Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:12:59.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Democracy and Social Welfare in Uruguay and Paraguay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Davide Grassi
Davide Grassi*
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Torino. davide.grassi@unito.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article aims to assess how democracy affects social welfare by analyzing Uruguay and Paraguay, one country with a vibrant democratic history and a progressive political landscape, the other with a generally authoritarian past and a conservative dominant party. The article maintains that welfare systems in these countries have been critically shaped by the impact of democracy, or by its absence, and by the strategies adopted by major social and political actors, especially parties; these strategies have been determined, in turn, by parties' ideologies and by the workings of electoral competition. The article also emphasizes that the impact of democracy on social welfare is critically mediated by the role of previous welfare legacies, the presence of welfare constituencies defending acquired rights and privileges, and social and economic variables, such as overall wealth levels, the formal or informal nature of labor markets, and the political organization of domestic economies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , Spring 2014 , pp. 120 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alderson, Arthur S., and Nielsen, François. 2002. Globalization and the Great U-Turn: Income Inequality Trends in 16 Oecd Countries. American Journal of Sociology 107: 1244–99.Google Scholar
Altman, David. 2000. The Politics of Coalition Formation and Survival in Multiparty Presidential Democracies: the Case of Uruguay, 1989–1999. Party Politics 6, 3: 259–83.Google Scholar
Altman, David. 2011. Direct Democracy Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Bogado, Daniel, Carosini, Leticia, and Barrios, Laura. 2006. El caso paraguayo. In La economía social en Iberoamérica. Un acercamiento a su realidad, ed. María Pérez de Uralde, Juan y Radrigán Rubio, Mario. Madrid: FUNDIBES. 155–95.Google Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A., and Jackman, Robert W.. 1985. Regression Diagnostics: an Expository Treatment of Outliers and Influential Cases. Sociological Methods and Research 13: 510–42.Google Scholar
Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI). 2012. Paraguay Country Report. http://www.bti-project.org/countryreports/lac/pry. Accessed March 15, 2012.Google Scholar
Bradley, David, Huber, Evelyne, Moller, Stephanie, Nielsen, François, and Stephens, John D.. 2003. Distribution and Redistribution in Post-Industrial Democracies. World Politics 55: 193–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buquet, Daniel. 1995. Los efectos del sistema electoral uruguayo. Working paper. Reforma electoral y consolidación democrática en América Latina series. Montevideo: Instituto de Ciencia Política/Organización de Estados Americanos. Google Scholar
Carbone, Giovanni M. 2009. Do All Good Things Go Together? Exploring the Consequences of Democratization. Journal of Democracy 20, 2: 123–37.Google Scholar
Castiglioni, Rossana. 2005. Reforma de pensiones en América Latina: orígenes y estrategias, 1980–2002. Revista de Ciencia Política (Santiago) 25, 2: 173–89.Google Scholar
Comisión Económica para América Latina (CEPAL). 2006. Panorama social de América Latina. Cuadro 1.7. Santiago: United Nations.Google Scholar
Comisión Económica para América Latina (CEPAL). 2008. Históricas de estadísticas económicas: 1950–2008. América Latina y el Caribe series. http://www.eclac.cl/deype/cuaderno37/esp/index.htm. Accessed September 1, 2012.Google Scholar
Comisión Económica para América Latina (CEPAL). 2011. Panorama social de América Latina. Santiago: United Nations. Google Scholar
Coppedge, Michael. 1997. A Classification of Latin American Political Parties. Working Paper no. 244. Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
De Riz, Liliana. 2007. Los dilemas de la democracia paraguaya. Buenos Aires: Programa Buenos Aires de Historia Política. http://www.historiapolitica.com/datos/biblioteca/deriz3.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2012.Google Scholar
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Various years. Statistical Yearbook of Latin America. New York: United Nations. Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
