SchlegelThe centralization of policy decision-making in the Brazilian political imagination

Ipsa Summer School 2010 Course: Qualitative Methods and Research Design - Proposed research design 1

The centralization of policy decision-making

in the Brazilian political imagination

Rogerio Schlegel

ABSTRACT

The Brazilian federation has undergone a remarkable centralization of regulatory authority

since the previous decade, a process that can also be described as growing coordination of

public policies by the federal government. The fact that this takes place during a period of

democratic rule contradicts the conventional wisdom about federative dynamics in the country

democratic regimes are expected to decentralize authority. The purpose of this study is to assess

in what extent the support for decision-making centralization has prevailed in the Brazilian

political imagination and if this paradigm is linked to a possible mistrust of local authorities. The

main aim is to discuss the policy benchmark that might have influenced the design of the

federation and of intergovernmental relations, assuming that ideas are relevant to institutional

change. Taking into account recent developments in the field, pointing to the complementary

roles played by elites and the broader public in building institutions, the research will be

conducted in two fronts: analysis of 20th centurys books that influenced the national political

thought, looking for policy paradigms expressed by a relevant section of the intellectual elite;

secondary analysis of surveys with the Brazilian population, conducted as remotely in time as

possible, to investigate the normative orientation of the public in terms of federal arrangements.

1 THEORETICAL FRAME AND JUSTIFICATION

The support for centralized policy decision-making and the mistrust of local politicians

appeared in previous studies as potential hypotheses to explain some of their findings (Almeida

and Carneiro, 2003; Almeida, 2005; Arretche, 2009). However, no research has taken them as its

main theme so far.

To what extent the character of the Brazilian federation, with the center having a

prominent role in coordinating policies, is in line with the Brazilian public preferences? Has this

centralized arrangement been desired and conceived after the propositions of the authoritarian

thinkers of the 1920s? The axes authoritarianism-democracy and centralization-decentralization

are perceived as independent in the Brazilian political imagination? Distinguishing right to decide


and right to act will help to better understand shifts in Brazilian federation design? This project

aims at fostering knowledge that helps advancing answers to these questions.

Although still underexplored in Brazil, research on the role of ideas in institutional

development is getting higher in the agenda of Political Science studies (Faria, 2003; Capella,

2005). Under the umbrella represented by expression "ideas", analysts have gathered quite

different concepts such as language, speeches, knowledge, symbols and images that express

identities, solutions to public problems, frameworks and worldviews, and values, subjective norms

and ideologies. They have in common their character as cognitive structures with influence on

institutional development as a weapon for persuasion, a mobilizing factor or a justification for

advocacy, just to mention a few examples of the roles investigated. The list of Social Science

works associating ideas and institutional change is wide and in the rise (for a recent account, see

Bland and Cox, 2010).

In this study, the featured ideas are the principles that worked as policy benchmarks. It is

widely accepted that ideas provide the framework for dealing with public issues. The way a

problem is perceived might take it into the government agenda or make it seems invisible to

authorities. In the market of solutions, one is understood as suitable, the other is not even if

both are viable. But beyond that, there are ideas or cluster of ideas that serve as benchmark in

several points of institutional development. They are values, beliefs, preferences, perceptions

that inform what is acceptable and desirable in terms of public policy and institutional design

they even help building the identity of relevant agents. The policy benchmark is a normative

framework used by political actors, defined through dynamics that take place at the discursive

environment of society (Hall, 1989; Jobert and Muller, 1987; Muller, 2003).

This project will analyze members of the intellectual elites works and opinions of the

wider public because both are relevant to define policy paradigms. To Jobert and Muller (1987),

members of the elite are mediators actors capable of transforming an impenetrable socio-

economic reality into a consistent programme for political action. Mediators do not define the

paradigm themselves; there is rather a collective process in which power struggles and other

forms of confrontation take place within the wider social environment. In the model of multiple

streams of Kingdon (2003), academics and analysts are among the policy experts responsible for

formulating potentially viable alternatives. In other stages of the policy process, these ideas must

be disseminated to the general public in order to build their support. Public opinion is decisive in

shaping what the author calls the national mood", which can determine whether a given

alternative is forgotten or goes to the top of government agenda.


Approaches called "interactive", investigating top-down and bottom-up moves, have

become increasingly usual in studies on the development of institutions (Sanders, 2006: 44).

They are seen as a way to overcome visions that assign agency exclusively to high-profile actors

such as presidents, judges, senior bureaucrats and members of intellectual and business elites

taking into consideration mass publics, social movements and advocacy groups too.

1.1 What centralization means?

The relevance of discussing normative orientations behind the policy decision-making

centralization also lies on the fundamental role this theme plays in contemporary debates. In

Brazil, the opposition centralization-decentralization and considerations on the power of

governors have been hot spots in policy analysis. Many Brazilian studies aim at gauging in what

extent the federation is centralized or decentralized (e.g. Campbell, 1992; Almeida, 2001; Souza,

1997; Abrucio, 1998; Stepan, 1999; Arretche, 2005; Almeida, 2005).

The federal structure is considered one of the most important features of the Brazilian

political process, with impact on partisan and electoral dynamics, state reform and social policy

design, for instance. According to the prevailing view, there is an evident association between

federation arrangements and levels of democracy in the country. Centralization would

characterize authoritarian regimes such as Estado Novo dictatorship and the military coup that

seized power in 1964 and decentralization would be a trace of democratic regimes such as

Repblica Velha and the democratic era initiated in 1946.

This framework applies to the 1988s Constitution, a milestone in the most recent

democratization process, but not necessarily to what came after it. Important institutional changes

of the 1990s and 2000s represent moves toward centralization, in spite of democratic

consolidation. As a whole, they have in common the concentration of policy decision-making and

of regulatory power at the national level.

As Arretche (2009) highlights, a recent development in comparative analysis offers a

conceptual tool to better understand the Brazilian federation trajectory: the differentiation between

right to decide and right to act two dimensions related but distinct, especially useful to assess

the degree of dispersion of authority between different levels of government1. The first describes

1 Contemporary research increasingly applies this distinction, albeit with diverse terminology. Other authors

use the terms "policy decision-making" to refer to the right to decide and "policy-making" for policy implementation or for the whole process involving public policies (Obinger, Liebfried and Castles, 2005; Sellers and Lidstrom, 2007; Arretche, 2009). Rodden (2005) defines three dimensions of authority in which decentralization could be observed: fiscal authority, political authority and policy management authority. The first concerns the distribution of tax collection and expenditures among levels of government, the


authorities capable of regulating policies, the second refers to who are supposed to implement

the policies and effectively deliver the services (Braun, 2000; Keman, 2000). It's a way to refine

the knowledge on federal dynamics that goes beyond collapsing them into the centralization-

decentralization dichotomy.

Discriminating the right to decide from the right to act allows the analyst to launch a new

look at recent Brazilian history. Not every shift that was interpreted as power decentralization

necessarily involved the transfer of authority to regulate policies. Brazil would be among the

countries where state-building process was accompanied by a preference for uniform national

policies, like Germany and Austria. In this process, the dominant values in society made

uniformity prevail over claims for autonomy among subnational units (Arretche, 2009). The

contemporary Brazilian federation can be plausibly depicted as a complex arrangement in which

much of the right to decide is concentrated at the center, but the right to act is largely distributed

to constituent units.

2 DATA COLLECTION AND METHODOLOGY

The proposed research has two fronts:

a) revising, interpreting and contextualizing historically influential works of 20th centurys

Brazilian political thought;

b) obtaining and analyzing survey databases that trace back Brazilian population

orientations on public policies and federal design2.

The main objective is to detect and discuss current policy paradigms and its roots. The

study has commonalities with previous research programmes, such as that of Brando (2007:

30), which had as main ambition describing "intellectual structures and theoretical categories

under which reality is perceived, practical experience is articulated and political action is

organized. The project also focuses on texts considered the most significant among Brazil's

political diagnoses, hoping they are the most capable of revealing distinct eras political

conceptions. It also rejects idealistic approaches that take ideas as detached from their political,

social and language environment something quite different from accepting that ideas are

relevant to institutional development. But while Brando looked for "intellectual families" within

second refers to the possibility that local governments are elected directly and has their own mandate (untouchable by higher levels of government), and the third has to do with the distribution of responsibility for defining policies, in one hand, and for implementing them, in the other a variation of the concept presented here. 2 How much would be possible to go back in time is still an open question. Previous secondary analyses

were able to explore surveys on public policies conducted in Brazil in the 1940s (Lavareda, 1991) and 1950s (Cervi, 2006).


Brazilian political thought, the goal here is to discuss the policy benchmark that may have

influenced federal arrangements design.

It is worth stressing that this project uses the singular to refer to policy paradigm only to

make the exposition easier to follow. Indeed, the main working hypothesis assumes the

predominance of a stable policy benchmark, but that does not mean the research is only looking

for invariant orientations or path dependent trajectories. On the contrary, the intention is to

explore variations, spot and understand critical junctures, overruns and resilience over time.

Keeping the focus on the decision-making centralization-decentralization axis, the proposal is to

take this hypothesis as a starting point, aware that ruptures may be equally or even more relevant

than continuities. It is also useful to emphasize that, at this stage, the research ambition is not

pointing out direct causation between policy benchmark and policy development. The idea is to

detect normative guidelines that might have served as reference for political actors regarding the

federation arrangement something quite different from inferring that these principles did shape

the concrete world, what would be another investigative focus.

In the interpretation of results arising from the empirical data collection, this study is

particularly attentive to avert the potential risk of anachronism. That does not mean following the

strict view of Skinner and colleagues from Cambridge for whom the study of ideas and theories

from the past should be conducted as the observation of a foreign country, only understandable

in its historical and, over all, linguistic context. But there is always the temptation of attributing to

authors and ancient publics conceptions strange to the intellectual universe of their time. Treating

the right to decide and the right to act as separate dimensions, as suggested by the central

hypothesis, might sound natural in the light of contemporary literature, but these were alien

categories to the debates Oliveira Vianna [1883-1951] and Victor Nunes Leal [1914-1985], e.g.,

where inserted in. Taking into account the historical context and conceptual framework in which

ideas are embedded is an indispensable part of the effort to understand them. The task here is

not just "read and reread the text using an expression critically repeated by Skinner (1988)

expecting the book reveals its deep contents. It is rather a question of reconstituting the political,

social and conceptual context in which it fits.

At the same time I cannot accept the condemnation of all attempts to understand ideas

from the past as pernicious. As harmful as the risk of anachronism is that of antiquarianism. The

exegeses and commentaries also end up forming a given tradition and it is inevitable that past

research is informed by present interests (Gademer, 2004; Brando, 2007). In historical political

theory, the investigation must not be understood as having as its object "dead authors, but living


books"; the intention is precisely explain how certain works can survive their past to talk about

our present (Harlan, 1989: 609).

As Silva points out (2010: 326), this form of knowledge production is a "problem-solving

activity, in which the diversity of problems explains the diversity of methods and heuristic

techniques. This is precisely the case of the study I propose, which has the ambition to dig into

the political imagination of a century.

REFERENCES ABRUCIO, Fernando. Os bares da Federao: os governadores e a redemocratizao brasileira. So Paulo: DCP/USP/Hucitec, 1998.

ALMEIDA, Maria Hermnia Tavares de. Federalismo, democracia e governo no Brasil: idias, hipteses e evidncias. BIB, So Paulo, n 51, 2001.

______. Recentralizando a federao? Revista de Sociologia e Poltica, Curitiba, n 24, jun. 2005.

ALMEIDA, Maria Hermnia Tavares de; CARNEIRO, Leandro Piquet. Liderana local, democracia e polticas pblicas no Brasil. Opinio Pblica, Campinas, vol. 9, n 1, mai. 2003.

ARRETCHE, Marta. ______. Quem taxa e quem gasta: a barganha federativa na federao brasileira. Revista de Sociologia e Poltica, n 24: 69-86. 2005.

______. Federalism and place-equality policies: a case study of policy design and outputs. EUI Working Papers, Florena, SPS 2009/02, 2009. Disponvel em: . Acesso em: 22.12.2010.

BLAND, Daniel; COX, Robert H. Ideas and politics. In: ______. Ideas and politics in social science research. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2010.

BRANDO, Gildo Maral. Linhagens do pensamento poltico brasileiro. So Paulo: Hucitec, 2007.

BRAUN, Dietmar. The territorial division of power in comparative public policy research: na assessment. In: ______ (Ed.) Public policy and federalism. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000.

CAPELLA, Ana C. N. Perspectivas tericas sobre o processo de formulao de polticas pblicas. Paper apresentado no GT Polticas Pblicas, no 29 Encontro Anual da Anpocs (Associao Nacional de Ps-Graduao e Pesquisa em Cincias Sociais, Caxambu, outubro de 2005. Disponvel em: www.ana.pro.br/ensino/Capella%202007.pdf. Acesso em: 22.10.2010.

CERVI, Emerson U. Opinio pblica e poltica no Brasil: o que o brasileiro pensa sobre poltica e por que isso interessa democracia. Tese de doutorado, Iuperj, Rio de Janeiro, 2006.

FARIA, Carlos A. P. Ideias, conhecimento e polticas pblicas: um inventrio sucinto das principais vertentes analticas recentes. So Paulo, Revista Brasileira de Cincias Sociais, vol. 18, n 51, 2003.

GADAMER, Hans-Georg. Verdade e mtodo I. Petrpolis, RJ/Bragana, Paulista, SP, Vozes/Editora da Universidade So Francisco, 2004.


HALL, Peter A. The political power of economic ideas: Keynesianism across nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989.

JOBERT, Bruno; MULLER, Pierre. LEtat en action: politiques publique et corporatism. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1987.

KEMAN, Hans. Federalism and policy performance: a conceptual and empirical inquiry. In: WACHENDORFER-SCHMIDT, Ute (ed.) Federalism and political performance. London: Routledge, 2000.

KINGDON, John W. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: Longman, 2003.

LAVAREDA, Antnio. A democracia nas urnas: o processo partidrio-eleitoral brasileiro (1945-1964). Rio de Janeiro: Revan, 1991.

LEAL, Victor Nunes. Coronelismo, enxada e voto. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Nova Fronteira, 1997.

MELO, Marcus A. O sucesso inesperado das reformas de segunda gerao: federalismo, reformas constitucionais e poltica social. Dados, vol. 48, n 4: 845-88, 2005

MULLER, Pierre. Politiques publiques. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2003.

OBINGER, Herbert; LEIBFRIED, Stephan; CASTLES, Francis. Federalism and the welfare state. New World and European Experiences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2005.

SANDERS, Elizabeth. Historical institutionalism. The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

SCHLEGEL, Rogerio. Educao e comportamento poltico: os retornos politicos decrescentes da escolarizao brasileira recente. Tese de Doutorado. So Paulo, Departamento de Cincia Poltica da Universidade de So Paulo, 2010.

SELLERS, Jefferey M; LIDSTRM, Anders. Decentralization, local government, and welfare state. Governance, 20(4): 609-32. 2007

SKINNER, Quentin. Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas. In: TULLY, J. (ed.). Quentin Skinner and his critics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988.

SILVA, Ricardo. O contextualismo linguistico na histria do pensamento poltico: Quentin Skinner e o debate metodolgico contemporneo. Dados, Rio de Janeiro, 53(2): 299-335, 2010.

SOUZA, Celina. Constitutional engineering in Brazil: the politics of federalism and decentralization. Londres: MacMillan, 1997.

STEPAN, Alfred. Para uma nova anlise comparative do federalism e da democracia: federas que restringem e ampliam o poder do demos. Dados, 42 (2): 197-252, Rio de Janeiro, Iuperj, 1999.

Documents

SchlegelThe centralization of policy decision-making in the Brazilian political imagination