Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:27:45.954Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competitive Institution Building: The PT and Participatory Budgeting in Rio Grande do Sul

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Benjamin Goldfrank  and
Aaron Schneider
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the late 1990s, the Workers' Party (PT) government of the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul introduced participatory budgeting, a process in which citizens establish annual investment priorities in public assemblies. This innovation was one of several attempts by incumbent parties to structure political conflict using budget institutions. The character of participatory budgeting is most evident in its policymaking processes and policy outcomes. The process circumvented legislative arenas where opponents held a majority, privileged participation by the PT's voter base, and reached into opposition strongholds. The outcomes favored the interests of potential supporters among poor and middle-class voters. The political project proved vulnerable to its own raised expectations: it failed to sustain the image of clean government; brought tax increases along with fiscal insecurity; and left unfulfilled the participants' expectations for targeted investments. This article highlights the role of participatory budgeting, indeed all budgeting, in partisan actors' institutional choices.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , Autumn 2006 , pp. 1 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abers, Rebecca. 1996. From Ideas to Practice: the Partido dos Trabalhadores and Participatory Governance in Brazil. Latin American Perspectives 91, 23, 4: 1–53.Google Scholar
Abers, Rebecca. 2000. Inventing Local Democracy: Grassroots Politics in Brazil. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alesina, Alberto, Ricardo, Hausmann, Rudolf, Hommes, and Ernesto, Stein. 1996. Budget Institutions and Fiscal Performance in Latin America. Nber Working Paper 5586. Cambridge, Ma: National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amostra, 1996. Avaliação da administração municipal de Porto Alegre. Mimeograph. Porto Alegre. December.Google Scholar
Associação Brasileira de Organizações não Governamentais (Abong). 2004. Informe no. 268. 13 a 26 de abril de 2004. Nossa opinião: avaliação do governo Lula. http:www.abong.org.br Accessed July 15, 2004.Google Scholar
Avritzer, Leonardo. 2002. Democracy and the Public Space in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Avritzer, Leonardo, and Zander, Navarro eds. 2003. A inovação democrãtica no Brasil: o orçamento participativo. São Paulo: Cortez.Google Scholar
Baierle, Sérgio. 1992. Um novo princípio ético-político: prãtica social e sujeito nos movimentos populares urbanos em Porto Alegre nos anos 80. Master's thesis, State University of Campinas.Google Scholar
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo. 2004. Porto Alegre: The Dynamism of the Unorganized. In The Left in the City: Participatory Local Governments in Latin America, ed. Daniel, Chávez and Benjamin, Goldfrank. London: Latin America Bureau. 1–56.Google Scholar
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo ed. 2003. Radicals in Power: The Workers' Party and Experiments in Urban Democracy in Brazil. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Bandeira, Pedro. 1999. Participação, articulação de atores sociais e desenvolvimento regional. Texto para discussão no 630. Brasília: Ipea.Google Scholar
Bates, Robert H., Avner, Greif, Margaret, Levi, and Jean-Laurent, Rosenthal 1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
daFazenda, Ministério 19952002. Execução orçamentária dos estados. http:www.stn.fazenda.gov.brestados_municipios Accessed September 1, 2004.Google Scholar
Cabannes, Yves. 2004. Participatory Budgeting: a Significant Contribution to Participatory Democracy. Environment & Urbanization 16, 1: 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassen, Bernard. 1998. Participative Democracy in Porto Alegre. Le Monde Diplomatique October. http:mondediplo.com19981008brazil Accessed September 1, 2004.Google Scholar
Cheibub, Jose A., Argelina, Figueiredo., and Fernando, Limongi. 2002. Presidential Agenda Power and Decision-Making in Presidential Regimes: Governors and Political Parties in the Brazilian Congress Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.Google Scholar
