Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:42:14.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Avoiding Governors: The Success of Bolsa Família

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Tracy Beck Fenwick
Tracy Beck Fenwick*
Affiliation:
St. Antony's College, University of Oxford
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The central hypothesis derived in this article is that the ability of Brazil's central government to bypass governors determined the success of delivering public goods federation-wide in the area of noncontributory social protection policy. The Workers' Party's (Partido dos Trabalhadores) first-term administration from 2003 to 2006 successfully reformed, expanded, and implemented four previously existing cash-transfer programs designed to alleviate poverty. The central administration's flagship program Bolsa Família was implemented in all of Brazil's municipalities, delivering benefits to more than 11 million households. A nonmajoritarian political system, the constitutional autonomy of municipalities, and the gradual hardening of post-1995 subnational budget constraints facilitated the ability of the central government to live up to the aspirations and expectations of the Brazilian public by combating hunger, poverty, and misery through this program. This article shows these institutional factors to have provided incentives for successful central-local collaboration in this social policy area.

Resumo

Resumo

Este artigo defende a hipótese de que o sucesso na concessão de benefícios sociais não-contributivos no Brasil foi determinado pela capacidade do governo federal em evitar os governadores. A administração petista no período 2003–2006 reformou, ampliou e implementou com sucesso quatro programas de transferência de renda desenhados para reduzir a pobreza. O programa mais importante do governo federal, denominado Bolsa Família, foi implementado em todas as cidades brasileiras, atingindo mais de 11 milhões de famílias. A capacidade do governo federal em satisfazer as expectativas e os desejos dos brasileiros no que diz respeito ao combate à fome, à pobreza e à miséria por meio desse programa foi determinada por um modelo de governo consensual, pela autonomia constitucional dos municípios e pelas restrições orçamentárias no plano subnacional após o ano 1995. Neste artigo mostra que estes aspectos institucionais contribuíram para a bem-sucedida cooperação governo federal/municípios nesse setor da política social.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , 2009 , pp. 102 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 by the Latin American Studies Association

Footnotes

*

The research in this article was funded by the Centre for Brazilian Studies and the Latin American Centre at the University of Oxford, whose support I appreciate. Thanks also to Anthony Hall, Natália Sátyro, Celina Souza, Argelina Figueiredo, and Aaron Schneider for suggestions and corrections on an earlier version of this paper presented at the workshop “State Politics and Institutions in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Brazil” at the Centre for Brazilian Studies, Oxford, December 1, 2005. Last, thanks to my supervisors Laurence Whitehead and Timothy Power for comments and to Oswaldo Amaral for encouragement and suggestions on the final draft, plus the three anonymous LARR reviewers for their helpful insights and excellent feedback.

