa (Team Assistant, World Bank). 12 12 ACRONYMS AAGR GDP Average Annual Growth Rate Gross Domestic Product ABC GHG Low Carbon Agriculture – Agricultura Greenhouse Gas de Baixo Carbono GRID AgGDP Green, Resilient and Inclusive Development Agricultural Gross Domestic Product GSSE APP General Services Support Estimate Area of Permanent Preservation - Area IBGE de Preservação Permanente Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics - BNDES Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estadistica Brazilian National Development Bank – Banco LAC Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social Latin America and Caribbean CAR LCA Rural Environmental Cadaster – Agricultural Credit Notes – Letras Cadastro Ambiental Rural de Crédito do Agronegocio CNPA LPI National Agricultural Policy Council – Logistics Performance Index Conselho Nacional de Política Agrícola MAPA CSE Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock – Consumer Support Estimate Ministerio de Agricultura e Pecuaria EMBRAPA MPS Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation - Market Price Support Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria 13 13 NDC PSE Nationally Determined Contribution Producer Support Estimate NPC PSR Nominal Protection Coefficient Premium Subsidy Program OECD R&D Organization for Economic Research and Development Cooperation and Development RL PGPM Legal Reserve - Reserva Legal Minimum Price Guarantee Policy SCT PNCPD Single Commodity Transfer National Program for Conversion of Degraded SICAR Pastures to Sustainable Agrifood Productive National Electronic System for Rural Systems - Programa Nacional de Conversão de Environmental Cadaster – Sistema Pastagens Degradadas em Sistemas de Produção Nacional de Cadastro Ambiental Rural Agropecuários e Florestais Sustentáveis SNCR PPCDAm National Rural Credit System – Sistema Plan for the Prevention and Control of Nacional de Crédito Rural Deforestation in the Legal Amazon TFP PPP Total Factor Productivity Purchasing Power Parity TSE PROAGRO Total Support Estimate Agricultural Activity Guarantee Program PRONAF National Program to Strengthen Family Farming – Programa Nacional de Fortalecimento da Agricultura Familiar 14 1. INTRODUCTION 1. There are various efforts to conduct comprehensive assessments of agricultural policies in countries around the world. With the use of various methodologies, the work of international bodies such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Food and Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have carried out several efforts towards this goal. 2. In the case of the OECD, its methodology (designed in the 1970s and first applied in the 1980s) has been adapted and consolidated as an effective tool for policy monitoring and evaluation. In practical terms, it has frequently been used as a reference for establishing a dialogue at the national and international levels. Its standard character allows comparisons between countries, economies or over time; highlighting the impact of policies on the gross income of both consumers and producers. 3. Importantly, the OECD methodology estimates the value of monetary transfers made by taxpayers and consumers to agricultural producers. In its definition, the transfers generated as a result of the implementation of agricultural policies are considered. Based on this, it is possible to observe, as part of its indicators, the importance of these transfers in the total gross income of producers. 4. The methodology considers four basic indicators to determine the amount of transfers to the agricultural sector and to the consumer of agricultural products: Introduction 15 a. Total Support Estimates (TSE). Quantifies, in monetary terms, the impact of all policies and the sector as a whole. b. Producer Support Estimates (PSE): Quantifies the total transfers to the producer resulting from the implementation of agricultural policies aimed at a specific product or group of products. c. Producer Support Estimates as a percentage of gross income (PSE%): Estimates the impact of estimated transfers as a proportion of the gross income of the producer under analysis. d. Consumer Support Estimates (CSE): Quantifies the impact of agricultural policies on domestic consumers or on a particular product. 5. One of the objectives of this analysis is to quantify the impact of the agricultural policies of the state government of São Paulo on producers, consumers, and the sector as a whole based on the transfers that these policies generate, thus, in this analysis the result obtained will only reflect the transfers derived from the implementation of agricultural policies of the government of the state of São Paulo. In this sense, the transfers derived from the implementation of national policies are not considered in this exercise and in any case. During the analysis, the amount of these transfers is estimated, as 1 well as their importance within the producer’s gross income, which facilitates. 6. The analysis considers the period 2017-2021, which is relevant considering the various events that affected the sector during that period, such as the presence of the global pandemic and a food price crisis. Based on the results obtained, recommendations for repurposing public policies and programs to foster a competitive, green and resilient growth of the sector have been formulated in the final section. 1 The OECD annually estimates the transfers derived from the implementation of national government policies, considering Brazil as a non-member country. Their results are published on the Organization’s website. 16 2. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR (BRAZIL AND SÃO PAULO) 2.1 Gross Domestic Product Brazil 7. The pace of growth of the country’s economy has slowed over the past ten years. According to data from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), in 2020 the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was recorded at 7,6 trillion reais, which represented an annual growth of 3.0 percent over the previous year which meant a decrease of 9.6 p.p. compared to the annual growth of 12.6 percent recorded in 2011 when GDP stood at 3,885,847.00 million reais. For that period, the Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR) of GDP stood at 5.7 percent. 8. It is important to note that, during 2020, the pandemic and the confinement and social distancing measures to contain the spread of the virus significantly affected the economic activity, resulting in challenges for which the country implemented a series of measures such as direct cash transfers, support for small and medium-sized enterprises, postponement of the payment of certain taxes, among others. Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 17 FIGURE 1. Annual change in GDP (Source: IBGE) 12.6% 10.7% 10.0% 8.4% 6.4% AAGR 4.6% 5.0% 5.5% 5.7% 3.8% 3.0% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2.2 Value Added and Contribution to GDP by Economic Sector 9. Despite the decrease in GDP growth in recent years, the value added of agricultural production has had the greatest dynamism among sectors. In 2020, the annual variation in Agricultural Value Added was recorded at 39.9 percent, which implied an increase of 21.1 p.p. compared to 2011. For the period from 2011 to 2020, the agricultural sector presented a CAGR of 8.6 percent. 10. During 2020, a year in which there was low growth of the economy in general due to the effects of COVID-19, the agricultural sector showed resilience being an important engine for development, providing food security with record productions in crops such as corn and soybeans and recorded solid exports. According to data from the Ministry of Foreign Trade (Brazil), agricultural exports grew by 4.9 percent in 2020 compared to those observed in 2019, while exports corresponding to the processing and extractive industries decreased by 9.7 percent and 3.0 percent, respectively. 18 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector FIGURE 2. Annual Variation in Value Added by Economic Sector (2011-2020) (Source IBGE) 40.0% 39.9% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 18,8% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Agricultural Industry Services Administration Taxes 11. In addition, the agricultural sector has increased its participation in the total economy. In 2020, the agricultural sector contributed 5.7 percent of the Total GDP, which implied an increase in the sector’s share of 1.6 p.p. after ten years, only behind the contribution of the service sector, which increased by 2.6 p.p. for the same period. FIGURE 3. Composition of Brazil’s Gross Domestic Product: 2011 vs 2021 (Source: IBGE) Composition of Brazil’s GDP: 2011 Composition of Brazil’s GDP: 2020 Agricultural 4.1% Agricultural 5.7% Industry 23.3% Industry 19.5% Services 43.8% Services 46.4% Administration 13.8% Administration 15.1% Taxes 15.0% Taxes 13.3% Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 19 2.3 Contribution to GDP by State 12. Although the GDP share of the State of São Paulo in the total economy has decreased in recent years, it remains significant and the most important in the country. During 2020, the State of São Paulo contributed 31.2 percent of total GDP, a drop of 1.6 p.p. from the 2011 record. FIGURE 4. State Share of Total GDP: 2011 vs 2020 (Source IBGE) Share of the State of São Paulo Share of the State of São Paulo in the National GDP: 2011 in the National GDP: 2020 São Paulo 32.8% São Paulo 31.2% Others 67.2% Others 68.8% 2.4 External trade 13. Brazil’s trade balance is historically in surplus, however, in recent years imports have recorded a higher rate of growth than exports. Between 2017 and 2022, exports registered an Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR) of 9.2 percent, while the average growth of imports was 11.4 percent. In 2022, the trade balance stood at 61.525 million dollars, the result of a total amount of 334.136 million dollars of exports and 272.611 million dollars of imports. 20 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector FIGURE 5. Brazil’s foreign trade (Million USD) (Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas) 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Exports Imports 14. By the end of 2022, the main economic export activity was the processing industry, with a 54.3 percent share of the total value exported in that year, followed by the extractive industry with 22.8 percent and agricultural activity with 22.4 percent. It should be noted that the processing industry, as the main export activity, is strongly driven by the export of agri-food, which accounts for almost a third of this sector. FIGURE 6. Brazil exports by economic activity (MUSD) (Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas) Processing Industry Agriculture 22.4% Agrifood 31% Extractive Industry 22.8% Processing Industry 54.3% Others 69% Others 0.5% Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 21 15. The main export products, according to 2022 figures, were soybeans, crude oil, and iron ore, with shares of total exports of 13.9 percent, 12.7 percent and 8.7 percent, respectively, registering average growth rates of 12.6 percent, 20.7 percent, and 8.5percent, respectively. In addition, 10 of the 22 main products exported come from the processing industry, 7 of which are agri-food. FIGURE 7. Exports of main products (Share of value of total exports) (Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas) 2017 Soy 12% Cellulose 3% Iron ores 9% Coffee 2% Crude petroleum oils 8% Fuel oils 1% Sugar 5% Bird meat 3% Passenger motor vehicles 3% Unground corn 2% Soy flour 3% Semi-products Beef 2% 2022 Soy 13.9% Sugars 3.3% Crude petroleum oils 12.7% Cellulose 2.5% Iron ore 8.7% Beef 3.5% Fuel oils 3.9% Coffee 2.5% Unground corn 3.6% Semi-products: Soya flour 3.3% Bird meat 2.7% 22 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 16. In 2022, exports from the agricultural sector grew by 35.6percent compared to the previous year and at an average annual rate of 14.2percent over the last five years. In addition to soy, other products such as corn (16.3 percent), coffee (11.4 percent), and cotton (4.9 percent) stand out. FIGURE 8. Agricultural sector exports, 2022 - 100%= $74.787 million (Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas) Soy 46.559 | 3% Wheat 12.184 | 1% Coffee 8.514 | 1% Cotton 3.676 | 0% Fruits and Non-oilseed nuts 946 | 62% Rice 312 | 20% Wood 194 | 13% Others 2.401 | 0% 17. The main destinations for Brazil’s exports are China, with 26.8 percent of the total; the United States, with 11.2 percent; and Argentina, with 4.6 percent. Despite China concentrating about a quarter of exports, Brazil has a good diversification of trading partners, according to the Herfindahl and Hirschman Index (IHH) of 947. Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 23 FIGURE 9. Total exports by country of destination - (100% = $334.136 million) (Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas) China 26.8% Singapore 2.5% United States 11.2% Mexico 2.1% Argentina 4.6% Japan 2.0% Netherlands 3.6% India 1.9% Spain 2.9% Others 39.7% Chile 2.7% 18. The five main exporting states accounted for 56.6 percent of the total export value in 2022. São Paulo generated the highest value for this item with 20.8 percent, followed by Rio de Janeiro with 13.6 percent. The latter state also showed considerable growth in its total share of exports with an average annual rate of 18.3 percent. While Santa Catarina was the tenth state with the highest share of exports in 2022, collaborating with 3.1 percent of the total, the Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR) registered for this State was 7.1 percent for the period from 2017 to 2022. 24 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector TABLE 1. Exports by State (100% = $334.136 million) Source: Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services / Ministry of Foreign Trade (Brazil). https://www.gov.br/produtividade-e-commerce-exterior/pt-br/assuntos/commerce-exterior/estatisticas AAGR # State 2022 % in 2022 2022/2017 1 SÃO PAULO 69,631 20.80% 6.60% 2 RIO DE JANEIRO 45,514 13.60% 18.30% 3 MINAS GERAIS 40,194 12.00% 9.70% 4 MATO GROSSO 32,508 9.70% 17.20% 5 RIO GRANDE DO SUL 22,565 6.80% 4.90% 6 PARANÁ 22,133 6.60% 4.30% 7 PARÄ 21,515 6.40% 8.20% 8 GOIÁS 14,148 4.20% 15.40% 9 BAHIA 13,923 4.20% 11.60% 10 SANTA CATARINA 11,966 3.60% 7.10% OTHERS 40,040 12.0% 5.2% Total 334.136 100.00% 9.20% 2.5 National Consumer Price Index 19. The pace of price growth has slowed for most of 2022 and so far in 2023. In May 2023, the National Consumer Price Index (INPC) was recorded at 6,893.3 points, for that date, the annual variation of the index was 3.7 percent, which represents a slower growth rate compared to the 11.9 percent annual variation of the same month of 2022. Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 25 FIGURE 10. Annual Variation of the National Consumer Price Index (INPC) 2017 – May 2023 (Source: IBGE) 14.00 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Jul Sep Jan Mar May Nov Nov Nov Nov Nov Nov 2.6 São Paulo 2.6.1 State Gross Domestic Product 20. The pace of growth of the State’s economy has slowed considerably in recent years. According to IBGE data, from 2011 to 2020, the annual variation of São Paulo’s GDP has decreased from 11.0 percent to 1.2 percent, which represented a decrease of 9.8 p.p. in that period. In addition, the Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR) of GDP stood at 5.2 percent over the same period. FIGURE 11. Annual variation of GDP 11.0% 10.0% 8.5% 8.3% 6.2% AAGR 4.4% 5.1% 4.0% 4.2% 5.2% 1.2% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 26 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 2.6.2 Value Added and Contribution to GDP by Economic Sector 21. In line with the total economy, the Value Added of agricultural production in São Paulo has had the greatest dynamism among the sectors. In 2020, the annual variation in Agricultural Value Added stood at 34.2 percent, which implied an increase of 30.9 p.p. compared to 2011. For the period from 2011 to 2020, the agricultural sector presented a AAGR of 8.6 percent. FIGURE 12. Annual Variation in Value Added by Economic Sector in São Paulo: 2011 – 2020 (Source: IBGE) 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 36.1% 34,2% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Agricultural Industry Services Administration Taxes 22. This remarkable growth in the agricultural sector in 2020, a year highlighted by the presence of COVID-19 in Brazil and the rest of the world, was influenced by local, national, and international factors. According to data from the Brazilian Ministry of Trade, agricultural exports increased in São Paulo by 13.3 percent between 2019 and 2020, while the processing industry, which is largely explained by agri-food, also increased by 13.3 percent. This highlights the importance of the sector in the State as an economic engine in the face of various macroeconomic phenomena. 23. The agricultural sector has also increased its participation within the economy in the State of São Paulo, although below the Services Economic Performance of the Agricultural Sector (Brazil and São Paulo) 27 Sector and the Administration, Defense and Education Sector. While in 2011, the agricultural sector contributed 1.7 percent of the State GDP, in 2020, this sector participated with 1.9 percent of the state product, that is 0.2 p.p. more in a decade. FIGURE 13. Composition of São Paulo Gross Domestic Product: 2011 vs 2021 (Source: IBGE) Composition of São Composition of São Paulo’s GDP: 2011 Paulo’s GDP: 2020 Agricultural 1.7% Agricultural 1.9% Industry 22.4% Industry 17.5% Services 50.7% Services 57.0% Administration 7.9% Administration 8.3% Taxes 17.2% Taxes 15.3% 24. The State of São Paulo is the 4th State when it comes to GHG emissions within the country. The Agriculture sector represents 25 percent of the State net emissions, while Land use Change constitutes a carbon sink (with 2.9 MtCO2 removed). Within agriculture, it is worth noting that 52 percent of GHG emissions come from enteric fermentation, 43.7 percent from soils and 3.9 percent from animal waste. Emissions coming from the agriculture sector decreased by 6 percent between 2002 and 2022, while emissions from Land Use Change decreased by 100 percent during the same period. FIGURE 14. São Paulo: Sectoral breakdown of GHG emissions (Source: SEEG) Agriculture 25% Energy 61% Waste 11% Industry 3% 28 3. EVALUATION OF AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT IN SÃO PAULO (2017-2021) 3.1 Methodology 25. This section provides a quantitative assessment of monetary transfers to agriculture in São Paulo derived from the implementation of agricultural policies, during the period 2017-2021. For the estimation of these transfers, the OECD methodology for estimating agricultural support has been taken as a base reference, including the Producer Support Estimate (PSE), the Consumer Support Estimate (CSE), the Total Support Estimate (TSE), and the General Service Support Estimate (GSSE) (see Box1). It is important to note that for the estimates, the transfers derived solely from the implementation of state government policies have been considered, which allows quantifying them and estimating their impact on the producer/ consumer or on the state sector. In this sense, national policies are not considered since this would correspond to an analysis of transfers associated with national policies, which is not part of the objectives of this analysis. 29 BOX 1 OECD INDICATORS OF SUPPORT FOR AGRICULTURE • Indicators of support for producers regardless of their nature, objectives, or impacts on the consumption of agricultural products. Throughout this document, it will be emphasized that the estimation of the various supports will consider CSE in percentage (CSE%): CSE as a percentage only the implementation of policy measures by the of consumption expenditure (measured on an State and their impact on the state sector or state operating basis) net of transfers from taxpayers to producer/consumer. consumers. Producer Support Estimate (PSE): The annual • Indicators of support to general services for monetary value of gross consumer and taxpayer agriculture transfers to agricultural producers, measured at the farm level and derived from the implementation General Service Support Estimate (GSSE): The of state government agricultural policy measures annual monetary value of gross transfers to general that support agriculture, regardless of their nature, services provided to agricultural producers collectively objectives, or impacts on agricultural production (such as research, development, training, inspection, or incomes. marketing, and promotion), derived from measures of the implementation of policies that support Percentage of PSE (%PSE): PSE as a percentage of agriculture by the state, regardless of their nature, gross agricultural income (including transfers). objectives, and impacts on agricultural production, income, or consumption. The GSSE does not include Single Commodity Transfers (SCT) represent any transfers to individual producers. the total annual monetary value of transfers from consumers and taxpayers to agricultural producers. Percentage GSSE (% GSSE): GSSE as a percentage These transfers are measured at the farm gate of the Total Support Estimate (TSE). level and are a result of policies specifically tied to the production of a single commodity conditional • Indicators of Total support to the sector transfers. In order to receive the payment, producers are required to produce the designated commodity. Total Support Estimate (TSE): The annual This category also encompasses broader policies monetary value of all gross transfers from taxpayers where transfers are specified on a per-commodity and consumers resulting from the implementation basis. It can also be expressed as a percentage of of agricultural support policy measures by the state, Gross Agricultural Income for the specific product. net of associated budget revenues, regardless of their objectives and impacts on agricultural production and • Indicators of support to consumers incomes, or consumption of agricultural products. Consumer Support Estimate (CSE): The annual Percentage TSE (TSE%): TSE as a monetary value of gross transfers from (to) percentage of GDP. consumers of agricultural products, measured at the farm level, arising from the implementation of policy measures by the state that support agriculture, 30 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 26. The OECD methodology makes it possible to identify the beneficiaries of transfers and also identifies (and quantifies) the sources of financing for such transfers. The following figure outlines the relationship between beneficiaries and sources of financing for the transfers generated. In relation to recipients, there are fundamentally three types of transfers: to individual producers, to the sector, and to consumers. First, and to the extent that a state policy measure benefits a product or group of products, these measures are classified within the PSE and their source of financing can be consumers (through higher prices) or taxpayers (through tax payments with which the support programs are financed). Secondly, when a measure is carried out and benefits the sector as a whole, it is classified as GSSE. Virtually all of these measures are funded by taxpayers. Finally, policy measures that promote or hinder the consumption of agricultural products are classified within the CSE. The sources of financing for these measures are through taxpayers (public programs that subsidize the consumption of products) or through consumers themselves (through intervention measures that affect the market price). FIGURE 15. Scheme of Transfers Associated with the Implementation of Agricultural Policies Tot l Support Estim te Producer Support Support for Consumer Support Estim te Gener l Services Estim te M rket M rket Bud et r Bud et r Price Price Tr nsfers Tr nsfers Support Support Consumers T xp er Sources 27. The methodology applied in this study is consistent with that used by the OECD reports that monitor and evaluate agricultural policies in the OECD and other countries. Box 2 provides basic information on how this methodology has been applied to the case of the State of São Paulo, Brazil. 31 BOX 2 APPROACH TO TSE FOR SÃO PAULO The approach to estimating support for the sector in quotas, export subsidies, export taxes, quantitative the state of São Paulo faithfully applies the principles restrictions on exports and other measures that of the OECD methodology. In this sense, the estimate generate an increase (or decrease) in the domestic is limited to estimating the support derived from price in relation to an international reference. the implementation of State government policies in Additionally, other types of policies can be included the agricultural sector. Likewise, the indicators will within these measures, including the imposition indicate the impact that, in the margin, the State of managed prices (maximum and minimum), support represents on the producer’s gross income, government purchases, etc., which generate a gap on GDP, etc. This allows a reasonable comparison between prices. with other economies. In some cases, differences between domestic and It is worth mentioning that during the analysis, some international prices are also explained by factors support programs have been found that have a pari that are not strictly policy-related, for instance, passum financing scheme, with a national and a deficiencies in physical infrastructure, inadequate state contribution. In those cases, only the State information, and weak market institutions or contribution has been considered, as for the case of exchange rate variations (considering that the the school feeding program. comparison is commonly made in a local single currency). The OECD methodology indicates that, Under this principle, it is clear that the support that if the gap detected is due to the presence of any of a producer can receive in the State is complemented these factors, it is not considered for its calculations). by the support they receive from national policy measures (although the latter are not estimated in It is important to mention that the implementation this exercise). of policies related to border measures (restriction/ promotion of imports/exports) based on the • PSE calculation for São Paulo imposition of tariffs/quotas/subsidies is an exclusive power of the national government.2 However, other Broadly speaking, the PSE has two main components: measures that can generate a domestic price support via market prices and budget support. gap in relation to international references can be implemented by the state government, including, for • Market Price Support (MPS) example: administered prices, and public purchases or production quotas. Market price support is based on measuring the difference between a country’s (or state’s) domestic In the case of São Paulo, and according to the prices and international (property-level) reference information collected, there was no evidence that, prices. This price gap is the result of a variety of during the analyzed period (2017-2021), the State policy measures that prevent domestic prices from government implemented a policy that intervened in aligning with international levels. These policies the prices of the products analyzed and generated a include trade measures such as import tariffs, tariff gap in relation to the international reference price. 2 See: Receita Federal — Receita Federal (www.gov.br); Import customs procedures in Brazil - Santandertrade.com 32 The MPS was calculated based on the following External reference prices: Average annual export information: prices (FOB) were used for the products under analysis. Those prices were adjusted at the farm Analyzed Products and representativeness: level with the cost of transport to port and other Orange, soybeans, sugar, beef and pork. These five processing costs, in order to make reasonable products together represent 73.4 percent of the total comparisons with domestic prices. The adjustment value of gross agricultural production in São Paulo by followed the comparability criterion (like to like) 2021 (73.3 percent in 2017).3 The OECD methodology suggested by the OECD. The local consultant suggests that a sample of products that, as a provided data on FOB prices and transportation and whole, represent around 70 percent of the value of processing costs from information generated by the agricultural production (in this case statewide) be Centre of Advanced Studies on Applied Economics analyzed, so this parameter has been met for São (Centro de Estudos Avançados de Economia Aplicada Paulo and general conclusions can be made. It is also – CEPEA/ESALQ), adjusted for inflation between important to note that, for the purposes of the PSE 2018 and 2021. estimates, all the products analyzed were considered purely export products.4 Price gap estimates: The “zero price gap” was used when negative gaps were obtained, as the estimated Prices to the domestic producer: Corresponds to negative price gaps reflect factors other than the average annual prices received by producers at agricultural policies. the farm level in São Paulo. This information has been provided by the local Consultant, from the National • Budget support Supply Company (CONAB). Budget support comes from information on public spending at the sectoral level executed solely by the State Government through any of its agencies or entities that executed support programs for the sector in the period. The budget information was provided by the Local Consultant through information provided by the Secretary of Finance and planning of São Paulo. 3 Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA) 4 From calculation of Apparent National Consumption: Production+Imports-Exports Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 33 3.2 Producer Support Estimates (PSE) 3.2.1 Level of Support 28. The Producer Support Percentage Estimate (%PSE) is one of the most important indicators used by the OECD to measure the impact on the farmer of the transfers associated with the implementation of State policies, coming from both consumers and taxpayers, expressing this amount as a proportion 5 of the gross agricultural income of the state producer. Under this criterion, this indicator reasonably allows comparisons of the impact between products, countries or over time, and the OECD considers it as the “most appropriate indicator to compare changes in the level of support to the farmer”. 29. The %PSE expresses the monetary value of state aid transfers to agricultural producers in the state as a percentage of that producer’s gross income. As it is unaffected by inflation, it allows for comparisons in the level of support both over time and across countries. This indicator provides information on consumer and taxpayer transfers (budget transfers) to farmers. 30. Figure 15 shows the estimate of %PSE of São Paulo 2017-2021. In 2017, the %PSE indicates that 0.12 percent of the gross income of agricultural producers was generated by state support policies. By 2021, this level was 0.14 percent. All these levels denote a low (or almost zero) average impact on the income of state producers. This situation also reflects a condition where the products used for this analysis are mainly for export and therefore exposed to international prices. Finally, and as will be shown below, there were no policies by the government of the state of São Paulo that implied an interventionist measure in prices, since these are fundamentally governed by market conditions. 5 Calculated as the value of production plus transfers received. 34 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector FIGURE 16. São Paulo Producer Support Estimate as a proportion of Total Income (PSE%) 0,14% 0,14% 0,12% 0,10% 0,06% 0,05% 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Promedio 2017-2021 31. The %PSE indicator allows for reasonable comparisons, in this case with other countries, including OECD countries, and other states in Brazil. The average level of support to producers in São Paulo during the analyzed period was 0.1 percent, which is comparatively lower than that observed in other economies such as Chile, Mexico, etc., and similar to that of Santa Catarina (0.06 percent), but lower than that of Bahia (0.2 percent).6 FIGURE 17. Benchmarking PSE% - 2017-2021 0,1% 0,1% 0,2% Argentina Sta. São Bahia* Brazil Chile LATAM Mexico USA OECD Catarina* Paulo* 6 As mentioned, the comparison with other economies is reasonable and valid to the extent that the % PSE estimates represent the importance of transfers generated by policies (whether state or national) in the producer’s gross income, which can be reasonably compared with the same impact with other economies. Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 35 3.2.2 Composition and Structure of the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) by Support Category 32. A fundamental part of the research on support to the sector includes not only the analysis of the level and impact, but also the composition of the sector. The relative importance of each of the categories of support considered by the OECD methodology reveals the way in which the supports are granted and from there, conclusions can be reached on the degree of efficiency (inefficiency) and progressiveness (regression) of those supports. In practical terms, this can help identify that not necessarily a high (or low) level of support implies that it is being done efficiently or equitably. 33. For example, aid can be granted through support via prices or subsidies to inputs. It can take the form of a payment per hectare or per animal, or compensation to the producer’s income; but its impact (measured from various angles) can differ. Also, by identifying the various categories of support, it is possible to determine in the first instance, the impact that the form of support can have on production, trade or income or other variables of great relevance such as the environment. 34. Market price support (MPS) is considered a highly distorting measure with a high social cost, as its implementation is necessarily linked to the production of the targeted products, which implies a market distortion. On the other hand, the MPS imposes additional costs on domestic consumers, as it promotes an additional increase in the price for consumers, which represents an “implicit tax” on them and particularly on lower-income net consumers, who must allocate a greater part of their income to food spending, also making it highly regressive. During the analyzed period, the State of São Paulo did not implement any support measures that intervened in the level of domestic market prices to producers. Thus, according to the methodology, the calculation of the price gap is not considered and therefore there is no MPS during the analyzed period. 36 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector TABLE 2. Structure and Composition of PSE São Paulo (average 2017-2021) São Paulo Item Rs Mill % III.1 Producer Support Estimates (PSE) 118 9. 100% Market Price Support 0.0 0.0% Production-based payments 0.0 0.0% Payments based on the use of inputs 117.7 89.9% Supports based on non-current production A/ 0.0 0.0% AN/I. REQUIRED PRODUCTION : Supports based on non-current production A/ 0.0 0.0% AN/I. No production is required. Support based on criteria not related to agricultural production 13.2 10.1% Others 0.0 0.0% 35. Table 2 shows that, during the period of analysis, the direct support to producers in São Paulo was implemented mostly through payments based on inputs use. Almost 90 percent of transfers directed to a product or group of products were made through this category. The Government of São Paulo carried out various programs such as the insurance premium support program (financed with state resources), the rural credit financing program, seed subsidy programs, among others (see annex 1 for details). It is important to note that although the OECD relates payments based on inputs as support with a significant negative impact on the environment, in the case of São Paulo, its availability is conditional on compliance by the beneficiaries with sustainable agricultural practices, 7 which must be recognized and eventually considered in the analysis. 36. A relatively minor part of PSE (10 percent) includes other programs implemented by the State Government and whose objectives consider the preservation of the environment and natural resources. Programs 7 The OECD itself recognizes that such categorization must observe the particularities and context of each economy where these supports are appreciated. See OECD (2022). Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 37 such as “Management Practices for Carbon Emission Mitigation”, “Water Conservation Program” and the “Organic Production Stimulus Program” have been included here. Based on their characteristics, these programs can be considered as “green” programs. 37. In a comparative analysis of the structure with other states in Brazil and OECD countries (Table 3), two aspects are highlighted: the first is that unlike in the OECD, market price support is not used as a policy instrument to transfer resources to the sector. The second is that, in the OECD, most of the policy instruments that transfer resources to the sector (40.1 percent), are carried out through programs that are not conditional on production (decoupled) and thus, are less distorting, considered less harmful to the environment and result in support that is not subject to sanctions or trade compensation within the WTO’s foreign trade rules (green box). In general, the OECD observes the use of a more diverse range of categories and mostly oriented towards decoupled support categories. TABLE 3 Structure and Composition of PSE. Bahia, Santa Catarina, São Paulo and OECD (average 2017-2021) São Paulo Santa Catarina Bahia OECD Category % % % % III. Producer Support Estimate (PSE) 100% 100% 100% 100% Market Price Support 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 17.1% Production-based payments 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% 0.3% Payments based on the use of inputs 96.6% 98.7% 63.9% 14.1% Supports based on non- current production A/AN/I. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 27.0% REQUIRED PRODUCTION Supports based on non- current production A/AN/I. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 40.1% No production in required Support based on non- 3.4% 1.3% 21.7% 1.1% production criteria Others 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 38 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 3.2.3 Analysis of Producer Support by Product 38. The OECD methodology allows obtaining a disaggregated level for each product selected as the basis for the analysis. Formally, the analysis of support by product is called “Individual commodity transfers”. For these purposes, we will call it “Product Producer Support Estimate (product name)”. The PSE per product can also be expressed both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the gross revenue of the product under analysis. For the latter case, a figure of 33 percent, for example, indicates that the value of the transfers derived from the implementation of state agricultural policies, which are specific to that commodity, is equivalent, on average, to one third of the gross agricultural income of the producers of that product in the particular state and for the year or period analyzed. 39. Figure 17 shows the PSE of São Paulo in percentage (%PSE) for the five products included in the support estimation analysis, considering the average of the analyzed period. Throughout that period, pork had the highest level of %PSE, while the rest of the products observed a much lower and marginal level. 40. Table 4 includes the monitoring of this indicator for each year and the case of pork shows a significant volatility in the observed level of each year and above all an increase towards 2021.8 FIGURE 18. %PSE by Product in São Paulo (average 2017-2021) Sugar 0.18% Bovine 0.11% Soy 0.23% Orange 0.29% Swine 6.64% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8 The variability observed in this indicator results not necessarily from a variation in the levels of transfers, but rather in the high variation in production levels observed in those years. Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 39 TABLE 4 %PSE per product per year São Paulo 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Sugar 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% Orange 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.3% Bovine 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% Swine 7.5% 10.4% 4.2% 3.0% 8.0% Soya 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 3.3 Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) 41. The Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) measures the cost (or benefit) to state consumers of implementing state support policies for the sector. A negative CSE indicates a negative cost to the consumer, which is equivalent to an implicit consumption tax on agricultural products. To the extent that a (state) agricultural policy raises the domestic price of products above international reference prices (for example, the imposition of administered prices or production quotas), the consumer is the one who must bear that cost and transfers them as a benefit to the producer. Conversely, a policy that generates a domestic price below the international reference price (for example, a maximum price) generates an “implicit subsidy” to the consumer financed by the producer. 42. The OECD methodology considers, in addition to these supports, those that may result from food subsidy programs and which are financed by taxpayers. In any case, both sources of financing are considered in the calculations to determine the net support to the consumer. 40 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 3.3.1 Structure of the Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) 43. Like the PSE, the CSE can be expressed in relative terms as a percentage of consumption expenditures (%CSE). The average percentage of CSE for São Paulo was positive in the analyzed period (1.6 percent). Since the state government did not implement measures to support the sector that would result in higher prices received by the producer (for example, public purchases, maximum or minimum prices, etc.), the consumer was 9 not affected. Additionally, there were food subsidy and support programs implemented that, when accounted for, contributed to this indicator being positive. The estimated average result indicates that, derived from the implementation of subsidy programs financed with state resources and combined with a policy of non-intervention in agricultural prices by the state, the consumer found the value of the food basket 1.6 percent lower. FIGURE 19. São Paulo Percentage of Consumer Support Estimate (%CSE) 2.37% 1.90% 1.59% 1.6% 1.02% 1.0% 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2017-2021 Average 3.3.2 Estimated Consumer Support by Product 44. In the following table, the %CSE is observed at the level of each product and during the analyzed period. All products under analysis show a positive %CSE. In the case of São Paulo, these positive results are the result of two aspects: (i) the 9 For example, the School Feeding Program and the “Bom Prato” Program, both funded and executed by the State Government. Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 41 state’s agricultural policies did not include any type of measure that intervened in the price received for the product (and therefore inducing a higher cost by the consumer) of any of the products analyzed. Thus, there is no impact on the consumer indicator and it is considered as zero; (ii) on the other hand, the state government implemented consumption subsidy programs, from which the consumers of the products analyzed have benefited. In this way, the net impact of both measures generated positive consumer support. The level varies according to the product and the year analyzed, but in general it was positive. TABLE 5 %CSE by product in São Paulo (2017-2021) (average Status Product 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2017-2021) São Paulo Orange 0.9% 1.1% 1.1% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% São Paulo Soya 27.7% 36.4% 23.7% 20.4% 14.5% 24.5% São Paulo Sugar 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% São Paulo Bovine 1.6% 2.1% 1.6% 1.4% 1.0% 1.5% São Paulo Swine 22.5 41.4% 23.1 18.6% 18.2% 24.8% 3.4 General Service Support Estimates (GSSE) 45. In addition to transfers received by individual producers, state government policies assist the agricultural sector by financing activities that provide general benefits (public goods), such as agricultural research and development, training, sanitary inspection, information, sector promotion, etc. The generation of this type of public services creates positive externalities to the sector as a whole. The OECD methodology estimates this type of transfer to the sector through the General Services Support Estimate (GSSE), which considers the amount of public investment (from the state government) towards these activities. The GSSE is financed by taxpayers and its financing by the state 42 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector government is key insofar as, due to its characteristics as a public good, the level provided by the market is lower than the socially optimal level. 46. During the period 2017-2021 (table 5), the GSSE for São Paulo added an average of 438 R$ Millions. About 60 percent of the total GSSE disbursements were allocated to Research and Development (training, research, knowledge and transfer of technology and resources for agricultural institutes); 22% to Infrastructure (rural roads, irrigation, organization); 18.5 percent to Inspection and Control (animal and plant health surveillance). It is worth mentioning that although the GSSE has represented a very important part of the total supports (about 43 percent on average between 2017-2021), its level as a proportion of the state’s Agricultural GDP is relatively low (1.2 percent) and lower than what observed in OECD countries (5.3 percent). TABLE 6. São Paulo, GSSE 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (average 2017-2021) Investment in General Services Rs Mill % São Paulo Total 488.7 508. 424.1 385.9 386.8 438 (7) 100% Agricultural 295 293.9 269.5 233.7 212.1 260.8 59.5% knowledge (R&D) Inspection and 84.9 84.8 79.4 75.6 80.2 81.0 18.5% monitoring Infrastructure development and 107.7 129.1 75.1 76.6 94.5 96.6 22.0% maintenance Marketing and 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0% Promotion public storage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0% Miscellaneous 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1% Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 43 47. Evidence shows that the level of GSSE is positively correlated with the degree of development of countries. In addition, this type of support is listed as green box support in the WTO, which means that it is not subject to any compensatory measures by trade counterparts. Investment in GSSE is often associated with long-term agricultural growth and competitiveness. 48. The figure below (Figure 19) shows the GSSE as a percentage of each state’s agricultural GDP, for Brazil, Bahia, Santa Catarina, São Paulo and OECD economies, for 2017-2021. The data obtained show that the public investment in general services made by the state government of São Paulo, when measured as a proportion of its Agricultural GDP (1.2 percent), was higher than the equivalent observed in Bahia and Santa Catarina, but lower than that observed in the OECD. FIGURE 20. Benchmarking GSSE as proportion of agricultural GDP – Average 2017-2021 5.30% 1.21% 0.51% 0.57% 0.70% Brazil Bahia Santa Catarina São Paulo OECD 49. Figure 21 shows the distribution of state public investment in general services for Santa Catarina and other states, as well as the OECD. São Paulo and Bahia concentrate this investment in important areas such as Research, Inspection, and Infrastructure. In the case of Santa Catarina, it shows a more diverse distribution of its investment in other categories, similar to the OECD. 44 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector FIGURE 21. Benchmarking the composition of the GSSE 6.3% 2.28% 3.7% 6% 8.6% 1.02% 3.52% 0.16% 1.4% 3% 12.8% 22.0% 12.5% 2% 8.8% 29% 18.5% 51.7% 30.4% 42.5% 93.02% 24% 12.5% 13.5% 59.5% 39.7% 36% 31.1% 24.5% BAHIA SANTA SÃO PAULO BRAZIL OECD LATAM CATARINA Agriculture innovation Infrastructure Development and Maintenance Inspection and control Marketing and promotion Cost of public actions Others 50. Supporting research and innovation plays a vital role in helping to mitigate agricultural emissions. There is ample evidence that public investments in agricultural research and development also generate high rates of return (Alston, Pardey, & Rao, 2021). Agricultural research and development a key driver of productivity growth, which can help reduce emissions by allowing more food to be produced with the same amount or fewer emissions-intensive inputs (e.g., land, fertilizers). Innovations such as improvements in agricultural management practices, new crop varieties and livestock breeds, and new digital technologies (e.g., precision agriculture) can reduce the intensity of production emissions while mitigating emissions from land-use change. Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 45 3.5 Total Agricultural Support Estimates (TSE) Total Support Estimate 192.4 R$ The 51. million Total Support Estimates for Agriculture (TSE) is the indicator that USD 38.3 million Bahia includes the sum of transfers to agricultural producers directed both individually (PSE) and collectively (GSSE), in addition to direct budget transfers to consumers arising from state agricultural policies. This indicator can be expressed Producer of in absolute terms or as a percentage General Services GDP. Support Support Estimate, Estimate %TSE provides an indication of the cost31.0% In the latter case,68.9% that support 10 to the agricultural sector entails for the state economy and is mostly used to make reasonable comparisons between economies or over time. Total Support Estimate R$ 177.8 52. Figuremillion 22 shows the composition of the TSE in São Paulo for the period USD 35.6 million Santa 2017-2021. It is shown that from the estimated average Catarina total amount for that period (1,016 R$ million), the GSSE constituted 43.1 percent, the PSE 12.8 percent, and consumer support tax transfers 43.9 percent. Consumer Producer General Services Support Support FIGURE 22. Support Estimate, Estimate, Estimate 58.4% 30.7% 12.9% São Paulo, Composition of TSE Total Support Estimate R$ 1,016 million USD 203.2 million São Paulo Producer General Services Consumer Support Support Support Estimate, Estimate, Estimate 43.9% 43.1% 12.8% 10 Sometimes it is also represented as a proportion of the Gross Agricultural Domestic Product (state). In any case, the selection of the reference indicator depends on the objectives of the researcher. 46 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 53. When this level of support is measured as a percentage of the state agricultural GDP, it is observed (Figure 23) that the average TSE during that period was 2.89 percent of the state agricultural GDP. The evolution of this indicator in the period under analysis shows a significant reduction towards 2019 and 2020, but an increase towards 2021.11 FIGURE 23. São Paulo Total Support Estimate in million R$ and as proportion of AgGDP São Paulo 3.9% 3.1% 2.7% 2.9% 1.9% 1,120.1 1,238.4 898.9 829.2 996.8 1,021.6 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2017-2021 Average Total Support Estimate (TSE) RS Millions and TSE/Ag GDP EAT/PIB AGRO 54. The following graph shows the comparison with other states such as Bahia and Santa Catarina, which ratios are lower than those observed in São Paulo. FIGURE 24. Benchmarking TSE as share of Ag GDP 54.7% 46.4% 42.0% 13.9% 14.5% 11.1% 6.8% 6.7% 0.91% 0.95% 2.9% Colombia UE OCDE Mexico EEUU Costa Brazil Chile Bahia* Santa São Rica Catarina* Paulo* 11 This increase was due to the increase observed in the category of “Supplies Support”. Specifically, the increase in resources of programs such as “Rural Credit for Expansion and Investment” and other programs such as “Biofuels”, located within the “F” category of the OECD. Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 47 3.6 Sources of Funding for Support in São Paulo 55. The OECD methodology allows estimating the level of support considering the source of financing of the transfers generated to the sector. By definition, a transfer presumes the existence of a source and a beneficiary. The methodology identifies the agricultural sector as the main beneficiary and consumers of agricultural products and taxpayers as the two sources of transfers. This analysis is widely useful as it helps determine the associated cost for the two groups identified as main sources (Consumers and Taxpayers) and, from there, evaluate their efficiency from an economic and distributive point of view. 56. Figure 25 shows the participation of each of the sources of financing for transfers to the sector in the period 2017-2021. From the total transfers generated in São Paulo (derived from implementing public policies by the State), its taxpayers were the only source of generation of the same. The methodology considers other possible consumer transfers made from the payment of taxes and tariffs for foreign trade, where the beneficiary is not the sector but the government, which represents a public income. For this analysis, and since these tariffs are not derived from a state government policy, these transfers have not been taken into account. 57. The taxpayers, who generated all the transfers to the sector in São Paulo, have financed the public support programs with their taxes, with the beneficiary being the agricultural sector (either at the level of producers individually or the sector as a whole), as well as Bahia and Santa Catarina. In the case of OECD economies, consumers contributed almost 15 percent. The OECD has recognized that this reduction in the participation of consumers as financiers of transfers to the sector in the OECD is due to reforms established in these countries in recent years (OECD, 2021). 48 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector FIGURE 25. Benchmarking TSE by source of fundings 22.3% 85.2% 100% 100% 100% 77.7% 14.8% Bahía Santa Catarina São Paulo Brazil OECD Consumers' transfers Taxpayers' transfers 3.7 Environmental Impact of Support to the Agricultural Sector in São Paulo 58. Agriculture is an important source of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly in Brazil, and is at the same time highly vulnerable to it. It is estimated that on average the Brazilian agriculture sector loses 1 percent of agricultural GDP every 12 year due to climate events. The sector however has ample opportunities to reduce its emissions, enhance carbon storage and increase its climate resilience. 59. Recent research shows that reducing the impact of agriculture as a GHG producer can come directly from increases in productivity and activity- associated factors, including restoration of degraded land, increased soil carbon sequestration in croplands, and grasslands and afforestation, etc. In particular, support for agricultural research and development plays a vital role in helping mitigate agricultural emissions. There is ample evidence that 12 World Bank. 2015. Rapid and Integrated Agriculture Risk Management Review for Brazil Evaluation of Agricultural Supportin São Paulo (2017-2021) 49 public investments in agricultural research and development also generate high rates of return (Alston, Pardey and Rao, 2021), considering its contribution to productivity growth, which can help reduce emissions by allowing more food to be produced with the same or less emissions-intensive inputs (e.g., land, fertilizers, feed). Innovations such as improvements in agricultural management practices, new crop varieties and livestock breeds and new digital technologies (e.g., precision agriculture) can reduce the intensity of production emissions. 60. In recent years, the importance of various tools that can help this purpose or that could negatively affect it, has been emphasized. These tools include the various policies to support the sector, which directly or indirectly have an impact on the contribution of the sector in focusing on the environment. 61. In this regard, the OECD has considered the categories of support for agriculture and has labeled those that have a negative impact and those whose impact is minor or zero (potentially positive). For OECD, market price support (MPS) provides incentives for additional production, the intensification of the use of inputs, the allocation of land to supported crops, and the entry of land into the agricultural sector and, thus, is considered harmful to the environment. Similarly, input supports (particularly if based on production, current cropping area, or number of animals), typically encourage farmers to increase their output, either through intensification, land expansion, or retention of farms that would be financially unviable without support. 62. On the other hand, the development of new types of support that has been observed in OECD countries have included an ingredient of “decoupled”, that is, they are not conditioned to the production of any particular products and thus, their environmental impact is less or minimal. 63. Finally, other supports are considered, which incorporate incentives for the non-use of certain natural resources or stimulate the growth of environmental activities in the productive process of the sector, such as payments for environmental services. These types of measures are potentially among the most environmentally beneficial types of support measures (DeBoe, 2020). 50 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 64. Most of direct support to producers implemented by the State of São Paulo is granted through payments based on inputs (see Table 2), which, according to the OECD criteria, have a negative effect on the environment and on GHG emissions. However, it is important to consider that an important part of these supports is support for interest rates and subsidies for agricultural insurance premiums, which are conditional to the implementation of environmental policies within the production process and in that sense, the negative impact of these supports on the environment can be nuanced. 65. The remaining direct support to producers (10 percent of the PSE) is 13 implemented through decoupled payments. Decoupled payments are considered to generate positive environmental outcomes, encouraging farmers to provide environmental goods and services such as carbon sequestration, preservation of rural landscapes, resilience to natural disasters, pollination, habitat provision, etc. These types of measures are potentially 14 among the most environmentally beneficial types of support measures. 13 For example: “Soil, Water and Biodiversity Conservation Program”; “Soil Management and Carbon Emission Mitigation Program”; “Agroecology Stimulus Program”, etc. 14 DeBoe, G. et al. 2020. Reforming Agricultural Policies Will Help to Improve Environmental Performance, EuroChoices, Vol. 19/1, pp. 30-35, https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12247 51 4. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 66. Total support to agriculture (TSE) in São Paulo averaged RS Millions 1,017.6 per year in the period 2017-2021, which is equivalent to 2.89 percent of the state’s agricultural GDP. These levels are higher than the levels found in Santa Catarina (0.95 percent) and Bahia (0.87 percent). This total support corresponds to transfers derived from the implementation of agricultural policies of the state government. 67. Most of this support was transferred through public investment from the state in public goods and services to the sector in general (43.1 percent of the total), and another smaller part (12.8 percent of the total) through direct support. Another important part (43.9 percent of the total) was budget transfers to consumers of agricultural products. 68. The support that São Paulo directly grants to producers (and that derives from the implementation of state policies) measured by the estimate of producer aid (PSE) was, on average, equivalent to 0.1 percent of the total gross income of state producers during the period under analysis. During that period, a decrease was observed towards 2019 and a significant increase towards 2020 and 2021. This level of support is low compared to the average for OECD countries (17.4 percent) reflecting the sector’s competitive conditions and alignment with international markets. More than half of that support was concentrated in sugar (51 percent of the PSE). No MPS was observed during the analyzed period, most of direct support to producers happened through payment based on inputs. 52 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 69. Nine out of ten reais were transferred directly to producers through payments based on inputs. This type of support is considered inefficient to transfer income to producers and, a priori, negative for the environment when it promotes the overuse of GHG-emitting inputs or the over-exploitation of natural resources. However, it should be considered that in the case of São Paulo, this might not be the case given the pro-environmental conditions of part of the support programs. 70. The state support for the sector as a whole (GSSE) shows a relatively low level of investment in public goods in the sector in the period under analysis, equivalent to 1.2 percent of the Agricultural GDP. This level is below the OECD average (more than 5 percent), and relatively higher than Bahia (0.57 percent) and Santa Catarina (0.7 percent). When analyzing the composition of GSSE and comparing it with other states and the OECD countries, it was observed that the OECD countries maintain a very diversified investment among the categories that make up general services, while in São Paulo, almost 60 percent is dedicated to Agricultural innovation. 71. The Consumer Support Estimate (CSE) reached 1.5 percent during the period under analysis. This means that São Paulo’s consumer support policies represented an implicit consumption subsidy equivalent to 1.5 percent of the value of the food basket for that period. This positive result was the result of two aspects: (i) the non-intervention in product prices by the state government, which did not mean that the consumer had to pay a higher price; and (ii) the implementation of consumer subsidy programs (school breakfasts). These measures represented the implicit subsidy that has been pointed out. It is advisable to keep this type of program properly targeted to the most vulnerable population. 72. The recommendations for realigning agriculture support policies and programs towards greater competitiveness while increasing climate mitigation and resilience of the sector can be summarized around the following three key areas. There was no market price support observed during the analyzed period and in view of promoting competitiveness it is desirable that the State keep without any price interventions.  Increase support to agricultural public goods and services. In São Paulo, GSSE represented an important share of TSE (43.1 percent), showcasing a strong orientation of the State’s public support to the agricultural sector Summary and recommendations 53 towards public goods. However, when brought as a share of the agricultural GDP, GSSE (1.2 percent of AgGDP) is well below the average observed in OECD countries (5.3 percent). It has been demonstrated that support to agriculture public goods and services yield higher economic return 15 than public investments in private goods. In the context of climate change that already has an important impact on the sector, it is even more crucial to ensure further innovations are brought to the farmers to adapt to climate change and mitigate the sector’s impacts on the environment, that stronger Sanitary and Phytosanitary systems are in place to face increased occurrence of pest and diseases and that infrastructure is developed to support the changes the sector is facing. For these reasons it is important to seek, whenever the fiscal space allows it, to increase support to public goods and services, reaching at least 2 percent of AgGDP in the coming years and maintaining an increasing trend, in particular on Agricultural Innovation. It will also be important to foster the synergies and complementarities between the public goods and services supported at State and federal levels, to increase the diffusion of innovations to all farmers, in particular medium and family farmers, and improve rural infrastructure across the various regions of the countries. 73. Repurpose direct support to producers to foster adaptation and mitigation of the sector to climate change. Producer support (PSE) could be revised to not only support farmers’ incomes, but also to support the adoption of 16 climate-smart and low-carbon agriculture and seek to stop agricultural area expansion. Part of the payments based on inputs were linked to the implementation of environmental conditions. The State of São Paulo should keep linking its direct support to producers to environmental conditions and further shift its payments based on inputs to support adoption of climate- smart practices. Furthermore, moving away from payments based on production (inputs or outputs) to decoupled payments could enable the State to continue promoting transfers that generate income for the farmers in an 15 World Bank. 2001. World Development Report 2002. https://doi.org/10.1596/0-1952-1606-7, And DeBoe, G. et al. 2020. Reforming Agricultural Policies Will Help to Improve Environmental Performance, EuroChoices, Vol. 19/1, pp. 30-35, https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12247. 16 See https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture 54 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector efficient way, while allowing farmers to make production decisions based on market opportunity rather than the level of public support needed.  Expand risk management instruments. Agricultural production in São Paulo is facing increasing risks as a result of climate change, with extreme events becoming more frequent, causing significant crop failures and an increase in the volume of rural insurance claims. Strengthening the country’s agricultural policy through measures that protect rural producers and reduce the negative the negative impacts of climatic and socio-environmental events on the sector is more and more crucial. Given that uninsured risk hampers farmers’ investment17, increasing the share of agricultural public subsidies towards instruments that promote risk management could help improve the management of environmental and social risks in the agricultural sector. To do so in an inclusive manner, it would be important to design such a shift in a progressive way and to ensure it respond to the specific needs of small and medium farmers, who have the most difficulties in accessing those instruments through the market. TABLE 7 Areas of reforms for a competitive, green, resilient and inclusive agriculture sector in São Paulo Climate Competitiveness mitigation Inclusiveness Agriculture Policy Shift objective and resilience objective Shift from providing private goods (PSE) to public goods X X X and services (GSSE) Shift direct support to producers X to climate-smart subsidies Expand risks management X instruments 17 SOUZA, Priscila; ASSUNÇÃO, Juliano. 2020. Risk Management in Brazilian Agriculture: Instruments, Public Policy, and Perspectives. Climate Policy Initiative. 55 55 REFERENCES Alston, J., P. Pardey and DeBoe, G. et al. (2020), Heisey, P. and K. Fuglie OECD. Agricultural Policy X. Rao (2021), “Payoffs to “Reforming Agricultural (2018), “Public agricultural Monitoring and Evaluation a half century of CGIAR Policies Will Help to R&D in high-income OECD iLibrary | Agricultural research,” American Journal Improve Environmental countries: Old and new Policy Monitoring and of Agricultural Economics, Performance”, EuroChoices, roles in a new funding Evaluation 2020-2022 Vol. 104/2, pp. 502-529, Vol. 19/1, pp. 30-35, https:// environment”, Global Food (oecd-ilibrary.org) https://doi.org/10.1111/ doi.org/10.1111/1746- Security, Vol. 17, pp. 92-102, ajae.12255. 692X.12247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. OECD data monitoring gfs.2018.03.008. and evaluation: Reference Anderson, K. and E. FAO (2021), The share Tables: Total Support Valenzuela (2021), “What of agri-food systems in Henderson, B. and J. Estimate (TSE) (oecd.org) impact are subsidies and total greenhouse gas Lankoski (2020), “Assessing trade barriers abroad emissions: Global, regional the Environmental having on Australasian and country trends Impacts of Agricultural and Brazilian agriculture?”, 1990–2019, Food and Policies”, Applied Economic Australian Journal Agriculture Organization Perspectives and Policy, of Agricultural and of the United Nations, pp. 1-16, https://doi. Resource Economics, Rome, Italy, https:// org/10.1002/aepp.13081. Vol. 65/2, https:// fenixservices.fao.org/ doi.org/10.1111/1467- faostat/static/documents/ Forest Service. How 8489.12413. EM/cb7514en.pdf Transportation Costs Affect Fresh Fruit and Blandford, D. and K. Guerrero, S. et al. (2022), Vegetable Prices. Richard Hassapoyannes (2018), “The Impacts of Agricultural Volpe, Edward Roeger, and “The role of agriculture in Trade and Support Ephraim Leibtag (2013). global GHG mitigation”, Policy Reform on Climate OECD Food, Agriculture Change Adaptation OECD (2019), Enhancing and Fisheries Papers, No. and Environmental Climate Change Mitigation 112, OECD Publishing, Paris, Performance: A Model- through Agriculture, https://doi.org/10.1787/ Based Analysis”, OECD OECD Publishing, Paris, da017ae2-en. Food, Agriculture and https://doi.org/10.1787/ Fisheries Papers, No. 180, e9a79226-en OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd-ilibrary. OECD. Agricultural Market org/agriculture-and-food/ Information System: Home oecd-food-agriculture- (amis-outlook.org) and-fisheriesworking- papers_18156797. 56 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector ANNEX 1. SECTOR SUPPORT ESTIMATE, SÃO PAULO 2017-2021 2019- 2021 Concept/Cateogry Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average I. Total Production Rs Mill 127,309.9 117,467.3 118,582.8 131,176.4 133,593.8 127,784.3 Value (at farm gate) 1. Of which the share % 73.3% 72.9% 90.7% 71.4% 73.4% 0.8 of PSE products (%) II. Tpotal Consumption Rs Mill 25,574.1 24,170.2 25,536.0 37,606.5 42,276.6 35,139.7 value (at farm gate) 1. Of which the share Rs Mill 18,741.8 17,620.3 23,155.8 26,835.7 31,049.1 27,013.6 of PSE products (%) III.1 Producer Support Rs Mill 155.6 170.2 74.4 62.8 191.3 109.5 Estimate (PSE) A.1 Market Price Support Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1. Of which the share Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 of PSE products (%) A.2 Payments based Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 on production B. Supports based on Rs Mill 138.8 132.2 74.2 61.7 181.5 105.8 the use of inputs 1. Variable inputs Rs Mill 25.9 35.2 33.5 2.7 2.1 12.7 2. Fixed inputs Rs Mill 62.4 29.8 0.5 30.2 166.5 65.7 3. Services Rs Mill 50.5 67.2 40.3 28.8 12.9 27.3 C. Supports based on production A /An/ I. Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Production required 1. Based on income Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2. Based on surface the Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 number of animals D. Supports based on A / AN / I Not current. Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 necessary production Annex 1. Sector Support Estimate, São Paulo 2017-2021 57 2019- 2021 Concept/Cateogry Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average E. Supports based on A / AN / I Not current. Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 production not necessary 1. Variable Rates Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2. Fixed Rates Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 F. Support granted in criteria not related Rs Mill 16.7 38.0 0.2 1.1 9.8 3.7 to the production of agricultural products 1. Long term resources Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2. A specific product Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3. Other criteria not Rs Mill 16.7 38.0 0.2 1.1 9.8 3.7 related to products G. Miscellaneous supports Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 III.2 Producer Support Estimate in % 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 Percentage (PSE%) IV. Estimate of Support to Rs Mill 488.7 508.0 424.1 385.9 386.8 398.9 General Services (GSSE) H. Agricultural Knowledge Rs Mill 295.0 293.9 269.5 233.7 212.1 238.4 I. Inspection and Control Rs Mill 84.9 84.8 79.4 75.6 80.2 78.4 J. Infrastructure development and Rs Mill 107.7 129.1 75.1 76.6 94.5 82.1 maintenance K. Marketing and Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 promotion L. Public storage Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 M. Various Rs Mill 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 58 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector 2019- 2021 Concept/Cateogry Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average V.1 Consumer Support Rs Mill 475.9 560.2 400.3 380.5 418.7 399.8 Estimate (CSE) N. Transfers from consumers to Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 producers (-) 1. Of which the share Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 of PSE products O. Other consumer Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 transfers (-) 1. Of which the share Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 of PSE products P. Transfers from Rs Mill 475.9 560.2 400.3 380.5 418.7 399.8 taxpayers to consumers V.2 Percentage of CSE % 1.9 2.4 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.2 VI.1. Total Support Rs Mill 1,120.1 1,238.4 898.9 829.2 996.8 908.3 Estimate (TSE) Q. Consumer Transfers Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 R. Taxpayers Transfers Rs Mill 1,120.1 1,238.4 898.9 829.2 996.8 908.3 S. Budget revenue (-) Rs Mill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Annex 2. State Public Budget. São Paulo Programs 59 ANNEX 2. STATE PUBLIC BUDGET. SÃO PAULO PROGRAMS H. Agricultural Knowledge Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Resources for the Portal Secretaria acquisition of machinery de Agricultura y and equipment, such as Abasteciemiento harvesters, tractors and del São Paulo agricultural implements, https://www. self-propelled or not, as Infraestrura Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. well as motor vehicles for from the of br/ the transport of loads Mill Rs 0 0 0 1 16 ministry of Agriculture Portal da of agricultural products. agriculture and Supply Transparência The machines, equipment - Governo do and vehicles financed Estado de São must be new and Paulo (www. manufactured in Brazil, transparencia. except when there is no sp.gov.br) similar domestic product. Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del São Paulo https://www. Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. Geração de Resources for research of br/ tecnologias and development of Mill Rs 223 214 197 186 187 Agriculture Portal da / research agricultural activities. and Supply Transparência - Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Resources to certify the quality in the verification Portal Secretaria of the production de Agricultura y process, offering a better Secretary Laboratory Abasteciemiento product to the consumer of analyses - food del São Paulo Mill Rs 2 2 1 0 0 and increasing the Agriculture quality/ quality https://www. competitiveness of the and Supply agricultura. São Paulo agribusiness sp.gov.br/ in the internal and external markets. 60 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector H. Agricultural Knowledge Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Portal da Transparência Quality standards are - Governo do set by technicians Estado de São Mill Rs 2 2 1 0 0 from the Department Paulo (www. of Agriculture. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del São Paulo https://www. Supplies for Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. research Resources for research of br/ development/ and development of Mill Rs 4 3 3 2 1 Agriculture Portal da research agricultural activities. and Supply Transparência supplies - Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) For the acquisition of machinery and Portal Secretaria equipment, such as de Agricultura y harvesters, tractors and Abasteciemiento agricultural implements, del São Paulo self-propelled or not, as https://www. Difusão de well as motor vehicles Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. conheciments/ intended for the of br/ Mill Rs 2 2 2 0 0 technology transport of loads of Agriculture Portal da transfer agricultural products. The and Supply Transparência machines, equipment - Governo do and vehicles financed Estado de São must be new and Paulo (www. manufactured in Brazil, transparencia. except when there is no sp.gov.br) similar domestic product. Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Capacitacao Resources for the Secretary Abasteciemiento agents from training of extension of del São Paulo Mill Rs 0 0 0 0 0 agriculture workers who promote Agriculture https://www. paulista agriculture in São Paulo. and Supply agricultura. sp.gov.br/ Annex 2. State Public Budget. São Paulo Programs 61 H. Agricultural Knowledge Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Portal da Transparência Capacitacao Resources for the Secretary - Governo do agents from training of extension of Estado de São Mill Rs 0 0 0 0 0 agriculture workers who promote Agriculture Paulo (www. paulista agriculture in São Paulo. and Supply transparencia. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del São Paulo https://www. Mobilizacao Resources for the Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. assist.Tec. promotion of rural of br/ Ext.Rural / extension activities and Mill Rs 0 0 0 0 0 Agriculture Portal da technical knowledge transfer and and Supply Transparência assistance technical assistance. - Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del São Paulo https://www. Resources for the Secretary agricultura.sp.gov. Assist.Tecnica/ promotion of rural of br/ extensao rural extension activities and Mill Rs 65 73 67 45 8 Agriculture Portal da sustentavel knowledge transfer and and Supply Transparência technical assistance. - Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) TOTAL Mill 295 294 270 234 212 Agricultural Rs Knowledge 62 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector Infrastructure development and maintenance Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del São Paulo https://www. Resources for the Secretary of Melhor caminho agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill maintenance and Agriculture 27 53 8 5 0 / mejo camino Portal da Rs construction of rural roads. and Supply Transparência - Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Resources for the operation Abasteciemiento del of the Institute of Lands São Paulo of the State of São Paulo https://www. Ministry of Administração – “José Gomes da Silva” – agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill Agriculture 19 17 16 15 15 geral - itesp (ITESP), responsible for the Portal da Rs and Supply planning and execution of Transparência - the agrarian and land policy Governo do Estado of the state of São Paulo. de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Resources for the Portal Secretaria maintenance and de Agricultura y installation, configuration, Abasteciemiento del operation, management São Paulo and technical support of https://www. Manutencao e Wi-Fi networks with public Secretary of agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill expansao da rede Internet access, in the Agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 Portal da Rs internet governo regions and neighborhoods and Supply Transparência - of São Paulo, providing Governo do Estado an entire infrastructure, de São Paulo (www. services, equipment and transparencia. link for Internet access in sp.gov.br) each of these locations. Portal Secretaria The Rural Routes Program de Agricultura y looks into the interior of the Abasteciemiento del state of São Paulo and uses São Paulo information and geolocation https://www. technologies to promote Secretary of ROTAS RURAIS / agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill integration between the Agriculture 0 0 0 0 10 RURAL ROADS Portal da Rs various sectors, offering more and Supply Transparência - efficient services to the rural Governo do Estado population through a remote de São Paulo (www. access platform shared with transparencia. the state’s municipalities. sp.gov.br) Annex 2. State Public Budget. São Paulo Programs 63 Infrastructure development and maintenance Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Applications include coded Portal Secretaria address assignment, de Agricultura y availability of logistics Abasteciemiento del maps, and interactive São Paulo routers that will enable the https://www. rapid localization of rural Secretary of ROTAS RURAIS / agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill properties and their access Agriculture 0 0 0 0 10 RURAL ROADS Portal da Rs routes, promoting mobility, and Supply Transparência - connectivity, security, health Governo do Estado education, public and private de São Paulo (www. services, more efficient transparencia. public services, and social sp.gov.br) policy transformation. Resources for the program in which the areas subject to land regularization are identified and titles of Portal Secretaria ownership, dominion and de Agricultura y legitimation of lands are Abasteciemiento del granted, according to the São Paulo legal situation of each https://www. area indicated by the Ministry of REGULARIZA- agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill mayors and without any Agriculture 1 0 0 45 52 ÇÃO FUNDIÁRIA Portal da Rs charge to the beneficiaries, and Supply Transparência - in general. Residents in Governo do Estado areas with low Human de São Paulo (www. Development Index (HDI). transparencia. Regularization provides sp.gov.br) development, citizenship, income generation, legal security for families, and collection for municipalities. Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento del Resources for the São Paulo maintenance and https://www. RURAIS Secretary of construction of rural road agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill BRIDGES / Agriculture 1 0 0 0 0 infrastructures with an Portal da Rs RURAL BRIDGES and Supply impact on the promotion Transparência - of agricultural production. Governo do Estado de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) 64 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector Infrastructure development and maintenance Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Resources for the technical assistance program for quilombola families, distributed in 14 municipalities. There are 36 communities recognized as remnants of quilombos by the Government of the State Portal Secretaria of São Paulo, six of them de Agricultura y already titled on state public Abasteciemiento del lands. In which the training São Paulo REGULATION of the beneficiaries of the https://www. AND Ministry of quilombola communities agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill SUPPORT FOR Agriculture 50 49 49 6 3 is promoted with public Portal da Rs QUILOMBOLA and Supply development policies in Transparência - FAMILIES agricultural activities, forest Governo do Estado management, artisanal de São Paulo (www. production, marketing, transparencia. infrastructure, actions in the sp.gov.br) areas of health, education, social management, environment and tourism, with the promotion of the generation of income of the quilombolas and respecting their traditions. Alliance created between the Portal Secretaria Comprehensive Technical de Agricultura y Assistance Coordination Abasteciemiento del (CATI) and Embrapa, São Paulo which aims to disseminate, https://www. Ministry of RURAL encourage and support the agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill Agriculture 3 2 1 1 1 SANITATION construction of septic tanks Portal da Rs and Supply and wells in a simple and Transparência - economical way, with the Governo do Estado aim of providing drinking de São Paulo (www. water and reducing the transparencia. risk of contamination. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria TRANSFERS Several transfers destined de Agricultura y FOR MUNICIPAIS for specific actions in Ministry of Abasteciemiento del Mill FACILITIES agrarian matters of Agriculture 3 2 1 1 1 São Paulo Rs (LOCAL the municipalities that and Supply https://www. GOVERNMENT) make up the State. agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Annex 2. State Public Budget. São Paulo Programs 65 Infrastructure development and maintenance Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Portal da Several transfers destined Transparência - for specific actions in Governo do Estado Mill agrarian matters of 3 2 1 1 1 de São Paulo (www. Rs the municipalities that transparencia. make up the State. sp.gov.br) Portal Secretaria Partnership with de Agricultura y Municipalities to offer Abasteciemiento del better options and ways São Paulo to mitigate the effects of PARCERIAS COM https://www. climate extremes and the Ministry of MUNICÍPIOS / agricultura.sp.gov.br/ Mill vulnerability of agriculture Agriculture 4 5 1 5 13 MUNICIPAL Portal da Rs and the environment and Supply GOVERNMENTS Transparência - to climate adversities Governo do Estado and is aimed at farmers, de São Paulo (www. extension workers and transparencia. society in general. sp.gov.br) TOTAL Infrastructure Development Mill 108 129 75 77 94 and Maintenance Rs M. Miscellaneous Program Description Secretary Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Portal Secretaria de Agricultura y Abasteciemiento In order to support del São Paulo rural producers https://www. POUPATEMPO in registering Secretary of agricultura.sp.gov. DO RURAL and issuing Agriculture br/ Mill Rs 1.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRODUCER/ documents such and Supply Portal da DOCUMENTATION as sales invoices Transparência - (simplification Governo do Estado of procedures) de São Paulo (www. transparencia. sp.gov.br) Total Mill Rs 1 0 0 0 0 Miscelllaneous 66 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector ANNEX 3. BUDGET EXERCISED BY SÃO PAULO STATE PROGRAM (OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT) Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Resources for the acquisition of equipment and supplies for the agroecological transition and modernization of organic production, such as: sheep pump, water wheel, weather vane, hydraulic pump, biodigester, cistern Secretary of and/or well, solar and wind energy Agriculture and production systems, capture, Supply storage, treatment and distribution https://www. of rainwater and other sources, agricultura.sp.gov. STIMULUS TO gray and black water treatment br/ ORGANIC/ ORGANIC systems, protection systems for Portal da Mrs. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AGROECOLOGY solar and rain screens, drip or Transparência AND PRODUCTION micro-spray irrigation systems, - Governo do facilities for systematizing and Estado de São multiplying seedlings and seeds Paulo suitable for sustainable organic www. production, and facilities and transparencia. equipment for the production of sp.gov.br organic fertilizers and pesticides, which may include expenses with laboratory analysis in the amount of the financing, water concession procedures and georeferencing and certification process. Secretary of Agriculture and Interested São Paulo producers Supply should seek an insurance broker https://www. to apply for the subsidy through agricultura.sp.gov. insurers accredited in the br/ SUBVENCAO DO contracting of rural insurance. The Portal da PREMIUM DO Mrs. 27.65 38.02 42.88 1.66 0.00 benefit will be granted through the Transparência RURAL INSURANCE insurers, deducting from the rural - Governo do insurance premium paid by the Estado de São producer the amount corresponding Paulo to the value of the state subsidy. www. transparencia. sp.gov.br The activity carried out by CATI, through the Department of Seeds, Secretary of Seedlings and Matrices (DSMM), SOURCING OF Agriculture and develops and uses cutting-edge SEEDLINGS AND Supply technologies to offer farmers in Mrs. 10.22 7.72 5.20 3.02 4.17 MOLTS / SEEDS https://www. the state of São Paulo and other AND SEEDLINGS agricultura. states of the Federation seeds with sp.gov.br/ a guarantee of genetic, physical, physiological and sanitary quality. Annex 3. Budget Exercised by São Paulo State Program (Other Direct Support) 67 Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 The activity carried out by CATI, through the Department of Seeds, Seedlings and Matrices (DSMM), develops and uses cutting-edge technologies to offer farmers in the state of São Paulo and other Portal da states of the Federation seeds with Transparência a guarantee of genetic, physical, SOURCING OF - Governo do physiological and sanitary quality. SEEDLINGS AND Estado de São The basic and certified material Mrs. 10.22 7.72 5.20 3.02 4.17 MOLTS / SEEDS Paulo resulting from the multiplications, AND SEEDLINGS www. within the formally established transparencia. production system, results in sp.gov.br selected seeds, which present the advantages of physical and varietal purity, genetic purity, high rates of vigor and germination, uniformity of size and guarantee of non-propagation of diseases. The São Paulo Agribusiness Secretary of Expansion Fund (feap) -Banagro, Agriculture and linked to the Ministry of Agriculture Supply and Supply - SAA, aims to provide https://www. financial support in programs agricultura.sp.gov. and projects of interest to the br/ SUBVENCAO AOS economy of the State of São Portal da PRODUTORES Mrs. $64.03 28.65 0.38 40.91 59.05 Paulo, to farmers, ranchers and Transparência RURAIS-FEAP artisanal fishermen, as well as to - Governo do their associations and cooperatives Estado de São of rural producers, in the form of Paulo financing programs, lines of credit www. or economic subsidies, including transparencia. the equalization of interest rates. sp.gov.br Secretary of Agriculture and Supply https://www. Granting of credits with reduced agricultura.sp.gov. interest, for rural producers with an br/ RURAL CREDIT agricultural income limit intended Portal da FOR EXPANSAO for private rural producers, rural Mrs. 21.13 12.27 0.27 1.43 167.65 Transparência AND INVESTMENT producers with a legal entity - Governo do and for associations and/or Estado de São cooperatives of rural producers. Paulo www. transparencia. sp.gov.br 68 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Developed through a set of actions and services provided by the Comprehensive Technical Assistance Coordination through Secretary of units that provide technical Agriculture and assistance and training to farmers Supply and ranchers in the CATI Peasant https://www. Houses and Regional Commissions, MOBILIZACAO agricultura.sp.gov. where agronomists, zootechnicians, ASSIST.TEC.EXT. br/ sociologists and veterinarians RURAL /TECHNICAL Portal da inform and guide rural producers Mrs. 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASSISTANCE/ Transparência in the conduct of their agricultural EXTENSAO RURAL - Governo do businesses, as well as public SUSTENTAVEL Estado de São policy agents and executors of Paulo specific projects. Complementary www. support and training activities: transparencia. Field days, Demonstration sp.gov.br Units, Technology Adaptation Units - TAUs, technical visits, training courses and conferences and technical consultations. The project aimed to address the economics of ecosystems and Secretary of biodiversity, based on the premise Agriculture and of highlighting the economic Supply benefits of biodiversity, as well https://www. as the increasing socio-economic agricultura.sp.gov. cost of biodiversity loss and PRATICAS br/ ecosystem degradation and the HANDLING ONLY Portal da risks they cause to society with Mrs. 0.53 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 MITIGACAO EMIS. Transparência the loss of ecosystem services CARBON / SOIL - Governo do supply by natural and semi-natural Estado de São ecosystems. The project set out Paulo to demonstrate this context to www. help decision-makers, in different transparencia. spheres of government and sp.gov.br market, incorporate ecosystem services into their planning. Annex 3. Budget Exercised by São Paulo State Program (Other Direct Support) 69 Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 The São Paulo Social Interest Agriculture Program - PPAIS is an action of the Government of the State of São Paulo that aims to stimulate production and guarantee the commercialization of family farming products. The Program makes the State the main buyer of family farming products, improving the quality of Secretary of life of those who work in the field. Agriculture and The program for the purchase Supply of products from family farming https://www. of the Government of the State agricultura.sp.gov. of São Paulo, created in 2011, is MERC. ACCESS br/ aimed at family farmers, settlers, AGRIC.FAMILIARES Portal da quilombolas, indigenous people Mrs. 22.29 52:03 0.27 0.00 0.00 (supported Transparência and fishermen. Through it, at least businesses) - Governo do 30% of state resources allocated Estado de São to the purchase of food must Paulo be allocated to the purchase of www. products from family farming. To transparencia. participate, family farmers must sp.gov.br go to the Houses of Agriculture and to the settlers and quilombolas at any office of the São Paulo State Land Institute Foundation (Itesp) and request the Declaration of Conformity with the PPAIS (DCONP). In possession of the document, they must be aware of the opening of Public Calls for the acquisition of products. Secretary of Agriculture and Supply The Agricultural Soil Use, https://www. Conservation and Preservation agricultura.sp.gov. PRACTICAL Inspection aims to constantly br/ MANAGEMENT monitor the agricultural areas of Portal da ONLY MITIGACAO Mrs. 0.53 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 the State of São Paulo, in order Transparência CARBON / SOIL to minimize existing erosive - Governo do EMISSIONS processes, which most often occur Estado de São at levels above tolerable levels. Paulo www. transparencia. sp.gov.br 70 ENHANCING BRAZIL’S AGRICULTURE SUPPORT: Policies for a Competitive, Green, and Inclusive Agrifood Sector Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 The project aimed to address the economics of ecosystems Secretary of and biodiversity, starting from Agriculture and the premise of highlighting the Supply economic benefits of biodiversity, https://www. as well as the increasing socio- agricultura.sp.gov. economic cost of biodiversity loss br/ CONSERVACE OF and ecosystem degradation and Portal da SOLO, WATER AND the risks they cause to society Mrs. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.63 Transparência BIODIVERSIDE with the loss of ecosystem service - Governo do supply by natural and semi-natural Estado de São ecosystems. The project set out Paulo to demonstrate this context to www. help decision-makers, in different transparencia. spheres of government and sp.gov.br market, incorporate ecosystem services into their planning. The objective of the protocol is to support and enable the gradual process of change from the conventional production system to an agroecosystem, in accordance with the principles of Agroecology Secretary of in rural, urban and peri-urban Agriculture and areas of the State of São Paulo. Supply At the production sites, a checklist https://www. is applied that will compose the agricultura.sp.gov. STIMULUS TO Agroecological Transition Plan br/ ORGANIC/ ORGANIC based on the guidelines of the Portal da Mrs. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AGROECOLOGY protocol. Each group of farmers Transparência AND PRODUCTION has technical support to guide the - Governo do improvement of agri-environmental Estado de São practices, as well as to evaluate Paulo and monitor compliance with the www. Transition Plan. With the aim transparencia. of preparing the various rural sp.gov.br extension institutions of the state to support the agroecological transition in the different territories of São Paulo, carrying out training and rural extension activities. Annex 3. Budget Exercised by São Paulo State Program (Other Direct Support) 71 Program/Action Description Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Secretary of Agriculture and Supply https://www. agricultura.sp.gov. State resources to promote br/ the production and use of Portal da BIOCOMBUSTÍVEIS Mrs. 0.00 0.02 0.05 1.60 11,68 biofuels within the framework Transparência of national policy. - Governo do Estado de São Paulo www. transparencia. sp.gov.br ANNEX 4. BUDGET EXERCISED FOR CONSUMPTION SUBSIDIES OF THE STATE OF SÃO PAULO Support Origin Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 INTEGRATED ACOES www. DE EDUCACAO transparencia. Mill Rs 0 0 0 118 123 ALIMENTAR (pessoal sp.gov.br and commissions) Expenses of the www. Government of transparencia. Mill Rs 572 685 .699 449 672 São Paulo sp.gov.br POPULAR www. RESTAURANTS/ transparencia. Mill Rs 77 83 94 145 169 BOM PRATO sp.gov.br Total Mill Rs 649 .768 792 713 964