Carla Tomazini

Purpose-Focusing on the conditional cash transfers (CCTs) first created and implemented in Brazil and Mexico, this article takes a new look at the factors facilitating the creation of these innovative policies. In order to shed light on the continuous struggles that are faced when pioneering, formulating and adopting these antipoverty policies, the authors analyze three types of ambiguities: axiological, partisan and electoral. Design/methodology/approach-Based on a gradual institutional change approach within the advocacy coalition framework, the authors conduct a qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews, official public administration archives and newspapers. Findings-This article demonstrates that advocacy coalitions (for human capital, basic income and food security) and the quest for electoral gains are viable contexts for exploring the complex processes involved in setting up CCTs, of which Brazil's Bolsa-Fam ılia and Mexico's Progresa-Oportunidades-Prospera (POP) provide emblematic examples. Originality/value-The findings contribute to comparative social policy research and institutional change analysis. The coalitions and ambiguous consensuses studied here expand the perspectives with a more detailed understanding of the chaotic processes involved in developing social policies.

FROM COALITIONS TO AMBIGUOUS POLITICAL CONSENSUS. THE ORIGIN STORY OF BASIC INCOME IN BRAZIL Ambiguity has now become an indispensable element to understand how consensus-building mechanisms facilitate the adoption of public policies. Increasingly used in analyses of public action, the concept of « ambiguous consensus » can nevertheless lose some of its analytical value when it cuts across opposing categories (first alliances and agreements, for instance, and then oppositions and profound disagreements). If ambiguity is not reduced to the mere transcendence of partisan differences, what does it reveal about the uniqueness of partisan dynamics ? And how do « politics » contribute to the consensus-building required for policies to ultimately be adopted ? Through an analysis of how basic income programs were developed in Brazil in the 1990s, we shall argue that « consensual ambiguity » operates at three different levels : at an axiological level, at the level of partisan differences, and at the level of electoral strategies. This article will look at the complex process of implementing basic income programs in Brazil, including the famous Bolsa Família set up in 2004.

Ambiguity has now become an indispensable element to understand how consensus-building mechanisms facilitate the adoption of public policies. Increasingly used in analyses of public action, the concept of “ambiguous consensus” can nevertheless lose some of its analytical value when it cuts across opposing categories (first alliances and agreements, for instance, and then oppositions and profound disagreements). If ambiguity is not reduced to the mere transcendence of partisan differences, what does it reveal about the uniqueness of partisan dynamics? And how do “politics” contribute to the consensus-building required for policies to ultimately be adopted? Through an analysis of how basic income programs were developed in Brazil in the 1990s, we shall argue that “consensual ambiguity” operates at three different levels: at an axiological level, at the level of partisan differences, and at the level of electoral strategies. This article will look at the complex process of implementing basic income programs in Brazil, including the famous Bolsa Família set up in 2004.

How and to what extent do international financial institutions (IFI) drive public policy? More specifically, what role do the Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank play in formulating the anti-poverty programs known as Conditional Cash Transfer Programs (CCTP) in Brazil and Mexico? The present article seeks to examine the “cognitive role” played by these organizations as well as to qualify two widespread theories according to which agendas are imposed by IFI and there are clear-cut lines of demarcation separating national and international actors. This study reveals that international financial institutions have joined a coalition of national and international actors defending the cause of human capital. Further, it shows that, in order to dodge criticism, anticipate the controversies that might arise in public opinion and ensure that reforms, once adopted, remain in place, this pro-human capital coalition has embraced several strategies seeking to underscore the irreducibl...

How do new social policies emerge? The literature on developed countries has put forth important assumptions about changes in welfare policies, particularly building on the work of Esping-Andersen. However, discussion of social protection policies in middle-income countries underscores that rising policy innovations derive mostly from exogenous dimensions (external ideas and factors). In examining Mexico's Oportunidades and Brazil's Bolsa Família, one main question is addressed: What causal mechanisms underlie the rise of policy innovations that are not derived from exogenous dimensions? This article proposes moving beyond the argument in which international influence versus domestic politics are in opposition, and it suggests instead to compare empirical cases in different contexts, specifically by exploring the process of endogenous institutional changes using the example of conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs. By exploring recent theoretical contributions to institutional changes, the article identifies two critical aspects: (1) the rise of a dominant advocacy coalition favoring an ideology that promotes human capital as a key factor in the formation of national CCT programs in Brazil and Mexico; and (2) advocacy coalitions achieve similar results in terms of institutional changes in Brazil and Mexico, despite having different strategies and patterns of change.

Resumo O objetivo desse artigo é apresentar um quadro geral das análises cognitivas e normativas especialmente de trabalhos europeus e francófonos. O argumento principal desses trabalhos, é que políticas públicas não se resumem aos interesses dos atores ou aos contextos e arranjos institucionais. Desse modo, nos concentra-mos nas teorias e noções mais "otimistas" quanto às ideias, considerando que essas possuem efeitos indepen-dentes e impactos significativos no desenvolvimento de políticas públicas. Este artigo se organiza em cinco seções. Na primeira delas, busco sistematizar algumas clarificações sobre as variáveis "ideias". Na segunda, indico alguns dos motivos pelos quais as análises cognitivas são abundantes nos contextos europeus e espe-cialmente nas análises de políticas públicas na França. A terceira se dedica à retraçar em linhas gerais uma das mais influentes noções analíticas que estruturou o campo francês de pesquisa de políticas públicas e segue influenciando o debate atual: a noção de referencial. Na quarta seção, tratamos de retraçar as propostas de aproximações de entre três abordagens que lidam com categorias de análises próximas: referencial de Jobert e Muller (1987), coalizão de defesa de Sabatier e Jenkins-Smith (1993, 1999) e paradigma de Hall (1993). Por fim, apresento de maneira reduzida um outro tipo de abordagem-os instrumentos de políticas públi-cas-que também tem se mostrado bastante profícua, indicando algumas pistas para agendas de pesquisas. Palavras-Chave: políticas públicas, análises cognitivas, instrumentos, referencial, modelos teóricos.

Abstract
The aim of this article is to present a general framework of cognitive and normative analyses, especially European and French ones. The main point of these works is that public policies do not boil down to the interests of actors or the contexts and institutional arrangements. Thus, we focus on the theories and concepts that are more "optimistic" about ideas, considering they have independent effects and significant impact on the development of public policies. The article is organized in five sections. First, we attempt to clarify the variable "ideas". In the second section, we point out some of the reasons why cognitive analyses are abundant in European contexts and particularly in France. The third section retraces one of the most influential notions that has structured the field of public policy research in France/French-speaking countries: the notion of the référentiel. In the fourth section, we consider one proposition to bring together three approaches that deal with analogous categories of analysis: the référentiel (Jobert and Muller 1987), the advocacy coalition framework (Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1993, 1999) and the paradigm (Hall 1993). Finally, we present the instruments of public policy-which also has proven to be a fruitful approach-and we indicate some possible paths for future research.

L'article interroge la manière dont le Bolsa Família a pu contribuer à la crise institu-tionnelle aboutissant à la destitution de Dilma Rousseff en 2016. L'hypothèse retenue est qu'à travers deux mécanismes-la politisation et la polarisation-, le Bolsa Família est devenu un ferment de déstabilisation sous le gouvernement Lula, gagnant en importance au cours du gouvernement Rousseff, jusqu'à devenir son talon d' Achille. En s'appuyant sur les travaux de Paul Pierson, l'article entend montrer que le Bolsa Família a fragilisé la présidente, en étant progressivement associé à un cadre d'interprétation disqualifiant le Parti des travailleurs et les ambitions qui sous-tendent la redistribution des ressources par l'État. Mots-clés Brésil-destitution de Dilma Rousseff-polarisation-politisation-Bolsa Família Between polarization and politicization: Bolsa Família, the Achilles' Heel of Dilma Rousseff? Abstract The article examines how the Bolsa Família contributed to the institutional crisis leading to the impeachment of the president Dilma Rousseff in 2016. T

Bolsa Família Entre polarização e politização: Bolsa Família, calcanhar de Aquiles de Dilma Rousseff?

Resumo
Esse artigo discute a maneira como o Bolsa Família participa da crise institucional que levou a destituição da Presidente Dilma Rousseff em 2016. A hipótese é que, por meio de dois mecanismos – politização e polarização – o Bolsa Família tornou-se um fermento de desestabilização sob o governo Lula, ganhando importância durante o governo Rousseff, até se tornar seu calcanhar de Aquiles. Baseado no trabalho de Paul Pierson, o artigo pretende mostrar que o Bolsa Família foi gradualmente associado a uma estrutura de interpretação que desqualifica o Partido dos Trabalhadores e as am-bições que estão na base da redistribuição de recursos pelo Estado.

O objetivo deste artigo e fornecer uma analise sobre o lugar e o papel das “ideias” na formulacao dos programas de transferencias monetarias condicionadas no Brasil e no Mexico. Trata-se de, acrescentando uma dimensao comparativa, destacar os fatores que podem explicar a origem, ascensao e desacordos de ideias que estao por tras desses programas. Esses fatores sao explorados a luz das teorias sobre o processo de elaboracao de politicas publicas que ressaltam o papel das coalizoes de causa. Assim, o instrumento “transferencia monetaria” parece ser objeto de um consenso. Mas devemos acrescentar que este e um consenso ambiguo, porque os atores envolvidos estao de acordo sobre os meios, e nao sobre os objetivos. Embora o objetivo de aumentar o capital humano seja predominante, os programas Bolsa-Familia e Oportunidades tornaram-se um grande emaranhado de ideias, sem um acordo sobre os objetivos e principios.

The aim of this article is to provide an analysis of the place and role of “ideas” in the formulation of conditional
cash transfer programs in Brazil and Mexico by adding a comparative dimension and highlighting the factors that can
explain the origin and rise of as well as the disagreements between the ideas that are behind these programs. Thus,
the instrument “cash transfer” seems to be the object of a consensus. However, we must add that this is an ambiguous
consensus, as the factors involved agree on the means but not on the goals. Although the goal of increasing human
capital is predominant, Bolsa-Família and Oportunidades programs have become a tangle of ideas, lacking in agreement
on objectives and principles.


O objetivo deste artigo é fornecer uma análise sobre o lugar e o papel das “ideias” na formulação dos programas de
transferências monetárias condicionadas no Brasil e no México. Trata-se de, acrescentando uma dimensão comparativa,
destacar os fatores que podem explicar a origem, ascensão e desacordos de ideias que estão por trás desses programas.
Esses fatores são explorados à luz das teorias sobre o processo de elaboração de políticas públicas que ressaltam o
papel das coalizões de causa. Assim, o instrumento “transferência monetária” parece ser objeto de um consenso. Mas  devemos acrescentar que este é um consenso ambíguo, porque os atores envolvidos estão de acordo sobre os meios, e
não sobre os objetivos. Embora o objetivo de aumentar o capital humano seja predominante, os programas Bolsa-Família
e Oportunidades tornaram-se um grande emaranhado de ideias, sem um acordo sobre os objetivos e princípios.

Resumo O artigo examina o processo de concepção e o progressivo abandono do Programa Fome Zero (PFZ) como principal linha estratégica para as ações do governo federal entre 2003 e 2004. O objetivo é analisar as ideias que estruturam essa política de segurança alimentar e levantar hipóteses sobre sua crise e sobre o redirecionamento para a unificação dos programas de transferência de renda que desembocou na criação do Programa Bolsa Família. A metodologia de pesquisa consiste na análise de dados qualitativos primários (entrevistas semiestruturadas com formuladores do programa) e dados secundários (matérias de jornais, publicações produzidas por pesquisadores especialistas no assunto e trabalhos analíticos sobre o PFZ). O arcabouço teórico utilizado é o de análise de políticas públicas pós-positivista e cognitivista. Após examinar como se deu o processo de formação do paradigma de segurança alimentar no plano internacional e nacional, foram levantadas hipóteses explicativas referentes à crise do PFZ: arranjos institucionais prévios, confronto entre paradigmas, perda de influência da coalizão “segurança alimentar” e a complexidade programática do programa. Argumenta-se que o programa representa um elemento importante para se compreender não somente o jogo político e os problemas gerenciais enfrentados pelo governo recém estabelecido à época, mas a disputa de ideias e de paradigmas travada entre atores e coalizões que buscaram influenciar o combate à fome e à pobreza no primeiro mandato do governo Lula.

Ambiguity has now become an indispensable element to understand how consensus-building mechanisms facilitate the adoption of public policies. Increasingly used in analyses of public action, the concept of “ambiguous consensus” can nevertheless lose some of its analytical value when it cuts across opposing categories (first alliances and agreements, for instance, and then oppositions and profound disagreements). If ambiguity is not reduced to the mere transcendence of partisan differences, what does it reveal about the uniqueness of partisan dynamics? And how do “politics” contribute to the consensus-building required for policies to ultimately be adopted? Through an analysis of how basic income programs were developed in Brazil in the 1990s, we shall argue that “consensual ambiguity” operates at three different levels: at an axiological level, at the level of partisan differences, and at the level of electoral strategies. This article will look at the complex process of implementing basic income programs in Brazil, including the famous Bolsa Família set up in 2004.

Les annees 1990 ont vu naitre de nouvelles politiques sociales, les « transferts monetaires conditionnels » : allocations attribuees aux familles pauvres a condition qu’elles incitent leurs enfants a poursuivre leur scolarite ou qu’elles les conduisent dans les centres de sante, avec pour objectif de reduire la pauvrete et d’assurer un meilleur avenir aux « pauvres » de demain. Avec leur developpement, ces politiques ont cree un nouveau champ de protection sociale, dont les principes et les manieres de faire s’eloignent du fonctionnement traditionnel de l’assistance. Ces politiques ont fait leur apparition au Bresil et au Mexique dans les annees 1990. L’analyse de leur genese met en evidence une structuration progressive, marquee par des contextes institutionnels et des trajectoires distincts qui se soldent neanmoins par des resultats semblables. Comment expliquer ce parallelisme ? L’objectif de cette etude a consiste a degager une ou plusieurs variables permettant d’expliquer l’emergence et l’expansion des programmes de transferts monetaires conditionnels dans ces pays et a mettre en evidence la maniere dont l’evolution de ces politiques a pu susciter des oppositions plus ou moins fortes de la part de certains acteurs, ainsi que les contraintes institutionnelles auxquelles ces politiques se sont confrontees. On peut observer la structuration de groupes defendant des causes diverses autour de ces politiques, et qui ont determine largement leur elaboration et mise en oeuvre, rentrant tantot en concurrence tantot en alliance. C’est, notamment, la coalition dominante « pro-capital humain » qui entend definir et encadrer l’ensemble des politiques menees. L’apport de cette recherche est donc de nuancer l’idee d’une reforme consensuelle des politiques de lutte contre la pauvrete au Mexique et au Bresil, sans pour autant nier l’ampleur des transformations intervenues. Il en resulte que le changement institutionnel au Bresil s’est opere par l'ajout de nouveaux dispositifs aux institutions existantes ; et au Mexique, en premiere instance, le processus de changement et de consolidation de la politique de transfert monetaire s’est produit sous la forme d'un deplacement et, par la suite, afin de maintenir le statu quo, les acteurs defenseurs des institutions ont modifie de facon marginale le programme pour maintenir leurs interets. Les instruments monetaires qui visent a lutter contre la pauvrete sont, en effet, l’objet d’un consensus ambigu, plusieurs acteurs issus de differentes coalitions finissant par le revendiquer. Enfin, la variable interet, necessaire a differents moments, s’est constituee comme une variable essentielle pour comprendre la permanence de ces politiques par l’intermediaire des phenomenes de verrouillage.

Progresa/Oportunidades/Prospera 1 en México y Bolsa Escola/Bolsa Família en Brasil fueron unos programas pioneros sobre transferencias condicionales de efectivo (CCTs en inglés) en América latina, y continúan siendo hoy en día los más importantes y más conocidos programas de asistencia social de la región. Su aparición fue influenciada por la crítica de actores reformistas sobre las ineficiencias y distorsiones de programas de asistencia social previos. Dichos actores recalcaron la necesidad de alejarse de algunas prácticas anti pobreza clientelisticas —especialmente de ''first ladyism 2 ''—, así como también de eliminar escándalos políticos que envolviesen programas de asistencia social. A pesar de que los CCTs parecen haber alcanzado un estatus consensuado dentro de la región, implementados tanto por gobiernos de derechas como de izquierdas, las variaciones en su diseño reflejan distintas visiones acerca de sus propósitos. Tal consenso es, además, ambiguo, dado que las metas y objetivos detrás de estas políticas pueden variar, particularmente con respecto a las tensiones potenciales entre objetivos a largo plazo sobre acumulación de capital humano y los objetivos a corto plazo sobre mitigación y alivio de la pobreza de forma inmediata. Así, moviéndonos más allá de este aparente consenso y de la discusión estéril sobre el programa ''paternity'' , resulta importante comprender cómo surgieron estos nuevos programas y qué conjunto de ideas los respaldaron. Desde los años noventa, muchos actores han tratado de influir en su diseño. En contraste con muchos de los estudios sobre la difusión de CCTs en la región, que suelen centrarse solo en dimensiones exógenas y diseminaciones transnacionales, cualquier estudio sobre los CCTs de Brasil y México debería subrayar la endogeneidad de este proceso de construcción de instituciones...

failed due to industry opposition, mandatory wheat flour fortification boosted the financial viability of a failing monopoly industry. It benefited the economically powerful flour milling industry, protected the newly deregulated Indonesian wheat market from cheaper imports, and legitimised corporations as nutritional ‘experts’ alongside scientists and government officials. Paradoxically, smart foods are also criticised for their dubious safety, low nutritional content and cultural inappropriateness. Interviews with mothers suggest that the growing ‘scientization of motherhood’ (pp. 112–113) has changed the cultural meanings of baby food by equating good mothering with the rationalised (and fortified) solutions offered by so-called medical experts. Poor women trying to feed their children are side-lined from decision making, and the resulting devaluation of women’s own feeding practices has real consequences for women’s everyday lives and nutritional outcomes. Low-cost, nutritionally adequate fortified baby foods are highly corporatised, aggressively marketed and have gained strong public endorsement, but are not affordable for the majority of poor mothers. Combined with the devaluation of breastfeeding, this raises doubts about their actual contribution to health outcomes. Similarly, golden rice – a genetically modified, high-yielding rice variety with fortified beta-carotene (Vitamin A) content – is charged with a ‘gap between the utopian vision and the disappointing reality’ (p. 153). Besides concerns about bioavailability and inefficiency of its actual vitamin A content, the social and cultural life of rice has made the technology culturally inappropriate. The anti-GM movement, nutritional experts and the agricultural biotechnology industry reject golden rice on the basis of concerns over health and environmental impacts, corporate control and lack of fit with national development priorities (such as food self-sufficiency). But critique is difficult in light of the benevolent discourse attached to it by nutritionism. By bringing together insights from agrifood political economy, feminist food studies and science and technology studies, Hidden Hunger highlights the downside of nutritionism’s tendency to reduce food problems to a scientific or technical definition. Although Kimura draws on fieldwork with women only in one empirical chapter, the gendered political economy approach provides a useful framework for observing ‘the construction of priorities that privilege productivity over justice’ (p. 64). It is a shame that this gendered lens is not repeated throughout the other empirical chapters. Overall, the book provides a cautionary tale to the international development community: nutritionism as a discourse and policy directive has very real potential to divert attention away from the deeper social and political problems that underpin food insecurity, hunger and poverty. In Indonesia, while ‘smart food’ technologies have emerged as a particularly good fit with neo-liberal market-led development strategies, and are an ideal way to involve the corporate sector in public–private partnerships, it was the ‘experts’ from government, universities, international donor organisations and the food industry who pushed for fortification rather than ordinary citizens. The potential for ‘charismatic nutrients’ and ‘hidden hunger’ discourse to obscure other significant development concerns is therefore high. Issues related to the root causes of hunger, access to and affordability of food, obesity and over-nutrition, the negative consequences of new technologies, nutritional education, corporatisation, and the inclusion/exclusion of grassroots food movements in the debate tend to ‘slip away from the policy discussion’ (p. 163). By broadening connections beyond science and technology studies, Kimura’s book will be of interest to scholars in fields as broad-ranging as anthropology, feminist/women’s studies, governance, food politics and agriculture.

