When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Contexto Internacional |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-85292016000100349 |
Resumo: | Abstract Non-state actors contribute with inputs to the elaboration of the national interest in trade negotiations, thus enhancing its legitimacy. Nevertheless, does the participation of those actors necessarily equal influence on the part of all segments of civil society on policymaking? To answer the question, I argue that procedural legitimacy should be evaluated not only in relation to the inputs society provides to the State, but should also consider whether officials actually analyse societal contributions in decision-making. I demonstrate the empirical application of the model based upon Brazil's experience in multilateral trade negotiations during the 2000s, using Mexico as a shadow case. I conclude that foreign trade policymaking can only be democratised if, in procedural legitimacy, the State attributes equal weight to contributions from all types of societal actors, including civil society organisations and organised social movements, which tend to have less material resources and power than interest groups such as business associations and labour unions. |
id |
PUC_RIO-22_906096f4081ae98e02041818334dacf1 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0102-85292016000100349 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_RIO-22 |
network_name_str |
Contexto Internacional |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and MexicoForeign Trade PolicyCivil SocietyLegitimacyBrazilMexicoDoha RoundPolicymaking.Abstract Non-state actors contribute with inputs to the elaboration of the national interest in trade negotiations, thus enhancing its legitimacy. Nevertheless, does the participation of those actors necessarily equal influence on the part of all segments of civil society on policymaking? To answer the question, I argue that procedural legitimacy should be evaluated not only in relation to the inputs society provides to the State, but should also consider whether officials actually analyse societal contributions in decision-making. I demonstrate the empirical application of the model based upon Brazil's experience in multilateral trade negotiations during the 2000s, using Mexico as a shadow case. I conclude that foreign trade policymaking can only be democratised if, in procedural legitimacy, the State attributes equal weight to contributions from all types of societal actors, including civil society organisations and organised social movements, which tend to have less material resources and power than interest groups such as business associations and labour unions.Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Relações Internacionais2016-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-85292016000100349Contexto Internacional v.38 n.1 2016reponame:Contexto Internacionalinstname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RIO)instacron:PUC_RIO10.1590/S0102-8529.2016380100010info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVieira,Vinícius Rodrigueseng2016-06-16T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-85292016000100349Revistahttp://contextointernacional.iri.puc-rio.br/cgi/cgilua.exe/sys/start.htm?tpl=homePUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpcintjournal@puc-rio.br||contextointernacional@puc-rio.br1982-02400102-8529opendoar:2016-06-16T00:00Contexto Internacional - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RIO)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
title |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
spellingShingle |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico Vieira,Vinícius Rodrigues Foreign Trade Policy Civil Society Legitimacy Brazil Mexico Doha Round Policymaking. |
title_short |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
title_full |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
title_fullStr |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
title_full_unstemmed |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
title_sort |
When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico |
author |
Vieira,Vinícius Rodrigues |
author_facet |
Vieira,Vinícius Rodrigues |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Vieira,Vinícius Rodrigues |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Foreign Trade Policy Civil Society Legitimacy Brazil Mexico Doha Round Policymaking. |
topic |
Foreign Trade Policy Civil Society Legitimacy Brazil Mexico Doha Round Policymaking. |
description |
Abstract Non-state actors contribute with inputs to the elaboration of the national interest in trade negotiations, thus enhancing its legitimacy. Nevertheless, does the participation of those actors necessarily equal influence on the part of all segments of civil society on policymaking? To answer the question, I argue that procedural legitimacy should be evaluated not only in relation to the inputs society provides to the State, but should also consider whether officials actually analyse societal contributions in decision-making. I demonstrate the empirical application of the model based upon Brazil's experience in multilateral trade negotiations during the 2000s, using Mexico as a shadow case. I conclude that foreign trade policymaking can only be democratised if, in procedural legitimacy, the State attributes equal weight to contributions from all types of societal actors, including civil society organisations and organised social movements, which tend to have less material resources and power than interest groups such as business associations and labour unions. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-85292016000100349 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-85292016000100349 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0102-8529.2016380100010 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Relações Internacionais |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Relações Internacionais |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Contexto Internacional v.38 n.1 2016 reponame:Contexto Internacional instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RIO) instacron:PUC_RIO |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RIO) |
instacron_str |
PUC_RIO |
institution |
PUC_RIO |
reponame_str |
Contexto Internacional |
collection |
Contexto Internacional |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Contexto Internacional - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RIO) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
cintjournal@puc-rio.br||contextointernacional@puc-rio.br |
_version_ |
1752127872363921408 |