References

Abranches, Sergio Hudson 1988 “Presidencialismo de coalizão: O dilemma institucional brasileiro.” Dados 31 (1): 5–38.Google Scholar
Abrucio, Fernando Luiz 1998 Os barões da federação. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo.Google Scholar
Abrucio, Fernando Luiz 2005 “A coordenação federativa no Brasil.” Revista Sociología Política 24:41–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrucio, Fernando, and Samuels, David 2000 “The New Politics of Governors.” Publius 30 (2): 43–62.Google Scholar
Afonso, Jose Roberto Rodriques 2006 “Novos desafios à decentralizacão fiscal no Brasil.” Paper presented at Semenario Regional de Política Fiscal, Santiago, Chile, January 23–26, 2006.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry 1995 “Electoral Rules, Constituency Pressures, and Pork Barrel: Bases of Voting in the Brazilian Congress.” Journal of Politics 57 (2): 324–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ames, Barry 2001 The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil, Interests, Identities, and Institutions in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry, and Power, Timothy forthcoming “Party Systems and Governability in Brazil.” In Political Parties in Transitional Democracies, edited by Webb, P., White, S., and Stansfield, D. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Amorim Neto, Octavio 2007 “Algumas conseqüências políticas de Lula.” In Instituiões representativas no Brasil, edited by Nicolau, J., and Power, T. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Universitario de Pesquisas do Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Ananias, Patrus 2006 Personal interview by the author, January 22, São Paulo.Google Scholar
Armijo, Leslie Elliot, Faucher, Phillipe, and Dembrinska, Magdalena 2006 “Compared to What? Assessing Brazil's Political Institutions.” Comparative Political Studies 39 (6): 759–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arretche, Marta 2000 Estado federativo e políticas sociais: Determinantes da descentralização. São Paulo: Revan.Google Scholar
Bednar, Jenna, Eskridge, William, and Ferejohn, John 2001 “A Political Theory of Federalism.” In Constitutional Culture and Democratic Rules, edited by Ferejohn, J. A., Rakove, J. N., and Riley, J., 223–245. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvo, Ernesto, and Medina, Juan Abal 2001 El federalismo electoral argentino. Buenos Aires: Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Castro, Maria Helena 2005 “Política social no Brasil: Continuidades e mudanças.” Paper presented at Brasil y Chile: Una mirada hacia América Latina, Santiago, Chile, July 11–12..Google Scholar
Cheibub, José, and Limongi, Fernando 2002 “Democratic Institutions and Regime Survival.” Annual Review of Political Science 5:151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickovick, Tyler 2006 “Municipalization as a Central Government Strategy: Central-Regional-Local Politics in Peru, Brazil, and South Africa.” Publius 37 (1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickovick, Tyler, and Eaton, Kent 2004 “The Politics of Re-Centralization in Argentina and Brazil.” Latin American Research Review 39 (1): 90–122.Google Scholar
Dimenstein, Gilberto 2006 “Malandragem do Bolsa Família.” Folha de São Paulo, April 4, 2006.Google Scholar
Draibe, Sonia 2004 “Social Policy Reform.” In Reforming Brazil, edited by Font, M. and Spanakos, P., 71–93. Oxford, UK: Lexington.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent 2004 Politics beyond the Capital: The Design Subnational Institutions in South America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausto, Boris, and Devoto, Fernando 2004 Brasil e Argentina, 1850–2002. São Paulo: Editora 34.Google Scholar
Figueiredo, Argelina, and Limongi, Fernando 1999 Executivo e legislativo na nova ordem constitucional. Rio de Janeiro: Fundacão Gétulio Vargas.Google Scholar
Filippov, Mikhail, Ordeshook, Peter C., and Shvetsova, Olga 2004 Designing Federalism: A Theory of Self-Sustainable Federal Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fonseca, Ana 2007 Personal telephone interview by the author, February 22, Brasilia.Google Scholar
Fundacão Gétulio Vargas 2006 Miséria, desigualdade, e estabilidade: O segundo real. São Paulo: Fundacão Gétulio Vargas.Google Scholar
Garman, Christopher, Haggard, Stephan, and Willis, Eliza 1999 “The Politics of Decentralization in Latin America.” Latin American Research Review 34 (1): 7–56.Google Scholar
Gibson, Edward L. 2004 “Federalism and Democracy: Theoretical Connection and Cautionary Insights.” In Federalism and Democracy in Latin America, edited by Gibson, Edward L., 1–28. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Wendy, and Power, Tim 2007 “Rewarding Lula: Executive Power, Social Policy, and the Brazilian Elections of 2006.” Latin American Politics and Society 49 (1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IBOPE (Instituto Brasileira de Opinão e Pesquisa) 2002 Pesquisa de Opinão Publica, Survey No. 558/570. Accessed November 7, 2007, at http://www2.ibope.com.br.Google Scholar
Instituto de Pesquisa Econômico Applicada 2005 “Dados macoreconômicos e regionais.” Accessed December 5, 2006, at http://www.ipeadata.gov.br.Google Scholar
Inter-American Development Bank 2006 “The Politics of Policies.” Economic and Social Progress in Latin America 2006 Report. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Laakso, M., and Taagepera, R. 1979 “Effective Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe.” Comparative Political Studies 12 (1): 3–28.Google Scholar
