Contesting Austerity

Despite the historical and political similarities between Portugal and Spain, the contentious responses to austerity diverged in terms of number, rhythm and players. This book compares the contentious responses to austerity in Portugal and Spain during the Eurozone crisis and the Great Recession between 2008 and 2015. While in Spain a sustained wave of mobilisation lasted for three years, involving various players and leading to a transformation of the party system, in Portugal social movements were only able to mobilise in specific instances, trade unions dominated protest and, by the end of the cycle, institutional change was limited. Contesting Austerity shows that the different trajectories and outcomes in these two countries are connected to the nature and configurations of the players in the mobilisation process. While in Spain actors’ relative autonomy from one another led to deeper political transformation, in Portugal the dominance of the institutional actors limited the extent of that change.

Role of water infrastructure programs for family farmers in strengthening adaptive capacities to climate change: lessons from the Cisterns Program in Semi-arid Brazil

The semi-arid region of Brazil, marked by low human development indicators, has historically suffered from water scarcity, being the focus of public policies to reduce socioeconomic, water, and climatic vulnerabilities for more than a century. Among the recent initiatives, the Cisterns Program stands out as an attempt to guarantee water and food security for family farmers through the construction of social technologies for water storage, such as cisterns production. Thus, the research objective was to analyse the perception of farmers and institutional actors involved with the Program about the impact of the 2011-2018 drought on the functioning of cisterns and to discuss how water infrastructure programs can improve the adaptive capacity of farmers affected by climate change. Through semi-structured interviews with institutional actors at the regional/national level and with farmers in semi-arid Brazil in the years of 2017/2018, the results indicate that access to the social technology seems to strengthen the relationship between water and food security, and the specific capacity of farmers in dealing with climatic risks. We conclude with lessons and recommendations from the Brazilian experience that can be useful for actors from other semi-arid regions involved in water infrastructure programs.

13. The institutions of the Common Foreign and Security Policy:

This chapter examines the institutional arrangements in the European Union’s (EU’s) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The chapter first charts the historical development of this policy, with foreign policy cooperation being one of the last policy areas to emerge at the EU level. Thus, many of the institutions operating in this area have only been recently established, including the High Representative, the European External Action Service, and many of the administrative bodies supporting the implementation of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy, which comprises the EU’s civilian and military operations. The chapter then analyses the main institutional actors involved in the CFSP, focusing on their ability to shape the decision-making and implementation of this policy. The following sections also examine the five dimensions of EU institutional politics and how these play out in this particular area, highlighting the key challenges the EU faces in becoming a fully fledged international actor.

3. The European Council:

This chapter discusses the central role of the European Council in European Union (EU) politics and policymaking. Even though it was not listed among the EU’s core institutions until the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council regularly intervenes in EU decision-making to make other institutional actors follow its guidance. Initially, it was meant to be predominantly an informal institution for direct exchanges between the heads of state or government of the member states. Yet it assumed responsibility for landmark decisions which paved the way for key steps in integration, such as EU enlargements and the euro. The European Council has arguably saved the Union from break-up by acting as its ultimate crisis manager and, at times, has skirted the boundaries of EU law by finding institutional compromises and fixes. The institution plays a guiding role, especially in relation to the Commission and the Council of the European Union, which was formerly known as the Council of Ministers. The European Council devises strategic guidelines for policy development, shapes processes of institutional reform, and breaks impasses when agreement cannot otherwise be found. Since the Treaty of Maastricht, European Council intervention has become a routine in new EU policy areas, such as euro area economic governance and foreign policy. The Treaty of Lisbon assigns the European Council its own full-time president and places the institution right after the European Parliament (EP) in the list of EU institutions. Even though it has shaped European integration since 1975, the European Council did not find much recognition in traditional theories of European integration. This has changed more recently, with renewed debate about intergovernmentalism in EU politics.

Introduction

The global rise of populism is driving a process of democratic erosion. Accordingly, scholarly attention has shifted from processes of democratization to de-democratization trajectories; or, how democracies perish after they have transitioned from authoritarianism. This chapter distinguishes between populism (a political strategy) and competitive authoritarianism (a regime type). The chapter enumerates the conceptual contributions of this book, primarily, that the rise to power of populism can lead to regime change by creating significant power asymmetries. However, while unconstrained populism in power can lead to hybrid regimes or even full-scale authoritarianism, strong judiciaries, and other institutional actors, can contain or constrain populism in power, preventing regime change. The chapter offers a new definition of populism that includes a governance dimension that is missing in other definitions and argues that Alberto Fujimori, Hugo Chávez, Álvaro Uribe, Evo Morales, and Rafael Correa are examples of populism.

The Hobbesian Moment

This chapter reviews how once in power, populist leaders try to assert their political dominance, which is invariably contested by some societal and institutional actors, and shows how this moment of decisive political confrontation determines the ulterior trajectory of the populist government. If populist chief executives succeed during this moment, an aggrandized executive emerges and electoral democracy will transition to a hybrid regime; if they are defeated or constrained, the possibility of regime change is averted. The chapter identifies the permissive and productive conditions that explain the failure or success of populist leaders in emerging victorious from this inflection point. The key permissive condition is voters’ support for radical institutional change. The key productive condition is the ability of populist leaders to use the state’s repressive apparatus to impose their political will. An additional productive condition is sometimes present: the organization and mobilization of low-income voters to support the populist project.

A Dynamic Theory of Populism in Power

This chapter considers how populism in power leads to regime change in some cases, but not in others and shows how the difference is explained by the ability of populist leaders to navigate a key moment of confrontation with the opposition and the courts. This ability is determined by the strength of permissive conditions (public opinion support for institutional change). The necessary productive conditions are given by their decision to use the state’s repressive apparatus to prevail against the opposition. In some cases, another productive condition is present: the mobilization of civil society. Once the opposition is severely weakened, populist leaders find it much easier to accumulate greater power and to create an uneven playing field that reproduces their hold on power. By contrast, if the courts and other institutional actors defeat populist leaders in a key moment of confrontation, they will also constrain populist rule and avoid regime change.

Evolution of Short Food Supply Chain Innovation Niches and Its Anchoring to the Socio-Technical Regime: The Case of Direct Selling through Collective Action in North-West Portugal

This paper employs MLP (Multi Level Perspective) applied to a study on the transition to SFSC (short food supply chain) innovation taking place in North-West Portugal. MLP allows capturing transition phenomena and analysing them from a perspective that posits intervening factors and events on a three-level scale. Emphasis is laid on the institutional actors and factors that influence these processes, namely the Three Interrelated Analytic Dimensions and Types of Anchoring. Methodologically, personal interviews were conducted with 34 farmers who either are carrying out SFSC initiatives, or have dropped out, or even have never considered participating in them. A process of anchoring the innovation to the local socio-technical regime has been identified, characterised by a low buy-in from institutions and stakeholders. The anchoring that has been found has the peculiarity of occurring only in some points of the intersection between niche and regime, in a process in which it survives bordering this threshold, thanks to the mobilisation of multiple innovations. This type of anchoring, not yet described in the literature, draws attention to a possible pathway that innovations can follow, and brings implications for projects and for policy proposals to support the agroecological transition.

Engagement without accountability: The role of governments, field experts, and public intellectuals in the context of the covid-19 pandemic

The outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic represented a major shock. In their effort to adapt their responses to the crisis to their own conditions of survival, governments have tended to resort to arguments that limit accountability to the population. Despite the privileged place they are presumed to have within contemporary societies, experts have been displaced from the decision-making processes of governments and delegitimized by the anti-intellectual drift favored by the way in which arguments are presented and debated in social media. At the same time, despite being perceived as capable of offering inside-out evaluations of specific phenomena and therefore capable of distinguishing between truths and big lies (and anything in-between), the role of public intellectuals seems to have been limited. The article analyses the responses of great power governments and regional powers in terms of the discursive practices deployed in the context of the covid-19 crisis, and the capacity of the aforementioned non-institutional actors to confront these discourses. As editors-in-chief, policymakers have felt passionate about war metaphors that have allowed them to deconstruct and make complex subjects accessible, and as such, to ensure a sufficient level of attention and public approval so that the fight against the enemy could begin. In addition, they have prompted the implementation of emergency measures that, in a context of geopolitical confrontation, have allowed them to evade individual responsibilities. Rather than using their knowledge to provide constructive examination of complex issues and make them accessible, so the ones who listen to them can hopefully understand the impact of specific policy preferences and minimize their own losses in the increasingly competitive environment, experts and intellectuals have seen their room for maneuver to influence policy formulations severely limited.

Biobanking and risk assessment: a comprehensive typology of risks for an adaptive risk governance

Biobanks act as the custodians for the access to and responsible use of human biological samples and related data that have been generously donated by individuals to serve the public interest and scientific advances in the health research realm. Risk assessment has become a daily practice for biobanks and has been discussed from different perspectives. This paper aims to provide a literature review on risk assessment in order to put together a comprehensive typology of diverse risks biobanks could potentially face. Methodologically set as a typology, the conceptual approach used in this paper is based on the interdisciplinary analysis of scientific literature, the relevant ethical and legal instruments and practices in biobanking to identify how risks are assessed, considered and mitigated. Through an interdisciplinary mapping exercise, we have produced a typology of potential risks in biobanking, taking into consideration the perspectives of different stakeholders, such as institutional actors and publics, including participants and representative organizations. With this approach, we have identified the following risk types: economic, infrastructural, institutional, research community risks and participant’s risks. The paper concludes by highlighting the necessity of an adaptive risk governance as an integral part of good governance in biobanking. In this regard, it contributes to sustainability in biobanking by assisting in the design of relevant risk management practices, where they are not already in place or require an update. The typology is intended to be useful from the early stages of establishing such a complex and multileveled biomedical infrastructure as well as to provide a catalogue of risks for improving the risk management practices already in place.