Local autonomy in the management of public policies in the territory: the case of the Uruguayan central government during the governments of the broad front
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The published works are free to distribute and disseminate in the same sources as long as they correctly cite the source of publication and these acts do not have commercial purposes. The publication is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article analyzes the territorialization of public policies carried out by the Frente Amplio (FA) governments in Uruguay. With this objective, we describe the capacity for action and decisionmaking that local units of the central level have had in the territory. We argue that, despite the decentralizing discourse, the decision-making capacity of these units is scarce, with functions remaining in the hands of central actors. At a conceptual level, we present a typology of power allocation and distribution between central and peripheral actors in the definition and implementation of public policies, creating an index that measures the autonomy of local actors. To provide evidence for our argument, the index is applied to 159 sectoral programs.
References
Aghón y Krause-Junk (1993) “Descentralización fiscal: marco conceptual”. Naciones Unidas. CEPAL, Santiago de Chile.
Berthin, G. (2013) “Una primera aproximación a la dinámica y los dilemas de la gobernabilidad democrática sub-nacional en América Latina”, en Zaremberg, G (comp) Redes y Jerarquías. Participación, Representación y Gobernanza local en América Latina, FLACSO, Sede México. México.
Cameron M y Kenneth E. Sharpe (2012): La voz institucionalizada en las democracias de América Latina, en “Nuevas instituciones de democracia participativa en América Latina: la voz y sus consecuencias”. Maxwell A. Cameron, Eric Hershberg y Kenneth E. Sharpe (Editores) México, Flacso, 2012, pp. 13 – 38.
Castillo, M.; Fuentes, G. y Midaglia, C. (2016) “La difícil construcción política de la función de coordinación en el área pública social”. Estado, Gobierno y Gestión Pública (Universidad de Chile, Santiago de Chile). ISSN: 0717-8980.
Eaton, K. (2020). Latin American Politics and the Subnational Comparative Method: Vertical and Horizontal Challenges. Latin American Politics and Society, 62(3), 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1017/lap.2020.10
Eaton, K. (2004). Risky Business: Decentralization from above in Chile and Uruguay. Comparative Politics Vol. 37, No. 1 (Oct., 2004), pp. 1-22 (22 pages) https://doi.org/10.2307/4150121
Hall, P. (1993). “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain”, Comparative Politics, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 275-296.
Harguindéguy; Jean-Baptiste Paul, Alistair Cole & Romain Pasquier (2019): The variety of decentralization indexes: A review of the literature, Regional & Federal Studies, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2019.1566126
Hooghe, E; Marks, G; Schakel, A; Niedzwiecki, S; Chapman-osterkatz, S; Shair-rosenfield, S. Regional authority index (RAI) v.3, EUI Research Data, 2021, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/70298.
Khambule, I. (2021) Decentralisation or deconcentration: The case of regional and local economic development in South Africa. Local Economy. Vol. 36, v 1.
Ladner, A. y Keuffer, N. (2018): Creating an index of local autonomy – theoretical, conceptual, and empirical issues, Regional & Federal Studies, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2018.1464443
Midaglia, C; Castillo, M, Fuentes, G. (2014) La coordinación política en los espacios interinstitucionales del MIDES. Informe técnico en el marco del convenio entre el Instituto de Ciencia Política de la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y la Dirección Nacional de Gestión Territorial del Ministerio de Desarrollo Social.
Milanesi, A; Freigedo, M y Carneiro, F. (2019) Análisis de los formatos organizativos de intervención pública en el territorio. Informe técnico del Convenio entre el Departamento de Ciencia Política y el Ministerio de Desarrollo Social.
Minas. R, Wright. S y Van Berkel. R, (2012) Decentralization and centralization. Governing the activation of social assistance recipients in Europe. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. Vol. 32 No. 5/6, 2012. Pp. 286-298
Montecinos, E. (2006) Los estudios de descentralización en América Latina: una revisión sobre el estado actual de la temática, VII Congreso Iberoamericano de Municipalistas, Unión Iberoamericana de Municipalistas, Guatemala.
Moreno, L. y McEwen, N. (2005) “Exploring the Territorial Politics of Welfare”. En Nicola McEwen y Luis Moreno (Eds.) The Territorial Politics of Welfare. Routledge.
O’Neill, K. (2003). Decentralization as an electoral strategy. Comparative Political Studies, 36(9),23.
Orlansky, D. (1998). Las políticas de descentralización. Desarrollo económico : 827-844.
Oszlak, O. (2014). “¿Descentralizar o desconcentrar? Uruguay frente a un dilema no resuelto.” En Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios Municipales, Año V, N°9: 173-205.
Pierson, P (1995). Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher and the Politics of Retrenchment Part of Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics.
Pollit, C. (2007). “Decentralization: A Central Concept in Contemporary Public Management”. En: The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Edited by Ewan Ferlie, Laurence E. Lynn Jr., and Christopher Pollitt, Pp. 371-382.
Schneider, A. “Decentralization: Conceptualization and measurement.” Studies in comparative international development 38 (2003): 32-56.
Selee, A y Peruzzotti, E. (2009) Participatory innovation and representative democracy in Latin America Editor: Wooword Wilson Inernational Center for Scholars. Baltimore.
Verhoest, K, Van Thiel, S; Bouckaert; G y Lægreid, P. (2012). Government Agencies.Practices and Lessons from 30 Countries. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.