Search results

Purpose This study aims to analyze the use of discourse to solve issues related to coordination between advocacy coalitions in processes of gradual and transformative institutional change related to public policies. Design/methodology/approach Theoretical background is based on the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), new discursive institutionalism and critical discourse analysis theories. The research examines shorthand notes of public hearings held in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate between 1999 and 2012, carrying out a case study on Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant. The speech extracts were categorized according to the modes of operation of ideology and typical strategies of symbolic construction proposed by Thompson (1995). Findings The results suggest that the discourse can be an instrument of internal coordination and between coalitions that share beliefs about a policy, as in the case of Belo Monte. Potentially existing coalitions define their identities and set positions on controversial issues, aligning interests and expectations. In the case studied, the modes of operation of ideology verified as instruments of the coalitions were dissimulation, reification, fragmentation, unification and legitimation. Research limitations/implications The paper represents a unique analysis of the modes of operation of ideology (Thompson, 1999) in the case of Belo Monte. In addition, the paper aims to contribute to the New Discursive Institutionalism and to the ACF when it uses the critical discourse analysis to articulate a method to analyze the use of the Discourse by the coalitions. In fact, such an approach integrating the ACF, the New Discursive Institutionalism and the critical discourse analysis is something original. Finally, it also addresses a gap in ACF: issues related to advocacy coalition coordination. Practical implications Attentive readers linked to organizations working on infrastructure and environmental policies can benefit from the results by envisaging the deliberate manipulation of typical symbolic construction strategies and general modes of operation of ideology. Social implications The study sheds light on the daily and behind-the-scenes disputes among stakeholders who are interested in a certain public policy. It may draw attention to the access and professional use of the shorthand notes of the hearings held at the National Congress. Originality/value This paper aims to fill a gap pointed out by Jenkins-Smithet al.(2014) regarding problems of coordination of advocacy coalitions. In addition, it innovates by using critical discourse analysis as a methodological reference in ACF empirical studies. In addition, this work continues a trajectory of two other previously published studies dealing with the same phenomenon: a theoretical essay and a case study.

Abstract Purpose This study aims to analyze the use of discourse to solve issues related to coordination between advocacy coalitions in processes of gradual and transformative institutional change related to public policies. Design/methodology/approach Theoretical background is based on the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), new discursive institutionalism and critical discourse analysis theories. The research examines shorthand notes of public hearings held in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate between 1999 and 2012, carrying out a case study on Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant. The speech extracts were categorized according to the modes of operation of ideology and typical strategies of symbolic construction proposed by Thompson (1995). Findings The results suggest that the discourse can be an instrument of internal coordination and between coalitions that share beliefs about a policy, as in the case of Belo Monte. Potentially existing coalitions define their identities and set positions on controversial issues, aligning interests and expectations. In the case studied, the modes of operation of ideology verified as instruments of the coalitions were dissimulation, reification, fragmentation, unification and legitimation. Research limitations/implications The paper represents a unique analysis of the modes of operation of ideology (Thompson, 1999) in the case of Belo Monte. In addition, the paper aims to contribute to the New Discursive Institutionalism and to the ACF when it uses the critical discourse analysis to articulate a method to analyze the use of the Discourse by the coalitions. In fact, such an approach integrating the ACF, the New Discursive Institutionalism and the critical discourse analysis is something original. Finally, it also addresses a gap in ACF: issues related to advocacy coalition coordination. Practical implications Attentive readers linked to organizations working on infrastructure and environmental policies can benefit from the results by envisaging the deliberate manipulation of typical symbolic construction strategies and general modes of operation of ideology. Social implications The study sheds light on the daily and behind-the-scenes disputes among stakeholders who are interested in a certain public policy. It may draw attention to the access and professional use of the shorthand notes of the hearings held at the National Congress. Originality/value This paper aims to fill a gap pointed out by Jenkins-Smith et al. (2014) regarding problems of coordination of advocacy coalitions. In addition, it innovates by using critical discourse analysis as a methodological reference in ACF empirical studies. In addition, this work continues a trajectory of two other previously published studies dealing with the same phenomenon: a theoretical essay and a case study.

Purpose
This study aims to analyze the use of discourse to solve issues related to coordination between advocacy coalitions in processes of gradual and transformative institutional change related to public policies.


Design/methodology/approach
Theoretical background is based on the advocacy coalition framework (ACF), new discursive institutionalism and critical discourse analysis theories. The research examines shorthand notes of public hearings held in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate between 1999 and 2012, carrying out a case study on Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant. The speech extracts were categorized according to the modes of operation of ideology and typical strategies of symbolic construction proposed by Thompson (1995).


Findings
The results suggest that the discourse can be an instrument of internal coordination and between coalitions that share beliefs about a policy, as in the case of Belo Monte. Potentially existing coalitions define their identities and set positions on controversial issues, aligning interests and expectations. In the case studied, the modes of operation of ideology verified as instruments of the coalitions were dissimulation, reification, fragmentation, unification and legitimation.


Research limitations/implications
The paper represents a unique analysis of the modes of operation of ideology (Thompson, 1999) in the case of Belo Monte. In addition, the paper aims to contribute to the New Discursive Institutionalism and to the ACF when it uses the critical discourse analysis to articulate a method to analyze the use of the Discourse by the coalitions. In fact, such an approach integrating the ACF, the New Discursive Institutionalism and the critical discourse analysis is something original. Finally, it also addresses a gap in ACF: issues related to advocacy coalition coordination.


Practical implications
Attentive readers linked to organizations working on infrastructure and environmental policies can benefit from the results by envisaging the deliberate manipulation of typical symbolic construction strategies and general modes of operation of ideology.


Social implications
The study sheds light on the daily and behind-the-scenes disputes among stakeholders who are interested in a certain public policy. It may draw attention to the access and professional use of the shorthand notes of the hearings held at the National Congress.


Originality/value
This paper aims to fill a gap pointed out by Jenkins-Smith et al. (2014) regarding problems of coordination of advocacy coalitions. In addition, it innovates by using critical discourse analysis as a methodological reference in ACF empirical studies. In addition, this work continues a trajectory of two other previously published studies dealing with the same phenomenon: a theoretical essay and a case study.

Abstract This article aims to advance the discussion about the influence of knowledge and policy learning on policy change, taking the Advocacy Coalition Framework as reference. We propose unlinking the comprehension of learning through change in two perspectives. First, we suggest apprehending the relation between knowledge and policy learning, through the use of knowledge, assuming that different forms of learning are possible, depending on the context of decision-making. Then, relying on the contributions of the theory of gradual institutional change, we suggest using the notion of institutional dynamics, in order to capture the explanatory power of knowledge and policy learning both in stasis and change situations. We aim to contribute to diminish the skepticism presented in the literature about the influence of knowledge and policy learning in the policy process.

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to explain the dynamics of public appointments and present new possibilities for research in this field.Design/methodology/approachThe article is based on a systematic literature review from 2012 to 2021, identified in Web of Science, Scopus and SciELO, in English, Spanish or Portuguese. To explain the dynamics of public appointments, the following were analyzed: the nomination process; the motivations, objectives and criteria used; the results and impacts of appointments; and the profile of the nominees. The study focused only on discretionary appointments to fully public bodies and agencies.FindingsThe literature offers a limited explanation for the dynamics of appointments, by focusing on the dichotomy between loyalty and competence. Despite this, studies suggest that different contextual factors, such as administrative tradition or strategic choices, for example, determine the dynamics of appointments, indicating that it is a complex process that goes beyond the simple discussion of merit or clientelism.Originality/valueThe article presents an unprecedented analysis of the literature on the dynamics of public appointments and proposes an explanatory model that indicates that other factors, in addition to merit and loyalty, should be considered relevant for the selection criteria, the nomination process and the profile of who will be appointed. This model is useful both for the practical management of appointments and for the advancement of theory in this field and should receive improvements and future empirical evaluations.

Abstract
This manuscript analyses the parliamentary scrutiny of the presidential appointments to the direction of independent Brazilian Regulatory Agencies from an in-depth case study of the heads of the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency—ANVISA, between 1999 and 2021. In Brazil, the Senate has the final decision on these appointments, exercising a dual function: parliamentary control over presidential patronage and selecting future heads of agencies. The objective of this article was to explain how the parliament exercises these functions and interferes in the appointment process. The results indicate that, although the formal process of parliamentary scrutiny seems like a game of marked cards, where it is already known in advance that the result will be approval, the Parliament plays an anticipatory role of presidential decisions, interfering in the timing of appointments and the possibility of influence over the choice of nominees.

This study analyzes the role of stakeholders in the value creation in public-private partnerships in Brazil, considering their motivations and the critical factors that determine the success of this type of collaboration. We analyzed partnerships between federal, state, and local governments through content analysis of documents and interviews with representatives of the public and private sectors involved in such partnerships. Stakeholders identification was conducted through the simultaneous use of models that allow demonstrating the multiple roles played by the actors, i.e. the role in public policies formulation and implementation (R. C. Gomes et al., 2010), their potential for threat or cooperation (Savage et al., 1991), and salience degree (Mitchell et al., 1997). In addition, the most recurrent critical success factors, value elements, and determining factors for cooperation in such partnerships were identified. Furthermore, an analytical model is proposed to identify such elements so that decision-makers can devise a strategy to deal with them. ; Este estudio tiene como objetivo analizar el papel de los stakeholders en la generación de valor en las alianzas público-privadas en Brasil, considerando sus motivaciones y los factores críticos que determinan el éxito de este tipo de colaboración. Con este fin, se analizaron las asociaciones entre los gobiernos federal, estatales y municipales, a través del análisis de contenido de documentos y entrevistas con representantes de los sectores público y privado involucrados en tales asociaciones. La identificación de los stakeholders se realizó mediante el uso simultáneo de modelos que permiten demostrar los múltiples roles que desempeñan los actores en la formulación e implementación de políticas públicas (R. C. Gomes et al., 2010), su potencial de amenaza o de cooperación (Savage et al., 1991) y su grado de notoriedad (Mitchell et al., 1997). Además, se identificaron los factores críticos de éxito más frecuentes, los elementos de valor y los factores determinantes para la cooperación en tales alianzas. Asimismo, se propone un modelo de análisis que permite la identificación de dichos elementos para que el tomador de decisiones pueda diseñar una estrategia para tratar con ellos. ; Este estudo tem como objetivo analisar o papel dos stakeholders na geração de valor em parcerias público-privadas no Brasil, considerando suas motivações e os fatores críticos que determinam o sucesso desse tipo de colaboração. Para tanto, foram analisadas parcerias dos governos federal, estaduais e municipais por meio da análise de conteúdo de documentos e entrevistas com representantes dos setores público e privado envolvidos. A identificação dos stakeholders foi feita mediante a utilização simultânea de modelos que permitem demonstrar os múltiplos papéis desempenhados pelos atores na formulação e na implementação de políticas públicas (R. C. Gomes et al., 2010), seu potencial de ameaça ou de cooperação (Savage et al., 1991) e seu grau de saliência (Mitchell et al., 1997). Além disso, foram identificados os fatores críticos de sucesso, os elementos de valor e os fatores determinantes para a cooperação mais recorrentes nessas parcerias. Ademais, foi proposto um modelo de análise que permite a identificação de tais elementos, a fim de possibilitar que o tomador de decisão trace uma estratégia para lidar com eles.

This theoretical essay contributes to the analysis of advocacy coalitions in processes of formulation or change of public policies, combining public policy analysis and operational research models. Jenkins-Smith, Nohrstedt, Weible et al. (2014) observe from the results of some empirical applications that the beliefs of actors alone do not tell the whole history of policy change. In addition, the authors emphasize that the degree of conflict among actors or coalitions is related to their perceptions of the extent of threats of the goals or actions of other actors, to their beliefs about a policy. The study used an approach to analyze the degree of inter and intra political coordination in institutional change processes, based on the identification of the beliefs, declared objectives and political alternatives of the actors, using Value-Focused Thinking associated to causal cognitive maps. From the combination of these methods and the comparison of cognitive maps, the expectation is to identify political coalitions, characterize collaborative or conflicting environments, and the identify political agendas with varying degrees of cooperation or conflict. ; Este ensayo teórico presenta una contribución al análisis de coaliciones de defensa en procesos de formulación o cambio de políticas públicas, conjugando modelos de análisis de políticas públicas y de la investigación operacional. Jenkins-Smith, Nohrstedt, Weible et al. (2014) observan, a partir de los resultados de algunas aplicaciones empíricas, que sólo las creencias de los actores involucrados no cuentan toda la historia del cambio de la política, y resaltan que el grado de conflicto, entre los actores o coaliciones, está relacionado con sus percepciones en cuanto al alcance de las amenazas, de los objetivos o acciones de otros actores, a sus creencias acerca de una política. Ante lo expuesto, se propone un enfoque para analizar el grado de coordinación inter e intracoaliciones políticas en procesos de cambio institucional, a partir de la identificación de las creencias, de los objetivos declarados y de las alternativas políticas de los actores, utilizando value-focused thinking asociado a los mapas cognitivos causales. A partir de la conjugación de estos métodos se espera, a través de la comparación de los mapas cognitivos, la identificación de las coaliciones políticas, la caracterización de ambientes colaborativos o conflictivos, así como la identificación de agendas políticas con variados grados de cooperación o conflicto. ; Este artigo traz uma contribuição à análise de coalizões de defesa em processos de formulação ou mudança de políticas públicas, conjugando modelos de análise de políticas públicas e da pesquisa operacional (PO). Jenkins-Smith, Nohrstedt, Weible et al. (2014) observam, a partir dos resultados de algumas aplicações empíricas, que somente as crenças dos atores envolvidos não contam toda a história da mudança da política e ressaltam que o grau de conflito entre os atores ou as coalizões está relacionado às suas percepções quanto ao alcance das ameaças, dos objetivos ou das ações de outros atores, às suas crenças acerca de uma política. Diante do exposto, propõe-se uma abordagem para análise do grau de coordenação inter e intracoalizões políticas em processos de mudança institucional, a partir da identificação das crenças, dos objetivos declarados e das alternativas políticas dos atores, utilizando o pensamento focado no valor (value-focused thinking – VFT) associado aos mapas cognitivos causais. A partir da conjugação desses métodos, espera-se, por meio da comparação dos mapas cognitivos, identificar as coalizões políticas e caracterizar os ambientes colaborativos ou conflituosos, bem como identificar as agendas políticas com variados graus de cooperação ou conflito.

Abstract: This article presents an international review of the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) from 2015 to 2018. Forty-six empirical works that use the ACF as the main model or one of the main models for the analysis of public policies were analyzed. Bibliometric data, research methodologies and theoretical components have been considered in this analysis. In addition, this article fills in a gap in previous reviews of the ACF by presenting an exploratory review of ACF applications in Latin America. Our conclusions show that the research agenda proposed in 2014 has evolved over the last few years, but still presents unexplored challenges and possibilities for researchers interested in the use of ACF. We also offer some recommendations for future research.

This paper aims to analyze the gender gap in Brazilian states and the actions of stakeholders of the National Council for Women's Rights (NCWR). Two research was conducted in two steps. In the first step, a gender gap index in Brazilian states was calculated based on the Global Gender Gap Report (GGGR) methodology, prepared by the World Economic Forum. In the second, the NCWR stakeholders were mapped, and their performance was analyzed, considering the gender gap indexes obtained in the first step and the theoretical framework supported by stakeholder analysis models. The political and economic dimensions presented the worst performance. The Brazilian states with the best general indexes were Amapá, Distrito Federal, and Maranhão, and the worst were Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais, and Paraná. On the other hand, NCWR stakeholders acting in public policies related to the economic and political dimensions do not seem to have great relevance and influence capacity. Evidence indicates a concentration of policy efforts in areas where the country has good GGGR indicators (health and education). ; El objetivo de este artículo es analizar la brecha de género en las unidades federativas brasileñas y las acciones de los stakeholders del Consejo Nacional para los Derechos de la Mujer (CNDM). Con este fin, se realizaron dos etapas de investigación. La primera se basa en el cálculo de un índice sobre la brecha de género en los estados brasileños a partir de la metodología aplicada en el Global Gender Gap Report (GGGR), preparado por el Foro Económico Mundial. En la segunda etapa, se mapeareon los stakeholders del CNDM y se analizó su desempeño en vista de las brechas destacadas en la primera fase del estudio, a la luz del marco teórico respaldado por los modelos de análisis de stakeholders. En Brasil, las dimensiones de peor desempeño fueron la política y la económica, las unidades federativas que obtuvieron los mejores índices generales fueron Amapá, Distrito Federal y Maranhão, y las peores fueron Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais y Paraná. Por otro lado, los stakeholders del CNDM que actúan en políticas públicas relacionadas con las dimensiones económica y política no parecen tener gran relevancia e influencia. La evidencia indica que hay una concentración de esfuerzos en políticas en áreas donde el país tiene buenos indicadores de GGGR (salud y educación). ; O objetivo deste artigo é analisar a desigualdade entre homens e mulheres nas unidades federativas brasileiras e a atuação dos stakeholders do Conselho Nacional dos Direitos da Mulher (CNDM). Para tal, realizaram-se duas etapas de pesquisa. A primeira é baseada no cálculo de um índice sobre a disparidade entre gêneros nos estados brasileiros a partir da metodologia aplicada no Global Gender Gap Report (GGGR), elaborado pelo Fórum Econômico Mundial. Na segunda, foram mapeados os stakeholders do CNDM e analisada sua atuação diante das lacunas enfatizadas na primeira fase do estudo, à luz de referencial teórico amparado em modelos de análise de stakeholders. No Brasil, as dimensões que apresentaram o pior desempenho foram a política e a econômica, sendo as unidades federativas que obtiveram os melhores índices gerais Amapá, Distrito Federal e Maranhão, e os piores, Mato Grosso, Minas Gerais e Paraná. Por outro lado, os stakeholders do CNDM que atuam nas políticas públicas ligadas às dimensões econômica e política parecem não ter grande relevância e capacidade de influência. As evidências indicam que existe concentração de esforços em políticas nas áreas em que o país apresenta bons indicadores no GGGR, como saúde e educação.