Cidade, 1996. Os vereadores de Porto Alegre e o orçamento participativo. Mimeograph. Porto Alegre.Google Scholar
Cidade, 1999. Quem é o público do orçamento participativo: seu perfil, por que participa, e o que pensa do processo. Porto Alegre: PMPA.Google Scholar
Cidade, 2003. O Ppa, as Ongs e a construção do Op nacional. In De Olho no Orçamento , July 8: 13.Google Scholar
Coligação, Lula Presidente 2002. Programa de Governo 2002. http:www.lula.org.brassetsprogramadegoverno.pdf Accessed June 9, 2006.Google Scholar
Dacanal, José. 1999. A nova classe no poder. In A nova classe: o governo do PT no Rio Grande do Sul, ed. Dacanal, and João, Weber Porto Alegre: Novo Século. 1–126.Google Scholar
De Souza, Bernardo. n.d. Personal web page. http:www.al.rs.gov.branais49Deputadosbernardocurriculo_bernardo.htm Accessed July 15, 2004.Google Scholar
Ertman, Thomas. 1997. Birth of the Leviathan: Building States and Regimes in Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Peter B., Dietrich, Rueschemeyer., and Theda, Skocpol. 1985. Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faria, Cláudia Feres. 2003. Do conflito jurídico ao consenso democrático: uma versão da implementação do Op-Rs. in Avritzer and Navarro 2003. 1–72.Google Scholar
Fedozzi, Luciano. 1997. Orçamento participativo: reflexões sobre a experiência de Porto Alegre. Rio de Janeiro: Tomo/FASE/IPPUR.Google Scholar
Figueiredo, Argelina, and Fernando, Limongi. 1999. Executivo e legislativo na nova ordem constitucional. São Paulo: Fundação Getulio Vargas.Google Scholar
Fleury, Sonia. 2003 Concertação e efetividade da ação política: o Conselho de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social do governo Lula. Paper presented at the 7th Congreso Internacional del Clad sobre la Reforma del Estado y de la Administración Pública. Panamá, October 1–31.Google Scholar
Fundação de Economia e Estatística, Governo do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (Fee). 2003. Estatisticas Fee: Pib: Gráfico 01: Taxas de crescimento do Pib do Rs e do Br, 1999–2003. http:www.fee.tche.br Accessed December 20, 2004.Google Scholar
Giacomoni, James. 1993. A comunidade como instância executora do planejamento: o caso do “orçamento participativo” de Porto Alegre. Master's thesis, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.Google Scholar
Gintis, Herbert. 2000. Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Interaction. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
Giusti, Tavares, José, Antônio 1997. Rio Grande do Sul: O sistema partidário eleitoral e parlamentar. In O sistema partidário brasileiro: diversidade e tendências, 1982–94, ed. deOlavo Brasil, Lima Júnior Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getulio Vargas. 1–209.Google Scholar
Giusti, Tavares, José, Antônio 2000. Totalitarismo tardio: o caso do PT. Porto Alegre: Mercado Aberto.Google Scholar
Goldfrank, Benjamin. 2002. Urban Experiments in Citizen Participation: Deepening Democracy in Latin America. Ph.D diss., University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Goldfrank, Benjamin. 2003. Making Participation Work in Porto Alegre. in Baiocchi 2003. 1–52.Google Scholar
Goldfrank, Benjamin, and Aaron, Schneider. 2003. Restraining the Revolution or Deepening Democracy?the Workers' Party in Rio Grande do Sul. in Baiocchi 2003. 1–75.Google Scholar
Gomes, Angela Quintanilha, Assis, Brasil Olegário, and Sérgio, Baierle 2003. Quem é o público do orçamento participativo 2002. Porto Alegre: Cidade.Google Scholar
Governo do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. Secretaria da Fazenda. n.d. Evolução do desempenho da arrecadação anual do Icms nominal. http:www.sefaz.rs.gov.brSEF_ROOTSARSAR-WEB-ARR-ANO_1.asp Accessed January 12, 2005.Google Scholar
Hochstetler, Kathryn. 2000. Democratizing Pressures from below?Social Movements in the New Brazilian Democracy. in Kingstone and Power 2000. 1–82.Google Scholar
Inter, Redes 2004. Ppa e a construção coletiva da participação social. April. http:www.lula.org.brobrasilprograma_int.asp ?cod=36 Accessed July 15, 2004.Google Scholar
Kingstone, Peter. 2000. Muddling through Gridlock: Economic Policy Performance, Business Responses, and Democratic Sustainability. in Kingstone and Power 2000. 1–2003.Google Scholar
Kingstone, Peter, and Timothy, Power eds. 2000. Democratic Brazil: Actors, Institutions, and Processes. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Knight, Jack. 1992. Institutions and Social Conflict. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lamounier, Bolivar, and Rachel, Meneguello. 1986. Partidos políticos e consolidação democratico no caso brasileiro. São Paulo: Brasiliense.Google Scholar
Lesbaupin, Ivo. 2000. Poder local x exclusão social: a experiência das prefeituras democráticas no Brasil. Petrópolis: Vozes.Google Scholar
Lorenzoni, Onyx. 2000. Os 500 dias do PT no governo, são outros 500. Porto Alegre: Sulina.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Timothy, Scully. 1995. Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Marques, J. Luis. 1998. Rio Grande do Sul: a vitória da esquerda. Petrópolis: Vozes.Google Scholar
Marquetti, Adalmir. 2003. Participação e redistribuição: o orçamento participativo em Porto Alegre. in Avritzer and Navarro 2003. 1–56.Google Scholar
Melo, Marcus André. 2002. Reformas constitucionais no brasil: instituições políticas e processo decisório. Rio de Janeiro: Revan.Google Scholar
Navarro, Zander. 1997. Uma análise do orçamento participativo: sua implantação e desenvolvimento. In Porto da cidadania: a esquerda no governo de Porto Alegre, ed. Tarso, Genro. Porto Alegre: Artes e Oficios. 1–235.Google Scholar
North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nylen, William. 2000. Contributions of the Workers' Party to the Consolidation of Democracy in Brazil. in Kingstone and Power 2000. 1–43.Google Scholar
Nylen, William. 2002. Testing the Empowerment the Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte and Betim, Brazil. Comparative Politics 34, 2 (January): 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nylen, William. 2003a. Participatory Democracy versus Elitist Democracy: Lessons from Brazil. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Nylen, William. 2003b. An Enduring Legacy?Popular Participation in the Aftermath of the Participatory Budgets in João Monlevade and Betim. in Baiocchi 2003. 1–112.Google Scholar
Ricci, Rudá. 2003. O Plano Plurianual Federal: a outra face do governo Lula. Revista Espaço Acadêmico, No. 26. July.Google Scholar
Rosenfield, Denis. 2002. PT na encruzilhada: social-democracia, demagogia ou revolução. Porto Alegre: Leitura XXI.Google Scholar
Sader, Emir. 2003. Porto Alegre, até logo in Zero Hora , January 28.Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 2003. Fiscal Straightjacket: the Politics of Macroeconomic Reform in Brazil, 1995–2002. Journal of Latin American Studies 35: 1–25.Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 2004. The Political Logic of Decentralization in Brazil. In Decentralization and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Alfred, Montero. and Samuels, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. 1–93.Google Scholar
Santos, Boaventura 1998. Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: toward a Redistributive Democracy. Politics & Society 26, 4: 1–510.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E.E. 1960. The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Schick, Allen. 1969. Systems Politics and Systems Budgeting. Public Administration Review 29: 137–51.Google Scholar
Schick, Allen. 1995. The Federal Budget: Politics, Policy, Process. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, David Luis. 1994. A “desodiotização” da cidadania M.a. thesis, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.Google Scholar
Silva, Marcelo Kunrath. 2003. Participation by Design: the Experiences of Alvorada and Gravataí, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. in Baiocchi 2003. 1–30.Google Scholar
Souza, Ubiratan 2000. Orçamento participativo: experiência do governo do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 2003. How Institutions Evolve: Insights from Comparative Historical Analysis. In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. James, Mahoney. and Dietrich, Reuschemeyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–40.Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles. 1992. Coercion, Capital and European States. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tribunal de Contas, Governo do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. Various years. Parecer Prévio. Porto Alegre: Government of Rio Grande do Sul.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 1990. Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Veja, São Paulo 2002. A onda petista perdeu impeto. October 30: 1–99.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1964. The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar