A importância das ideias na mudança institucional e nos processos políticos

Autores

Palavras-chave:

Idéias, Discurso, Instituições, Aprendizagem social, Coligações

Resumo

O objetivo do artigo é mostrar o papel crucial que as ideias desempenham na mudança institucional, na formação de políticas públicas, e no agrupamento e orientação dos atores. Todos estes cenários envolvem processos de criação de ideias e discursos, de disputas sobre a solução de problemas e a legitimação ou não de decisões. O papel das ideias depende da nossa concepção da sua relação com as instituições, interesses e atores. E dos determinantes que apreciamos nas mudanças. O pressuposto promovido pela escolha racional de que são um meio instrumental de interesses limita a compreensão da complexidade dos processos políticos. Para justificar o seu papel, o artigo analisa várias escolas e autores em termos da tensão conceitual entre interesse e instituições; a relação entre ideias, mudança política e coligações; e o papel do discurso em relação a elas.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

René Millán, Universidade Nacional Autônoma do México

Doutorado em Sociologia pela Universidade de Turim. Professor pesquisador do Instituto de Pesquisas Sociais pela Universidade Nacional Autônoma do México.

Referências

ABDELAL, R.; BLYTH, M.; PARSONS, C. (Eds.). Constructing the international economy. Cornell: University Press, 2015.

ALIGICA, P. D.; BOETTKE, J. P. “The two social philosophies of Ostroms’ Institutionalism”. The Policy Studies Journal, vol. 39, n° 1, p. 29-49, Aug. 2011.

ANDERSON, C. The logic of public problems: evaluation on comparative policy research. In: ASHFORD, D. (ed.). Comparing public policies. Sage, 1978. BARNETT, M. Social constructivism. In: BAYLIS, J.; SMITH, S.; OWENS, P. (Eds.). The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

BÉLAND, D.; COX, R. H. “Ideas as coalition magnets: coalition building, policy entrepreneurs, and power relations”. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 23, n° 3, p. 428-45, Dec. 2016.

BIRKLAND, T. An introduction to the policy process. New York: Routledge, 2016. BLYTH, M. Great transformations: economic ideas and institutional change in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

BIRKLAND, T. “Structures do not come with an instructions sheet: interest, ideas, and progress in political science”. Perspectives on Politics, vol. 2, n° 4, p. 695-706, Dec. 2003.

BIRKLAND, T. “Paradigms and paradox: the politics of economic ideas in two moments of crisis”. Governance: an International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, vol. 2, n° 2, p. 197- 215, abr. 2013.

BÖRZEL, T. A.; HEARD-LAURÉOTE, K. “Networks in EU multi-level governance: concepts and contributions”. Journal of Public Policy, vol. 29, n° 2, p. 135-51, Jul. 2009.

BOSWELL, C. “The political functions of expert knowledge and legitimation in European Union immigration policy”. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 15, n° 4, p. 471-88, May 2008.

BOVENS, M.; HART, P.; KUIPERS, S. The politics of policy evaluation. In: MORAN, M.; REIN, M.; GOODIN, R. E. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

BRUNSSON, N. The organization of hypocrisy: talk, decisions, and actions in organizations. Chichester and New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1989.

CAIRNEY, P. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. In: LODGE, M.; PAGE, E. C.; BALLA, S. J. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of classics in public policy and administration. Oxford: Oxford University, 2018.

CAMPBELL, J. L. “Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy”. Theory and Society, vol. 27, n° 3, p. 377-409, Jun. 1998.

CAMPBELL, J. L.; PEDERSEN, O. K. (Eds.). The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

CARSTENSEN, M.; SCHMIDT, V. “Power through, over, and in ideas: conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism”. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 3, n° 2, p. 318-337, Dec. 2015.

CONNOLLY W. E. The terms of political discourse. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983. DOWDING, K. “The compatibility of behaviouralism, rational choice, and ‘new institutionalism’”. Journal of Theoretical Politics, vol. 6, n° 1, p. 105-17, May 1994.

DUNLOP, C.; JAMES, O. “Principal-agent modelling and learning: the European commission, experts, and agricultural hormone growth promoters”. Public Policy and Administration, vol. 22, nº 4, p. 403- 422, Oct. 2007.

FISCHER, F. Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. FISCHER, F.; GOTTWEIS, H. (Eds.). The argumentative turn revisited. London: Duke University Press, 2012.

FREEMAN, R. Learning in public policy. In: MORAN, M.; REIN, M.; GOODIN, R. E. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

GILARDI, F. “Who learns from what in policy diffusion processes?” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 54, n° 3, p. 650-66, Jul. 2010.

GILARDI, F; RADAELLI, C. Governance and learning. In: LEVI-FAUR, D. (ed.). The Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

GOFAS, A.; HAY, C. The ideas debate in political analysis: towards a cartography and critical assessment. In: GOFAS, A.; HAY, C. (Eds.). The role of ideas in political analysis: a portrait of contemporary debates. London: Routledge, 2010.

GOLDSTEIN, J. Ideas, interests, and American trade policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993.

GOLDSTEIN, J.; KEOHANE, R. (Eds.). Ideas and foreign policy: beliefs, institutions, and political change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993.

HAJER, M. Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice: the case of acid rain in Great Britain. In: FISCHER, F; FORESTER, J. (Eds.). The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1995.

HAJER, M.; VERSTEEG, W. “A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives”. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, vol. 7, n° 3, p. 175-84, Jan. 2005.

HALL, P. A. Governing the economy: the politics of state intervention in Britain and France. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

HALL, P. A. “Policy paradigms, social learning, and state”. Comparative Policy, vol. 25, n° 3, p. 275- 96, Apr. 1993. HALL, P.; TAYLOR, R. “Political science and the three institutionalisms”. Political Studies, vol. 44, n° 5, p. 936-57, Dec. 1996.

HARDIN, R. La acción colectiva y el dilema del prisionero. In: COLOMER, J. (Ed.). Lecturas de teoría política positiva. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Fiscales, 2006.

HAY, C. Constructivist institutionalism. In: RHODES, R. A. W.; BINDER, S. A.; ROCKMAN, B. A. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

HECLO, H. Modern social politics in Britain and Sweden. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974. HENRY, A. “Power, ideology, and policy network cohesion in regional planning”. Policy Studies Journal, vol. 39, n° 3, p. 361-83, Aug. 2011.

HÉRITIER, A.; RHODES, M. (Eds.). New modes of governance in Europe: governing in the shadow of hierarchy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

HOWARTH, D. Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000. JENKINS-SMITH, H. D., et al. The advocacy coalition framework: an overview of the research program. In: WEIBLE, C.; SABATIER, P. A. (Eds.). Theories of the policy process. Avalon Publishing, 2018.

JOHN, P. Analyzing public policy. London: Pinter, 1998. KAHNEMAN, D.; TVERSKY, A. Choices, values, and frames. In: MACLEAN, L. C.; ZIEMBA, W. T. (Eds.). Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: part I. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, p. 269-78, 2013.

KING, A. “Ideas, institutions, and the politics of governments: a comparative analysis, I and II”. British Journal of Political Science, vol. 3, nº 3, p. 291-313, Jul. 1973.

KRISTENSEN, P. H.; ZEITLIN, J. Local players in global games: the strategic constitution of multinational corporation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

MACDONELL, D. Theories of discourse: an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986. MANSBRIDGE, J. Beyond adversarial democracy. New York: Basic Books, 1980.

MARCH, J.; OLSEN, J. “The new institutionalism: organizational factors in political life”. American Political Science Review, vol. 78, p. 732-49, Sep. 1984.

MARCH, J.; OLSEN, J. Elaborating the ‘new institutionalism’. In: RHODES, R. A. W.; BINDER, S. A.; ROCKMAN, B. A. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

MAY, P. J. “Policy learning and failure”. Journal of Public Policy, vol. 12, n° 4, p. 331-54, Dec. 1992.

MAZMANIAN, D.; SABATIER, P. Implementation and public policy. Glenview: MD: Scott Foresman, 1983.

NORTH, D. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

OLIVER, M. J.; PEMBERTON, H. “Learning and change in 20th-century British Economic Policy”. Governance, vol. 17, n° 3, p. 415-41, Jul. 2004.

OSTROM, E. “Background on the institutional analysis and development framework”. The Policy Studies Journal, vol. 39, nº 1, p. 7-21, Feb. 2011.

RADAELLI, C. M. “Europeanization, policy learning, and new modes of governance”. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, vol. 10, n° 3, p. 239-54, Sept. 2008.

RADAELLI, C. M. “Measuring policy learning: regulatory impact assessment in Europe”. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 16, nº 8, p. 1.145-64, Nov. 2009.

RISSE-KAPPEN, T. “Ideas do not float freely: transnational coalitions, domestic structures, and the end of the cold war”. International Organization, vol. 48, n° 2, p. 185-214, May 1994.

ROTHSTEIN, B. Social traps and the problem of trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

RYDGREN. Beliefs. In: PETER, H.; BEARMAN, P. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

SABATIER, P. “Knowledge, policy-oriented learning, and policy change: an advocacy coalition framework”. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, vol. 8, n° 4, p. 649-92, Nov. 1987.

SABATIER, P. “The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe”. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 5, n° 1, p. 98-130, Feb. 1998.

SABATIER, P.; BRASHER, A. M. From vague consensus to clearly differentiated coalitions: environmental policy at lake Tahoe, 1964-1985. In: SABATIER, P.; JENKINS-SMITH, H. (eds.). Policy change and learning. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993.

SABATIER, P.; JENKINS-SMITH, H. The advocacy coalition framework: an assessment. In: SABATIER, P.; JENKINS-SMITH, H. (Eds.). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999.

SCHERFTER, L. “The use of scientific knowledge by independent regulatory agencies”. Governance, vol. 23, n° 2, p. 309-30, Mar. 2010.

SCHMIDT, V. “Discursive institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse”. The Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 11, p. 303-26, Jun. 2008.

SCHMIDT, V. “Taking ideas and discourse seriously: explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’”. European Political Science Review, vol. 2, n° 1, p. 1-25, Feb. 2010.

SCHMIDT, V. “Speaking of change: why discourse is key to the dynamics of policy transformation”. Critical Policy Studies, vol. 5, n° 2, p. 106-26, Jun. 2011.

SCHMIDT, V. Discursive institutionalism: scope, dynamics, and philosophical underpinnings. In: FISCHER, F.; GOTTWEIS, H. (Eds.). The argumentative turn revisited: public policy as communicative practice. Duke University Press, 2012.

SCOTT, R. Institutions and organizations: ideas, interests, and identities. Sage Publications, 2013.

SHAPIRO, M. Language and political understanding: the politics of discursive practice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1981.

SIKKINK, K. Ideas and institutions: developmentalism in Argentina and Brazil. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991.

SMITH, A. “Policy networks and advocacy coalitions: explaining policy change and stability in UK Industrial Pollution Policy”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, vol. 18, n° 1, p. 95-114, Feb. 2000.

STONE, D. A. Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1988.

WEIBLE, C. Introduction: the scope and focus of policy process research and theory. In: WEIBLE, C.; SABATIER, P. (Eds.). Theories of the policy process. Avalon Publishing, 2018.

Downloads

Publicado

2022-05-10

Como Citar

Millán, R. . (2022). A importância das ideias na mudança institucional e nos processos políticos. Opinião Pública, 28(1), 1–32. Recuperado de https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/op/article/view/8669203

Edição

Seção

Artigos