Brazil
Brazil has earned a prominent place in the governance dialogue literature due to the quite remarkable experience of participatory budgeting employed in a number of its cities. This accomplishment in Brazil has been attributed to the phenomenal trend in civil society organizations to challenge clientelism and patronage while simultaneously offering concrete new practices, strategies and institutions. Brazil’s structural reforms have also had an impact. They have expanded the resource base and policy-making authority of local leaders and local institutions; strengthened accountability; and facilitated citizen input. Political parties have also made attempts to organize and mobilize groups and constituents at the grassroots level. In sum, these three factors have contributed to the country’s exceptional experience of governance dialogue.
Brazil’s accomplishments in the field of governance dialogue, though, have not been restricted to participatory budgeting. Also of significance has been the success of the Management Councils. These fora of co-management were conceived as responses to the traditional weaknesses of the welfare state. The councils have responsibility for various policy areas (primarily health, education, social assistance and provision for children and adolescents), the corresponding infrastructure (schools, community and health centres) and the associated funds. Over the course of the 1990s such councils have been organized from the local to the federal level and have continually implemented a principle of parity in their composition between representatives of civil society, of service providers and government.
Most attention on the Management Councils has been focused on their operation in the health sector, where they have functioned the longest. There are more than 5,000 health councils currently, meaning nearly one for each of Brazil’s 5,507 municipalities. They involve almost 100,000 individuals and numerous associations. The most studied of these councils have been those in São Paulo. The councils’ success there usually is attributed to the level of either civil society involvement or commitment by political authorities. However, the São Paulo health councils’ success has also been based on the willingness and ability to promote institutional innovation that cultivates clear rules of representation, and processes of discussion and decision-making. This has facilitated effective participation by those with less technical knowledge and fewer communication skills.
Brazil's experience has been the subject of keen study from around the world:
Arnab Acharya et al., “Civil society representation in the participatory budget and deliberative councils of Sao Paulo, Brazil,” IDS Bulletin
Brian Wampler and Leonardo Avritzer, “Participatory publics: Civil society and new institutions in democratic Brazil,” Comparative Politics
Paul W. Posner, “Local democracy and popular participation: Chile and Brazil in comparative perspective,” Democratization
Vera Schatta P. Coelho, “Brazil’s health councils: The challenge of building participatory political institutions,” IDS Bulletin
Vera Schatta P. Coelho et al. “Deliberative fora and the democratization of social policies in Brazil,” IDS Bulletin
Sarah Gillingham, “Social organization and participatory resource management in Brazilian Ribeirinho communities,” Society and Natural Resources
IPAC Events
