Premium
International Modeling and B razilian Public Policies for Poverty Reduction
Author(s) -
Kauchakje Samira
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
latin american policy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.195
H-Index - 4
eISSN - 2041-7373
pISSN - 2041-7365
DOI - 10.1111/lamp.12036
Subject(s) - austerity , centrality , poverty , population , politics , public economics , public policy , economics , social policy , political science , poverty reduction , development economics , economic growth , sociology , demography , mathematics , combinatorics , law , market economy
The relationship between public social policies for poverty reduction and the requirements of international organizations on the issue may explain the similarities between public policies in countries with significant economic and cultural differences. The formulation of these policies may be linked to factors of the domestic political and economic situation and also to the institutional encouragement and international cultural standard, as discussed in the literature on the T heories of P olicy D iffusion and P olicy T ransfer. This article presents the results of ongoing research that investigates B razilian social policies for poverty reduction under the C ardoso, L ula, and R ousseff administrations. It suggests that so‐called positive modeling predominated as national policies were linked to international policies focusing on the low‐income population and that the international political community considered B razilian conditional cash transfer policies as a model. In the second L ula and R ousseff administrations, there was negative modeling (i.e., contrary to international recommendations) between policies of economic growth and increasing or maintaining the values of social public spending; international financial institutions prescribe economic austerity and a reduction of social public policy. At the same time, there was positive modeling due to the centrality that the administrations have assigned to policies focusing on the low‐income population. This centrality may bring a risk to the universalist perspective.