Technocracy And Democracy In Latin America

Praised by some as islands of efficiency in a sea of unprofessional, politicized, and corrupt states, and criticized by others for removing wide areas of policy making from the democratic arena, technocrats have become prominent and controversial actors in Latin American politics. Through an in-depth analysis of economic and health policy in Colombia from 1958 to 2011 and in Peru from 1980 to 2011, Technocracy and Democracy in Latin America explains the source of these experts' power as well as the leverage they have across state policy sectors in Latin America.

The ascendancy of technocratic personnel and their imposition of neo-liberal economic policies have come to define Latin American politics in the 1980s and 1990s. This book is the first comparative analysis of these events and their implications for the future of democracy on the continent. Individual chapters discuss the rise to power of these technocrats in Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru as well as the historical antecedents of expert rule in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The important role that technocrats play in Latin America has stimulated a lively theoretical debate about experts' influence in policy making and their effective independence from other sociopolitical players, especially politicians, international financial institutions and business. Through an in-depth analysis of the role of economic and health technocrats in Colombia from 1958 to 2011 and in Peru from 1980 to 2011, this dissertation demonstrates that technocrats are best conceptualized as autonomous actors in Latin America. This technical autonomy, though, varies in strength from policy sector to policy sector and even within the same policy sector across time. I propose a theory of technocratic autonomy to explain both the bases of experts' autonomy and the determinants that explain the variation in the degree of autonomy across policy sectors and across time. Fundamentally, technocrats' higher degree of expertise provides them with considerable leverage over sociopolitical actors and allows them to enhance their influence. Four factors explain experts' degree of autonomy and its variation across policy areas. First, a high level of technical complexity in a policy area enhances autonomy by making it more difficult for politicians to counter technocrats' proposals. Second, the degree of technocratic consensus in a policy area limits the possibility of experts being replaced by other experts with preferences closer to those of politicians. Third, experts are more likely to gain autonomy in state areas where bad policy performance causes high political costs for the incumbent. Finally, a balanced constellation of diverse powerful stakeholders having interests in a policy area also enhances technical autonomy. These stakeholders monitor competing stakeholders and the incumbent, opening a space for technocrats to act with more autonomy. I argue that these four factors explain why economic experts, in general, are more likely to gain autonomy and entrench it over time, whereas health experts remain more vulnerable. These factors also explain the variation in technocratic autonomy over time within the same policy area.

The ascendancy of technocratic personnel and their imposition of neo-liberal economic policies have come to define Latin American politics in the 1980s and 1990s. This book is the first comparative analysis of these events and their implications for the future of democracy on the continent. Individual chapters discuss the rise to power of these technocrats in Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru as well as the historical antecedents of expert rule in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

This book represents the first comprehensive study of how technocracy currently challenges representative democracy and asks how technocratic politics undermines democratic legitimacy. How strong is its challenge to democratic institutions? The book offers a solid theory and conceptualization of technocratic politics and the technocratic challenge is analyzed empirically at all levels of the national and supra-national institutions and actors, such as cabinets, parties, the EU, independent bodies, central banks and direct democratic campaigns in a comparative and policy perspective. It takes an in-depth analysis addressing elitism, meritocracy, de-politicization, efficiency, neutrality, reliance on science and distrust toward party politics and ideologies, and their impact when pitched against democratic responsiveness, accountability, citizens' input and pluralist competition. In the current crisis of democracy, this book assesses the effects of the technocratic critique against representative institutions, which are perceived to be unable to deal with complex and global problems. It analyzes demands for competent and responsible policy making in combination with the simultaneous populist resistance to experts. The book will be of key interest to scholars and students of comparative politics, political theory, policy analysis, multi-level governance as well as practitioners working in bureaucracies, media, think-tanks and policy making.

The major role played by a technocratic elite in Chilean politics was perhaps most controversial when the “Chicago Boys” ran the economic program of Augusto Pinochet’s military regime from 1973 to 1990. But technocrats did not suddenly come upon the scene when Pinochet engineered the coup against Salvador Allende’s government. They had long been important contributors to Chile’s approach to the challenges of economic development. In this book, political scientist and historian Patricio Silva examines their part in the story of twentieth-century Chile. Even before industrialization had begun in Chile, the impact of positivism and the idea of “scientific government” gained favor with Chilean intellectuals in the late nineteenth century. The technocrats who emerged from this background became the main architects designing the industrial policies of the state through the Ibáñez government (1927–31), the state-led industrialization project of the late 1930s and 1940s, the Frei and Allende administrations, Pinochet’s dictatorship, and the return to democracy from the Aylwin administration to the present. Thus, contrary to the popular belief inspired by the dominance of the Chicago Boys, technocrats have not only been the tools of authoritarian leaders but have also been important players in sustaining democratic rule. As Silva shows, technocratic ideology in Chile has been quite compatible with the interests and demands of the large middle classes, who have always defended meritocratic values and educational achievements above the privileges provided by social backgrounds. And for most of the twentieth century, technocrats have provided a kind of buffer zone between contending political forces, thereby facilitating the functioning of Chilean democracy in the past and the present.

This is a bold new study of the recent emergence of democracy in Latin America. Leonardo Avritzer shows that traditional theories of democratization fall short in explaining this phenomenon. Scholars have long held that the postwar stability of Western Europe reveals that restricted democracy, or "democratic elitism," is the only realistic way to guard against forces such as the mass mobilizations that toppled European democracies after World War I. Avritzer challenges this view. Drawing on the ideas of Jürgen Habermas, he argues that democracy can be far more inclusive and can rely on a sphere of autonomous association and argument by citizens. He makes this argument by showing that democratic collective action has opened up a new "public space" for popular participation in Latin American politics. Unlike many theorists, Avritzer builds his case empirically. He looks at human rights movements in Argentina and Brazil, neighborhood associations in Brazil and Mexico, and election-monitoring initiatives in Mexico. Contending that such participation has not gone far enough, he proposes a way to involve citizens even more directly in policy decisions. For example, he points to experiments in "participatory budgeting" in two Brazilian cities. Ultimately, the concept of such a space beyond the reach of state administration fosters a broader view of democratic possibility, of the cultural transformation that spurred it, and of the tensions that persist, in a region where democracy is both new and different from the Old World models.

The rise of populist parties and movements across the Western hemisphere and their contempt for ‘experts’ has shocked the establishment. This book examines how the ‘post-industrial’ technocratic regime of the 1980’s – of managerialism, depoliticisation and the politics of expertise – sowed the seeds for the backlash against the political elites that is visible today. Populism, Esmark augues, is a sign that the technocratic bluff has finally been called and that technocracy posing as democracy will only serve to exasperate existing problems. This book sets a new benchmark for studies of technocracy, showing that a solution to the challenge of populism will depend as much on a technocratic retreat as democratic innovation.