In the last quarter of the twentieth century, both Argentina and Brazil decentralized their governments. Both countries also started this process with similar institutions of intergovernmental relations and in the context of military regimes. However, whereas the military in Argentina took an administrative decentralization measure first (ie., the transfer of primary level education from the central government to the provinces), the Brazilian military began the process of decentralization with a political measure (the reinstallation of the direct popular election of governors). The article shows that different types of militarism, in particular the different ways in which the military occupied the state apparatus and controlled the political system, explain the occurrence of opposite initial steps in the decentralization process. Such different beginnings led ultimately to varying degrees of autonomy for governors and mayors. Thus, by the end of the century, Brazilian governors and mayors had gained significantly more autonomy than their counterparts in Argentina. Adapted from the source document.
Both advocates and critics of decentralization assume that decentralization invariably increases the power of subnational governments. However, a closer examination of the consequences of decentralization across countries reveals that the magnitude of such change can range from substantial to insignificant. In this article, I propose asequential theory of decentralizationthat has three main characteristics: (1) it defines decentralization as aprocess, (2) it takes into account theterritorial interestsof bargaining actors, and (3) it incorporatespolicy feedback effects. I argue that the sequencing of different types of decentralization (fiscal, administrative, and political) is a key determinant of the evolution of intergovernmental balance of power. I measure this evolution in the four largest Latin American countries and apply the theory to the two extreme cases (Colombia and Argentina). I show that, contrary to commonly held opinion, decentralization does not necessarily increase the power of governors and mayors.
Latin American development : perspectives and debates / Maristella Svampa -- Fiscal policy, income redistribution, and poverty reduction in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay : an overview / Nora Lustig and Claudiney Pereira -- Social investment in Latin America / Evelyne Huber and John D. Stephens -- Debt, democracy, and post-neoliberalism : thirty years of regional integration in Latin America / A]Isabella Alcaiz -- Mercosur and regional migration : a human rights approach / Marcela Cerrutti -- Venezuela between two states / George Ciccariello-Maher -- From partial to full conflict theory : A neo-Weberian portrait of post-neoliberal Venezuela / David Smilde -- Populism or democracy? : reexamining the role of "the people" in twenty-first century Latin American politics / Paulina Ochoa Espejo -- Constitutional changes and judicial power in Latin America / Roberto Gargarella -- Agents of neoliberalism? : high courts, legal preferences, and rights in Latin America / Sandra Botero -- Experimenting with participation and deliberation in Latin America : is democracy turning pragmatic? / Thamy Pogrebinschi -- The Gattopardo Era : innovation and representation in Mexico in post- neoliberal times / Gisela Zaremberg, Ernesto Isunza Vera, and Adrian Gurza Lavalle -- Anti-imperial, but not decolonial? : Vasconcelos on race and Latin American identity / Juliet Hooker -- Decolonization and plurinationality / Oscar Vega Camacho -- Postwar El Salvador : entangled aftermaths / Irina Carlota (Lotti) Silber
In the early twenty-first century, the citizens of many Latin American countries, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Venezuela, elected left-wing governments, explicitly rejecting and attempting to reverse the policies of neoliberal structural economic adjustment that had prevailed in the region during the 1990s. However, in other countries such as Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru continuity and even extension of the neoliberal agenda have been the norm.What were the consequences of rejecting the neoliberal consensus in Latin America? Why did some countries stay on the neoliberal course? Contributors to Latin America Since the Left Turn address these questions and more as they frame the tensions and contradictions that currently characterize Latin American societies and politics. Divided into three sections, the book begins with an examination of the political economy, from models of development, to taxation and spending patterns, to regionalization of trade and human migration. The second section analyzes the changes in democracy and political identities. The last part explores the themes of citizenship, constitutionalism, and new forms of civic participation. With essays by the foremost scholars in the field, Latin America Since the Left Turn not only delves into the cases of specific countries but also surveys the region as a whole.Contributors: Isabella Alcañiz, Sandra Botero, Marcella Cerrutti, George Ciccariello-Maher, Tula G. Falleti, Roberto Gargarella, Adrian Gurza Lavalle, Juliet Hooker, Evelyne Huber, Ernesto Isunza Vera, Nora Lustig, Paulina Ochoa Espejo, Emilio A. Parrado, Claudiney Pereira, Thamy Pogrebinschi, Irina Carlota Silber, David Smilde, John D. Stephens, Maristella Svampa, Oscar Vega Camacho, Gisela Zaremberg.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext: