We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The concluding chapter to this book further explores the broad theoretical implications of this Brazil-focused study for our approach to understanding state-society relations in Latin America. First, I show how the case explored in the book offers new insight into the broader effects of democratization and neoliberal reform on state-society relations. In contrast to the view from traditional approaches that highlight the demise of corporatism, I argue that corporatism did not disappear but instead shifted—to different sectors of the state, and to different segments of society. Second, and by extension, I introduce a new model of state-society relations, what I call civic corporatism. Third, I explore broader questions related to the role of NGOs in international development. Fourth, I provide a series of case studies beyond Brazilian AIDS policy to explore the generalizability of the argument. I conclude by offering a broad new perspective on the relationship between democracy and the state.
This chapter previews the book’s main argument: government bureaucrats played a key role in helping Brazil's AIDS movement to endure and even expand over time. Also previewed are the broader theoretical contributions of the book to debates on social movements and state-society relations, in Brazil and beyond. First, in contrast to traditional approaches to social movements, the book offers a more optimistic perspective to the question of social-movement survival by revealing contexts in which state actors can help to cultivate civil society. Second, by arguing that state actors in Brazil are helping civil-society organizations to mobilize relatively autonomous political advocacy coalitions, the book introduces a new pattern of state-society relations—what I call civic corporatism. Finally, the book provides new insight into Brazil’s AIDS policy success by revealing the central role of civic advocacy in sustaining the policy model.
Chapter 2 proposes a new approach to understanding the trajectory of social movements, focusing on the positive role that state actors can play in the endurance of independent social-movement mobilization. In this chapter, I review the relevant literature from Political Science and Sociology, and I argue that existing explanations adopt a zero-sum approach to state-society relations, emphasizing control as a fundamental goal of state actors vis-à-vis civil society. Building on what I call theories of the state—a nascent literature on state capacity and state-building—I argue that intragovernmental conflicts sometimes drive state actors to seek allies in civil society as leverage over other actors inside the state. When state actors prioritize leverage over control as their objective vis-à-vis civil society, they support independent forms of civic organization and mobilization—thus enabling social movements to circumvent what has traditionally been seen as a fundamental trade-off between accepting support from the state, to help sustain themselves over time, and autonomy from the state.
The remaining empirical chapters, Chapters 5 through 7, describe the development of civic corporatism in Brazil’s AIDS policy sector in the first decade of the 2000s. Chapter 5 focuses on why and how federal bureaucrats sought to expand the AIDS movement into poorer and more rural regions of Brazil. It argues that bureaucrats in the national AIDS program were motivated to expand independent civic organization and mobilization in the early 2000s, when AIDS policy was decentralized, because the increased AIDS policy authority of mayors and governors threatened to undermine the national policy model they had built. Chapter 5 then describes how these federal bureaucrats provided new grassroots organizations across Brazil with resources and opportunities to access the political arena.
Chapter 3 examines the rise of Brazil’s AIDS movement in the 1980s and sets the stage for my argument about the later trajectory of AIDS activism in Brazil in the 1990s and 2000s. Like in the United States and Western Europe, the nascent HIV epidemic in 1980s Brazil devastated tight-knit urban gay communities in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. At this early point, the AIDS movement was concentrated in a handful of Brazil’s largest cities, among activist leaders who were stigmatized and suffered from discrimination, but who were also relatively well-educated and experienced in political advocacy. While contingent factors certainly played a role, traditional theoretical approaches to civil society that highlight the causal influence of grievances, socioeconomic resources, and political opportunities go a long way toward explaining the initial development and success of the AIDS movement.
Chapter 4 describes the transformations of the 1980s and 1990s that lay the foundation for civic corporatism to emerge: democratization and neoliberal reform. In general, the processes of democratization and neoliberal reform have been attributed to the unraveling of the corporatist system of state-society relations. By contrast, this chapter shows how the very processes that undercut the corporatist system also gave rise to a new system of state-society relations. Democratization produced new state actors who were motivated to support civic organization and mobilization. Democratization also created institutional channels for these new state actors to engage civil society as allies. Neoliberal reforms paradoxically produced the resources for these state actors to use in mobilizing allies in civil society. A broad implication of this argument, explored further in the conclusion to this book, is that the combination of democratization and neoliberal reforms did not destroy but rather transformed the incentives and resources that sustained corporatism.
This article challenges the conventional wisdom that enthusiastic state support is a prerequisite to building strong participatory institutions. Through an analysis of Colombia’s planning councils, this study develops the concept of the societydriven participatory institution, in which civil society actors, rather than the state, undertake the core tasks involved in implementing participatory institutions. The article argues that while state neglect limits their involvement in decisionmaking, society-driven participatory institutions can still develop important policymaking roles in agenda setting and in monitoring and evaluating public policy.
What are the conditions under which participatory institutions increase the voice of marginalized groups in policymaking? Existing studies of local participatory institutions highlight the role of leftist politicians and a strong civil society in determining outcomes, yet they fail to explain significant variation among participatory institutions at the national level. Examining the case of Brazil’s AIDS policy sector, this article argues that to fully understand the dynamics of national participatory governance, we must consider the role of bureaucrats. As studies of state-society synergy have shown, bureaucrats may seek outside political support from civil society when other actors inside the state prevent them from advancing their policy preferences. National bureaucrats may create new participatory institutions, and even help civil society delegates coordinate their engagement in such institutions, as strategies to strengthen their policy alliances with civil society.
This study explores the evolution of the Green Grants program, run by Brazil’s Ministry of Environment, as a means for developing the concept of bureaucratic activism. When the Workers’ Party first took office in 2003, many social movement actors joined the government, especially in that agency. After 2007, however, most of these activists left the government. At the same time, the ministry substituted thousands of temporary employees for permanent civil servants. Surprisingly, this study finds that these public employees carried forward the environmentalist cause, even when this required contesting the priorities of superiors. Examining their attitudes and practices leads to a definition of activism as the proactive pursuit of opportunities to defend contentious causes. The case study helps to develop this concept and to demonstrate that workers inside bureaucracies can engage in activist behavior. It also explores the effects of bureaucratic activism on environmental policymaking in Brazil.
Bolivia and Brazil have universalized their pension and healthcare systems, respectively. Civil society organizations participated actively in social policy expansion, yet they have done so in starkly different ways, reflecting general patterns in each country. Whereas in Brazil, popular participation in social policies takes place through “inside” formal channels, such as conferences and councils, in Bolivia, bottom-up influence occurs mostly via “outside” channels, by coordinating collective action in the streets. Understanding forms of popular participation matters because policies that allow for popular input are potentially more representative, universal, and nondiscretionary. This article argues that differences in the forms of popular participation in social policy expansion can be explained by the characteristics of the institutional context and differences in the types of movements engaged in the policymaking process. By focusing on patterns of participation, these findings add nuance to the literature on Latin America’s welfare states.
The institutionalization of community participation in the context of policing has become increasingly common in Latin America as a means of addressing the seemingly intractable increase in crime and insecurity. The creation of formal spaces for community participation in security differs markedly from how police forces have historically operated. Moreover, opening spaces for citizen input and oversight could potentially limit an executive’s control over the police, an important political tool. Why, then, do politicians sometimes turn to “participatory security” when reforming the police? This article argues that politicians choose participation as a safety valve to disaggregate societal discontent, particularly when police-society relations are fractious and police capacity and resources are low. Drawing on qualitative evidence from Buenos Aires Province, São Paulo State, and Colombia, this study demonstrates that participation can serve a range of strategic purposes, which, in turn, shape the institutional design of the participatory mechanism.
Chapter 7 brings together the previous two chapters by showing how the ultimate outcome of support from bureaucrats was a new type of social movement in Brazil. In contrast to the urban labor movements of the 20th Century, Brazil’s AIDS movement was a diverse movement that cut across class, ethnic, and geographic cleavages. In contrast to the protest-based social movements that mobilized at the start of the 21st Century, the AIDS movement employed a hybrid strategy for influencing policy, relying in equal measure on inside collaboration with government policymakers and contentious behavior. This pattern of demand-making among AIDS associations in Brazil does not fit existing models of corporatism, pluralism, or social movements—neither in the basic attributes of the organizations that have mobilized nor in the strategies they employ to influence policy. Brazil’s AIDS movement represents instead a new form of civic organization and mobilization in Latin America, in which social movements are sustained by their connections to the state, even while they make aggressive demands on the state.
Costa Rica and Colombia, two of the earliest Latin American countries to protect many LGBT rights, attempted to amplify those rights and litigate same-sex marriage (SSM) in mid-2000s; however, these attempts sparked a major anti-LGBT backlash by religious and conservative organizations. Yet a decade later, Colombia legalized SSM while Costa Rica still lacks the right to SSM. Using a most-similar systems comparative case study, this study engages the judicial politics literature to explain this divergent outcome. It details how courts, while staying receptive to many individual LGBT rights claims, deferred SSM legalization to popularly elected branches. In spite of the lack of legislative success in both countries, in Colombia a new litigation strategy harnessed that deference to craft a litigated route to legalized SSM. In Costa Rica, the courts’ lack of conditions or deadlines has left SSM foundering in the congress.
In State-Sponsored Activism, Rich explores AIDS policy in Brazil as a lens to offer new insight into state-society relations in democratic and post-neoliberal Latin America. In contrast to the dominant view that these dual transitions produced an atomized civil society and an impenetrable technocratic state, Rich finds a new model of interest politics, driven by previously marginalized state and societal actors. Through a rich examination of the Brazilian AIDS movement, one of the most influential movements in twenty-first century Latin America, this book traces the construction of a powerful new advocacy coalition between activist bureaucrats and bureaucratized activists. In so doing, State-Sponsored Activism illustrates a model whereby corporatism - active government involvement in civic mobilization - has persisted in contemporary Latin America, with important implications for representation and policymaking.