Issue Area and Pluralization In Brazilian Foreign Policy: an Exploratory Study of Decision-Making Processes in the Fernando Henrique Cardoso Government

Maitino, Martin Egon

doi:10.1590/dados.2024.67.4.336

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Articles • Dados rev. ciênc. sociais 67 (4) • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/dados.2024.67.4.336 copy

Issue Area and Pluralization In Brazilian Foreign Policy: an Exploratory Study of Decision-Making Processes in the Fernando Henrique Cardoso Government^* * This study was funded by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) through grants #2017/03988-8 and #2020/07387-1. I would like to thank professors Janina Onuki, Pedro Feliú Ribeiro, Guilherme Casarões, Marcelo Medeiros, and Francisco Urdinez for comments on earlier versions of the text.

Temática e Pluralização na Política Externa Brasileira: Um Estudo Exploratório dos Processos Decisórios no Governo Fernando Henrique Cardoso

Domaine de Problématique et Pluralisation dans la Politique Étrangère Brésilienne: Une Étude Exploratoire des Processus Décisionnels dans le Gouvernement de Fernando Henrique Cardoso

Temática y Pluralización en la Política Exterior Brasilera: Un Estudio Exploratorio de los Procesos de Toma de Decisión en los Gobiernos de Fernando Henrique Cardoso

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The idea of ‘pluralization’—a new configuration of decision-making processes, characterized by Itamaraty’s relative loss of influence and the participation of various actors—became widespread in Brazilian foreign policy studies. Questioning the literature’s general framing of this transformation, we explore the hypothesis that pluralization varies depending on the issue area under analysis. We build upon a mechanism connecting domestic distributive effects to pluralization and apply process-tracing methods to analyze two “typical cases” associated with environmental and health issues: the Kyoto Protocol negotiations and the dispute on AIDS drug patents. We explore how issue areas interact with mechanisms affecting decision-unit dispersion and generate hypotheses to explain deviations from the model. The results contribute to discussing issue-area effects, a gap in the literature. Conceptualizing issue areas as subsystems, we identify relevant dimensions to think their relation to pluralization: technical knowledge, distribution and weight of power capabilities, expert communities, institutionalization, and past interactions within the subsystem.

Brazilian foreign policy; Pluralization; Diplomacy; Decision-making process; Bureaucratic politics

Organization	COP3		COP4		COP5		COP6		COP6-2
	01–10/12/1997		02–13/11/1998		25/10–5/11/1999		13–25/11/2000		17–27/07/2001
Science and Technology	5	36%	9	27%	8	27%	11	17%	11	24%
Foreign Affairs	3	21%	7	21%	6	20%	7	11%	4	9%
Environment	2	14%	1	3%	3	10%	2	3%	1	2%
Energy	1	7%	1	3%	1	3%	2	3%	0
Economy	0		3	9%	1	3%	1	2%	2	4%
FBMC	0		0		0		1	2%	3	7%
State-owned companies	0		1	3%	0		4	6%	2	4%
Subnational	1	7%	0		0		2	3%	1	2%
Congress	0		1	3%	0		1	2%	0

NGO	1	7%	1	3%	1	3%	2	3%	5	11%
Business	1	7%	6	18%	7	23%	11	17%	7	15%
Academia	0		0		3	10%	3	5%	5	11%
Lawyers	0		0		0		3	5%	5	11%

No information	0		3	9%	0		14	22%	0
Total participants	14		33		30		64		46

Mechanism expectations	Kyoto case evidence	Patent case evidence
Economic issue area	Environmental issue area	Health issue area
Decision distributive effect is perceived by social groups.	Follows expectations. Negotiators’ and general society’s perceptions differ.	Follows expectations. Mediated by case impacts in domestic policy (against AIDS, in this case).
Interest groups mobilize in reaction to distributive effect.	Follows expectations.	Follows expectations. Governmental body (MS) also mobilizes in reaction to budget impact.
Interest group mobilization and contact generate governmental agencies’ interest and action.	The MMA and Congress follow expectations. Science and Technology does not.	Congress follows expectations. MS is compatible, but not completely explained (there is contact, but interest precedes it). MDIC does not follow expectations.
Governmental agency action pressures MRE and the opening of the decision unit.	Follows expectations for the Environment. Partially follows for Congress (restricted to FBMC). Falls short of expectations for Science and Technology (participation precedes trigger).	MS follows expectations. Congress and MDIC fall short of expectations.
Pluralized decision unit.	Follows expectations.	Follows expectations.

Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Políticos (IESP) da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) R. da Matriz, 82, Botafogo, 22260-100 Rio de Janeiro RJ Brazil, Tel. (55 21) 2266-8300, Fax: (55 21) 2266-8345 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: dados@iesp.uerj.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS