Abstract

This article analyzes the relationship between federative institutions and social policies in the new constitutional order in Argentina and Brazil. It draws on literature and data to describe two characteristics of federalism in both countries and relate this with the equitable advancement of policies such as education, health, and social assistance: jurisdictional centralization, which refers to the capacity of the central government to produce legislation about policy design; and fiscal federalism, concerned with the definition of revenues and social expenditure by the different levels of government. The conclusion is that Argentina and Brazil are example of centralized federalism and that this is not an impeditive to the advance of egalitarian social policies; but there are important differences between them. In Brazil there is greater jurisdictional centralization combined with fiscal federalism that includes centralized and stable rules to compound public revenues and a better definition of social expenditure, which structures more favorable conditions for universal and egalitarian social policies. In Argentina, jurisdictional centralization is lower and is combined with fiscal federalism with ample latitude for bargaining between the federated entities to divide revenue and define expenditure, factors which better accommodate territorially segmented social policies with a lower equalizing potential, as is the case of health.

Highlights

  • This article analyzes the relationship between federative institutions and social policies in the new constitutional order in Argentina and Brazil

  • It draws on literature and data to describe two characteristics of federalism in both countries and relate this with the equitable advancement of policies such as education, health, and social assistance: jurisdictional centralization, which refers to the capacity of the central government to produce legislation about policy design; and fiscal federalism, concerned with the definition of revenues and social expenditure by the different levels of government

  • The aim of this review essay is to analyze the effects of federative arrangements on social policies in two Latin American countries, Brazil and Argentina, based on a revision of the literature about the institutionallegal design of federalism complemented by secondary data refereeing to the two cases

Read more

Summary

Introduction

CN/94 reserves the Argentine president important jurisdictional powers over social themes, including through decrees, it is less detailed than the Brazilian one, with provinces being responsible for regulating municipal power, and more restrictive competences of the Union in the social area, at the same time that governors are relevant actors in national legislative production, becoming veto players. Argentine fiscal federalism is more centralized than the Brazilian in terms of the collection and distribution of revenues, with the provinces being more dependent on resources transferred from the national government.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call