Lamounier, Bolivar 1993 “Institutional Structure and Governability in the 1990s” In Brazil, the Challenges of the 1990s, edited by Kinzo, Maria D'Alva, 117–138. London: British Academic Press.Google Scholar
Leal, Victor Nunes 1949 Coronelismo, enxada e voto. São Paulo: Nova Fronteira.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend 2008 Thinking about Democracy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott 1991 “Politicians, Parties, and Electoral Systems: Brazil in Comparative Perspective.” Comparative Politics 24 (1): 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott 1995 “Democracy in Brazil and the Southern Cone: Achievements and Problems.” Journal of Inter-American Studies and World Affairs 37 (1): 113–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Liñán, Aníbal Pérez 1997 “Party Discipline in the Brazilian Constitutional Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 22 (4): 453–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Samuels, David 2004 “Strong Federalism, Constraints on the Central Government.” In Federalism and Democracy in Latin America, edited by Gibson, Edward L., 85–130. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Mainwaring Scott, Timothy R. Scully, and Cullell, Jorge Vargas 2007 “Measuring Success in Democratic Governance.” Mimeo, September.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. H. 2006 “Citizenship and Social Class.” In The Welfare State Reader, edited by Pierson, Christopher and Castles, Francis G. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
MDS (Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome) Brasília. Accessed at http://www.mds.gov.br (data received by email).Google Scholar
Mendoza, Enrique, Rodríguez, Victoria, and Ward, Peter 1999 New Federalism and State Government in Mexico: Bringing the States Back In. Austin: Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Meneguello, Rachel 2006 “Quem apoiá o presidente?” Paper presented at Latin American Studies Association conference, September 5–8, Montreal.Google Scholar
Montero, Alfred, and Samuels, David, eds. 2004 Decentralization and Democracy in Latin America. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Nicolau, Jairo 2006 Electoral databases. Accessed November 10, 2006, at http://www.jaironicolau.iuperj.br.com.Google Scholar
O'Neill, Kathleen 2005 Decentralizing the State: Elections, Parties, and Local Power in the Andes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oxhorn, Philip, Tulchin, Joseph, and Selee, Andrew, eds. 2004 Decentralization, Democratization, and Civil Society in Comparative Perspective. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Pochmann, Marcío 2005 Personal interview by the author, February 21, Campinas, Brazil.Google Scholar
Power, Timothy J. 2000 The Political Right in Postauthoritarian Brazil: Elites, Institutions, and Democratization. College Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Rezende, Fernando 2007 “Federal Republic of Brazil.” In The Practice of Fiscal Federalism, edited by Shah, A., 73–97. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1964 Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan 2004 “Comparative Federalism and Decentralization.” Comparative Politics (36) 4:481–500.Google Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan 2006 Hamilton's Paradox: The Promise and Peril of Fiscal Federalism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan, and Arretche, Marta 2004 “Legislative Bargaining and Distributive Politics in Brazil: An Empirical Approach.” Working paper, Yale University.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, Victoria, Spink, Peter, Wilson, Robert, and Ward, Peter 2006 Governance in the Americas. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Samuels, David 2003 Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, David 2008a “Brazilian Democracy under Lula and the PT.” In Constructing Democratic Governance in Latin America, 3rd ed., edited by Shifter, M. and Dominguez, J. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, David 2008b “Political Ambition, Candidate Recruitment, and Legislative Politics in Brazil.” In Pathways to Power in Latin America, edited by Morgenstern, S. and Siavelis, P. College Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Souza, Celina Maria de 1997 Constitutional Engineering in Brazil: The Politics of Federalism and Decentralization. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sposati, Aldaísa 2005 Personal interview by the author, February 22, São Paulo.Google Scholar
Strom, Kaare 1990 “A Behavioural Theory of Competitive Political Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 34 (2): 565–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suplicy, Eduardo 2002 Renda de cidadania. São Paulo: Editora Cortez.Google Scholar
Tommasi, Mariano, and Spiller, Pablo 2007 The Institutional Foundations of Public Policy in Argentina. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George 1995 “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism.” British Journal of Political Science 25 (3): 289–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veja 2006 “Dividir para governar.” September 6, 2006, 64–66.Google Scholar
Wibbels, Eric 2006 Federalism and the Market: Intergovernmental Conflict and Economic Reform in the Developing World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar