When bargaining is and is not possible: the politics of bureaucratic expertise in the context of democratic backsliding

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Policy and Society Pub Date : 2023-08-21 DOI:10.1093/polsoc/puad023
Natália Massaco Koga, Ana Paula Karruz, Pedro Lucas de Moura Palotti, Marcos Luiz Vieira Soares Filho, Bruno Gontyjo do Couto
{"title":"When bargaining is and is not possible: the politics of bureaucratic expertise in the context of democratic backsliding","authors":"Natália Massaco Koga, Ana Paula Karruz, Pedro Lucas de Moura Palotti, Marcos Luiz Vieira Soares Filho, Bruno Gontyjo do Couto","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puad023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In looking at the complex relationship between expertise and power in policymaking, what is amiss are studies on how the expertise exchange bargain between politicians and bureaucracy works in practice, especially in antidemocratic contexts. To deal with this limitation, we use Christensen’s (Christensen, J. (2022). When bureaucratic expertise comes under attack. Public Administration) expertise bargain change model for examining the authority transaction between politicians and bureaucrats. Upon external shocks, such as democratic backsliding with the sidelining of policy advice, the extant expertise bargain is challenged. We explore how the bureaucracy acted toward the government’s adversarial (and even antagonistic) stance and how that relationship toward the expertise bargain changed in two policy areas in Brazil (health and environment) during Bolsonaro’s administration (2019–2022). Notably, this article relies mainly on qualitative data from in-depth interviews with bureaucrats who provided expertise to the government on these policy areas during the Bolsonaro administration’s transition. Ancillary documentary sources were examined to detail the strategies of attack from government toward bureaucratic expertise and ancillary documentary sources of quantitative data from a survey with bureaucrats fielded during the Bolsonaro administration’s first year. Results show three factors that condition bureaucratic expertise’s resilience: the nature of the attack (local or extensive), the knowledge base’s and epistemic community’s level of cohesion, and the advice system’s degree of institutionalization. This case study sheds light on how different policy advice arrangements respond and function under antidemocratic contexts, allowing the application and enrichment of policy expertise literature outside regular democratic politics.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":"110 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In looking at the complex relationship between expertise and power in policymaking, what is amiss are studies on how the expertise exchange bargain between politicians and bureaucracy works in practice, especially in antidemocratic contexts. To deal with this limitation, we use Christensen’s (Christensen, J. (2022). When bureaucratic expertise comes under attack. Public Administration) expertise bargain change model for examining the authority transaction between politicians and bureaucrats. Upon external shocks, such as democratic backsliding with the sidelining of policy advice, the extant expertise bargain is challenged. We explore how the bureaucracy acted toward the government’s adversarial (and even antagonistic) stance and how that relationship toward the expertise bargain changed in two policy areas in Brazil (health and environment) during Bolsonaro’s administration (2019–2022). Notably, this article relies mainly on qualitative data from in-depth interviews with bureaucrats who provided expertise to the government on these policy areas during the Bolsonaro administration’s transition. Ancillary documentary sources were examined to detail the strategies of attack from government toward bureaucratic expertise and ancillary documentary sources of quantitative data from a survey with bureaucrats fielded during the Bolsonaro administration’s first year. Results show three factors that condition bureaucratic expertise’s resilience: the nature of the attack (local or extensive), the knowledge base’s and epistemic community’s level of cohesion, and the advice system’s degree of institutionalization. This case study sheds light on how different policy advice arrangements respond and function under antidemocratic contexts, allowing the application and enrichment of policy expertise literature outside regular democratic politics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当讨价还价是可能的和不可能的时候:民主倒退背景下的官僚专家政治
在研究决策过程中专业知识和权力之间的复杂关系时,对政治家和官僚机构之间的专业知识交换交易在实践中如何运作的研究是错误的,特别是在反民主的背景下。为了应对这一限制,我们使用了Christensen的(Christensen, J.(2022))。当官僚专业知识受到攻击时。考察政治家与官僚之间权力交易的公共管理专业知识交易变迁模型。一旦受到外部冲击,比如民主倒退、政策建议被边缘化,现有的专业知识交易就会受到挑战。我们探讨了在博尔索纳罗执政期间(2019-2022年),官僚机构如何对政府的对抗(甚至对抗)立场采取行动,以及在巴西的两个政策领域(健康和环境),这种关系与专业知识交易的关系是如何变化的。值得注意的是,本文主要依赖于对博尔索纳罗政府过渡期间就这些政策领域向政府提供专业知识的官僚进行深入访谈后获得的定性数据。对辅助文件来源进行了研究,以详细说明政府对官僚专业知识的攻击策略,以及对博尔索纳罗政府第一年派驻的官僚进行调查的定量数据的辅助文件来源。结果表明,影响官僚专业知识弹性的因素有三个:攻击的性质(地方性或广泛性)、知识库和知识共同体的凝聚力水平以及咨询系统的制度化程度。本案例研究揭示了不同的政策建议安排如何在反民主背景下作出反应和发挥作用,从而允许在常规民主政治之外应用和丰富政策专业文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Society
Policy and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
43
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Governance of Generative AI From benign to malign: unintended consequences and the growth of Zombie policies Policy knowledge production in de-democratizing contexts Responsible governance of generative AI: conceptualizing GenAI as complex adaptive systems Steering the future: expert knowledge and stakeholder voices in autonomous vehicle policy reports
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1