3. Producción
Browse
Search Results
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Protecting gains: Extractivism, social movements, and the politics of policy implementation(Elsevier Ltd, 2024-03-01)Scholarship on social movements around conflicts over extractive development has advanced in identifying when movements are likely to impact policy adoption. Yet, in Latin America policies are rarely implemented – a reality that commonly leads conflicts to reignite. This sheds light over this often overlooked issue. We focus on the politics of policy implementation – when and how social movements around extractive development have higher chances to favorably impact policy enforcement. To this end, we switch the attention from the strategies of social movements and their outcomes over policy implementation at the local level, to their cumulative impact on national-level policy. We argue for a comparative political economy approach that enables us to identify the systemic, intermediate, and short-term factors that impact the effect of movements on conflicts over policy implementation. Building on this approach, we propose three potential implementation outcomes – positive, status quo and rollback – depending on the degree to which they align with a movement's position. We conclude highlighting the contributions of the articles in this issue to the politics of policy implementation and providing some insights for social movements’ course of action to protect their gains. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Economic elites and development with equity in Bolivia and Ecuador(Taylor and Francis, 2024-01-01)Over the last few decades, Latin American economic elites have held strong preferences in favor of laissez-faire macroeconomic models with minimum state intervention. However, after the elections of left-wing parties in government in the 2000s, they acquiesced to more heterodox, state-led development models. What explains this change of stance? Under what conditions do economic elites of small economies on the periphery of the world capitalist system swing their support from neoclassical market economics to more mixed-economy approaches to development? In this chapter, we argue that critical changes in the balance of power between economic elites and left-wing governments explain variations in the former’s willingness to accept mixed-economy development models. To support the argument, we trace the changing distribution of power resources in three interrelated but analytically separate fields - economic, political, and social - and the international economic factors that tilt the balance in favor of or against capital owners. We look at the cases of Bolivia and Ecuador and find that when economic elites are at a disadvantage vis-à-vis left-wing governments in terms of power resources, they are more likely to accommodate state-led development models. In particular, we find that the commodity boom, the crisis of pro-market parties, and the fragmentation within the pro-business associational space caused a decline in the economic, political, and social resources possessed by economic elites. The end of the commodity boom and changing socio-political conditions caused economic elites to once again aggressively turn away from heterodox development models.