Ferreira-Coimbra, Natalia, and Forteza, Alvaro. 2004a. Protección social en Uruguay. Financiamiento, cobertura y desempeño, 1990–2002. Cuadro 43: Tienen cobertura de salud. Santiago: Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT).Google Scholar
Ferreira-Coimbra, Natalia. 2004b. Cuadro 65: Cobertura del programa de invalidez, vejez y sobrevivencia. Santiago: OIT. Google Scholar
Filgueira, Fernando, and Moraes, Juan A.. 1999. Political Environments, Sector Specific Configurations, and Strategic Devices: Understanding Institutional Reform in Uruguay. Working paper R-351. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
Filgueira, Fernando, and Alegre, Pablo. 2008. El sistema de protección social y de relaciones laborales en Uruguay: balance y perspectivas (1985–2009). IPES paper no. 13. Universidad Católica de Montevideo. http://www.ucu.edu.uy/es/node/1623#.Utz3SqNd6M911/07/2012 Google Scholar
Freije, Samuel. 2003. Empleo informal en América Latina y el Caribe. Caracas: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo/IESA. Google Scholar
Garmendia, Gonzalo. 2010. Evaluación de la reforma del sistema de pensiones en Uruguay. Perfiles Latinoamericanos 18, 35: 89–103.Google Scholar
González, Luis Eduardo. 1993. Estructuras políticas y democracia en Uruguay. Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria. Google Scholar
Gough, Ian, and Wood, Geoff, eds. 2004. Insecurity and Welfare Regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America: Social Policy in Development Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Gradstein, Marc, and Milanovic, Branko. 2004. Does Liberté = egalité? a Survey of the Empirical Links between Democracy and Iinequality with Some Evidence on the Transition Economies. Journal of Economic Surveys 18, 4: 515–37.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan, and Kaufman, Robert R.. 2008. Development, Democracy, and Welfare States. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
Hicks, Alexander M. 1999. Social Democracy and Welfare Capitalism: A Century of Income Security Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2001. Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Markets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne. 2005. Successful Social Policy Regimes? Political Economy, Politics, and the Structure of Social Policy in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, and Costa Rica. Paper presented at the conference “Democratic Governability,” Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame, October 7–8.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, Nielsen, François, Pribble, Jennifer, and Stephens, John D.. 2006. Politics and Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean. American Sociological Review 71, 6: 943–63.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, Stephens, John D., Mustillo, Thomas, and Pribble, Jennifer. 2008. Latin America and the Caribbean Political Dataset, 1945–2001. Charlotte: University of North Carolina. Google Scholar
Katzman, Rubén, and Rodríguez, Francisco. 2006. Encuesta nacional de hogares ampliada. Informe temático: Situación de la educación en Uruguay. Montevideo: INE. Google Scholar
Kay, Stephen J. 1999. Unexpected Privatizations: Politics and Social Security Reforms in the Southern Cone. Comparative Politics 31, 4: 403–22.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert. 1994. The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Lachi, Marcello. 2004. Gobernabilidad democrática al estilo paraguayo. NovaPolis 7 (May). http://www.novapolis.pyglobal.com/07/gobernaestilo.php. Accessed September 4, 2012.Google Scholar
Lindert, Peter H. 2004. Growing Public: Social Spending and Economic Growth Since the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour M., and Smelser, Neil J., eds. 1966. Social Structure and Mobility in Economic Development. Chicago: Aldine. Google Scholar
Luna, Juan Pablo. 2007. Frente Amplio and the Crafting of a Social Democratic Alternative in Uruguay. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 4 (Winter): 1–30.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott P., Brinks, Daniel, and Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal. 2008. Political Regimes in Latin America, 1900–2007. Unpublished mss. http://kellogg.nd.edu/scottmainwaring/Political_Regimes.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2012.Google Scholar
McAuslan, Patrick. 1998. Making Law Work: Restructuring Land Relations in Africa. Development and Change 29, 3: 525–52.Google Scholar
Mesa-Lago, Carmelo. 1990. Aspectos económicos-financieros de la seguridad social en América Latina y Caribe. Paper presented at the 2o Congreso Interamericano Jurídico de la Seguridad Social, Montevideo, October 8–12.Google Scholar
Midaglia, Carmen. 2009. Las políticas sociales del gobierno de izquierda en Uruguay. Una aproximación a sus características y resultados. In Consenso progresista: las políticas sociales de los gobiernos progresistas del Cono Sur, ed. Quiroga, Yesko, Canzani, Agustín, and Ensignia, Jaime. Mexico City: Fundación Friedrich Ebert. 183–222.Google Scholar
Nelson, Kenneth. 2007. Universalism versus Targeting: the Vulnerability of Social Insurance and Means-Tested Minimum Income Protection in 18 countries, 1990–2002. International Social Security Review 60, 1: 33–58.Google Scholar
El País (Montevideo). 1997. Reforma del sistema de pensiones. May 18.Google Scholar
Paraguay. Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos (DGEEC). 2001a. Boletino TAEC 9, 12/2001. Asunción: DGEEC.Google Scholar
Paraguay. Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos (DGEEC). 2001b. Encuesta integrada de hogares, 2000/01. Asunción: DGEEC. Google Scholar
Paraguay. Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos (DGEEC). Various years. Censo 2002 y encuesta permanente de hogares. Cuadros: Tienen seguro médico. Asunción: DGEEC. Google Scholar
Paraguay. Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos (DGEEC). Various years. Resultados finales. Encuesta permanente de hogares. Asunción: DGEEC. Google Scholar
Paraguay. Ministerio de Educación y Cultura. 2003. Análisis cuantitativo de la evolución educativa, 1990–2001. Asunción: MEC. Google Scholar
Paraguay. Ministerio de Hacienda. 2012. Informe de las finanzas públicas de la República del Paraguay. http://www.hacienda.gov.py/web-presupuesto/index.php?c=164. Accessed January 30, 2012.Google Scholar
Polity IV. Various years. Regime Authority Characteristics and Transitions Datasets. Annual Time-Series 1800–2012. http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/inscr.htm. Accessed April 23, 2012.Google Scholar
Pribble, Jennifer. 2013. Welfare and Party Politics in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, Alvarez, Michael E., Antonio Cheibub, Josè, and Limongi, Fernando, eds. 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuveny, Rafael, and Li, Quan. 2003. Economic Openness, Democracy, and Income Inequality. Comparative Political Studies 36, 5: 575–610.Google Scholar
Richards, Donald G. 2008. Transition and Reform in a Predatory State: the Case of Paraguay. Journal of Economic Policy Reform 11, 2: 101–14.Google Scholar
Rodríguez Silvero, Ricardo. 2003. Paraguay 2003: Discusión política en torno a los sistemas locales de seguridad social y status actual en materia de proyectos de ley. Paper presented at FECON 2003, Universidad Autónoma de Asunción, November 21.Google Scholar
Rodrik, Dani. 1999. Democracies Pay Higher Wages. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114, 3: 707–38.Google Scholar
Ross, Michael. 2006. Is Democracy Good for the Poor? American Journal of Political Science 50, 4: 860–74.Google Scholar
Schumacher, Gijs, and Vis, Barbara. 2009. Party Organization, Electoral Competition, and Reform of Welfare State Generosity in Oecd Countries, 1973–2002. Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto, September 3–6.Google Scholar
Siegle, Joseph T., Weinstein, Michael W., and Halperin, Morton H.. 2004. Why Democracies Excel. Foreign Affairs 36, 5: 575–601.Google Scholar
Sondrol, Paul C. 2007. Paraguay: a Semi-Authoritarian Regime? Armed Forces and Society 34, 1: 46–66.Google Scholar
Trylesinski, Fanny. 2007. Encuesta nacional de hogares ampliada. Informe temático: los uruguayos y la salud. Montevideo: INE. Google Scholar
Turner, Brian. 2004. State Reform and Anti-Neoliberal Rhetoric in Paraguay. In MACLAS Latin American Essays, Vol. 18. New Brunswick: Middle Atlantic Council of Latin American Studies. 20–37.Google Scholar
Ultima Hora (Asunción). 2011. Modificaciones a ley de Caja Fiscal agravan situación. October 2.Google Scholar
Uruguay. Administración Nacional de Educación Pública (ANEP). 2005. Panorama de la educación en el Uruguay. Una década de transformaciones, 1992–2004. Montevideo: ANEP. Google Scholar
Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). 2011. Encuesta continua de hogares (ECH). Montevideo: INE. Google Scholar
Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). Various years. Uruguay en cifras: salud. Montevideo: INE. Google Scholar
Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). Various years. Uruguay en cifras. Cuadros: cotizantes al sistema de seguridad social. Montevideo: INE. Google Scholar