Indicadores de desempeño y programas de desarrollo rural en México / Performance indicators and rural development programs in Mexico

Abstract

Se analizan los aportes de la Metodologia de Marco Logico (MML) y de la Matriz de Indicadores de Resultados (MIR), al diseno de indicadores en los programas de desarrollo rural en Mexico. La MML es un instrumento conceptual y metodologico con importantes implicaciones en el ambito de las competencias del Sector Publico. Es producto de la Gestion por Resultados (GPR) y del Sistema de Evaluacion del Desempeno (SED) orientados a flexibilizar estructuras y procesos para mejorar la accion del gobierno. El SED se adopto en Mexico en 2006 y sus repercusiones en la operacion de los distintos programas de indole social y economica, han sido clave para la medicion de metas y objetivos publicos en un territorio, como el rural, que se ha caracterizado por la marginacion y la pobreza. La principal conclusion es que, aun bajo un esquema como el SED, los usos politicos y otras fallas de gestion, siguen presentes y pueden debilitarlo, pero tambien, que la MML ha contribuido de manera importante a fortalecer la estructura interna de los programas dando claridad a los fines, propositos, componentes y actividades a traves del diseno de indicadores. En consecuencia, metodologicamente, es una herramienta mas avanzada que otras formas de gestion publica. \nAbstract \nThe contributions of the Logical Framework Methodology (LFM) and the Results Indicator Matrix (RIM) to the design of indicators in rural development programs in Mexico are analyzed. The LFM is a conceptual and methodological instrument with important implications for the competencies of the public sector. It is the product of Results-Based Management (RBM) and the Performance Evaluation System (PES), aimed at making structures and processes more flexible in order to improve government action. The PES was adopted in Mexico in 2006 and its impact on the operation of the different social and economic programs has been key to measuring of public goals and objectives in a territory such as rural areas, which have been characterized by marginalization and poverty. The main conclusion is that, even under a scheme such as the PES, political uses and other management failures are still present and can weaken it, but also, that the LFM has contributed significantly to strengthen the internal structure of programs by giving clarity to the aims, purposes, components and activities through the design of indicators. Consequently, methodologically, it is a more advanced tool than other forms of public management