"En Amérique latine, les programmes de transferts monétaires conditionnels (PTMC) Progresa/Oportunidades/Prospera du Mexique et Bolsa Escola/Bolsa Família du Brésil ont été pionniers en leur genre et demeurent les programmes d'assistance sociale les plus vastes et réputés de la région. Leur émergence a été influencée par les critiques formulées par des acteurs soucieux de réformer les programmes d'assistance sociale de l'époque afin d’en corriger les lacunes et les distorsions. Ces acteurs ont souligné la nécessité de renoncer à des pratiques clientélistes de lutte contre la pauvreté, en particulier". (...)

"O Progresa-Oportunidades-Prospera no México e o Bolsa Escola-Bolsa Família no Brasil foram os pioneiros em programas de transferências condicionadas de renda (PTC) na América Latina e continuam sendo os dois maiores e mais bem conhecidos programas de assistência social na região. Sua emergência foi influenciada pelas críticas de atores reformistas a respeito das ineficiências e distorções de programas de assistência social anteriores. As críticas enfatizaram a necessidade de eliminar algumas práticas clientelistas na luta contra a pobreza – especialmente o "primeiro damismo" – e escândalos políticos envolvendo programas de assistência social". (...)

Progresa/Oportunidades/Prospera 1 en México y Bolsa Escola/Bolsa Família en Brasil fueron unos programas pioneros sobre transferencias condicionales de efectivo (CCTs en inglés) en América latina, y continúan siendo hoy en día los más importantes y más conocidos programas de asistencia social de la región. Su aparición fue influenciada por la crítica de actores reformistas sobre las ineficiencias y distorsiones de programas de asistencia social previos. Dichos actores recalcaron la necesidad de alejarse de algunas prácticas anti pobreza clientelisticas —especialmente de ''first ladyism 2 ''—, así como también de eliminar escándalos políticos que envolviesen programas de asistencia social. A pesar de que los CCTs parecen haber alcanzado un estatus consensuado dentro de la región, implementados tanto por gobiernos de derechas como de izquierdas, las variaciones en su diseño reflejan distintas visiones acerca de sus propósitos. Tal consenso es, además, ambiguo, dado que las metas y objetivos detrás de estas políticas pueden variar, particularmente con respecto a las tensiones potenciales entre objetivos a largo plazo sobre acumulación de capital humano y los objetivos a corto plazo sobre mitigación y alivio de la pobreza de forma inmediata. Así, moviéndonos más allá de este aparente consenso y de la discusión estéril sobre el programa ''paternity'' , resulta importante comprender cómo surgieron estos nuevos programas y qué conjunto de ideas los respaldaron. Desde los años noventa, muchos actores han tratado de influir en su diseño. En contraste con muchos de los estudios sobre la difusión de CCTs en la región, que suelen centrarse solo en dimensiones exógenas y diseminaciones transnacionales, cualquier estudio sobre los CCTs de Brasil y México debería subrayar la endogeneidad de este proceso de construcción de instituciones...

Nas últimas duas décadas, um campo de pesquisa sobre o papel das idéias na formulação dos interesses e estratégias dos atores (cf. Hansenteufel e Andy, 2002) tem se consolidado na análise de políticas públicas. As abordagens cognitivas podem ser relevantes para os estudos de caso latino- americanos na medida em que consideram a formulação e implementação de políticas públicas de uma forma diferente: não simplesmente como uma resolução de problemas, mas como um componente da relação entre política e a construção da ordem social (Muller, 2000). Partindo de três dos principais conceitos dessas abordagens: paradigma (Hall, 1993, Surel 1995, 1997), referencial (Muller e Jobert, 1987) e Advocacy Coalition Framework (Sabatier e Jenkins-Smith, 1993, 1999), essa comunicação pretende verificar, através do levantamento de estudos de casos, como estes conceitos têm sido testados na região. Nesse sentido, procura-se verificar se as abordagens cognitivas, ao trazer variáveis tais como conhecimento, idéias, representações e crenças da ação pública, podem se mostrar, em certos casos, relevantes como referencial analítico ao estudo de políticas públicas na América latina.

Alors que les études portant sur les politiques publiques ont longtemps été dominées en Amérique Latine par des travaux d'économistes ou relevant de différents courants sociologiques, ces dernières années ont vu le développement de recherches plus directement inspirées par la science politique et l'analyse classique des politiques publiques. Ce mouvement est sans doute lié pour partie à un certain nombre de réformes emblématiques liées aux alternances gouvernementales ou à l'émergence d'enjeux d'action publique massifs. On peut citer en exemple la réforme des retraites (notamment le laboratoire chilien), les innovations institutionnelles modifiant les processus de décision dominées par le budget participatif (en particulier celui de Porto Alegre au Brésil) ou encore les programmes de lutte contre la pauvreté. Mais ce développement académique ne s'est pas seulement fait par une forme de demande d'intelligibilité liée à des controverses sociales et politiques fortement publicisées ; il a été nourri également par un rapprochement progressif avec la production internationale, d'abord par le biais de la sociologie de l'Etat et de l'administration (Collier et Collier 1991; Geddes 1994; M. Grindle 1986), puis par une inscription progressive dans les débats de l'analyse des politiques publiques. Dans les différentes communautés académiques latino-américaines, l'analyse des politiques publiques est ainsi devenue un sous-champ disciplinaire à part entière, très prolifique ces dernières années, grâce à la mobilisation et à l'appropriation critique de différents modèles analytiques utiles à la compréhension de l'action publique. Elle bénéficie également désormais d'une plus forte assise institutionnelle. Ainsi, les formations en administration publique et en gestion de politiques publiques se sont récemment multipliées, en s'inspirant largement d'institutions comme la Kennedy School of Gouvernement de l'université Harvard ou comme le programme de Goberna-America Latina (Escuela de Politica y Alto Gobierno) de l'Institut universitaire espagnol Ortega y Gasset (G. Fontaine 2015). Même si ces évolutions restent parfois fragiles, dépendantes des aléas politiques et économiques, elles n'en témoignent pas moins d'une institutionnalisation et d'une légitimation, décrites précisément par Pierre Favre comme certaines des conditions nécessaires à l'existence d'une discipline. Cette trajectoire académique particulière explique aussi certains traits permanents de la discipline dans le contexte latino-américain avec une forte pluridisciplinarité et une série de focales empiriques privilégiées. Le premier trait évoqué, la pluridisciplinarité, n'est en soi pas original à l'Amérique latine, tant l'analyse des politiques publiques a été pensée dès l'origine comme une « discipline-carrefour » empruntant son lexique analytique et ses protocoles méthodologiques à d'autres sciences sociales. Peter de Léon, analysant les traits permanents de la discipline (DeLeon 2008), insistait justement sur ce point en rappelant notamment que Lasswell (Lasswell 1968), souvent décrit comme l'un des pères fondateurs des « Policy Sciences », considérait que la complexité de ses objets nécessitait de mobiliser et d'associer les