POSTS

Institutional Presidency in Latin America

Research Questions
The goal of this project is to analyze the development of the institutional Presidency (IP) in Latin America after the processes of re-democratization in the 1980s. The institutional Presidency (Moe 1993; 1994), also known as the core executive (Peters et al 2000), refers to the bulk of agencies that directly support the chief of the executive in his/her governing tasks. The IP evolution is characterized by the functional differentiation and professionalization of the administrative structures directly supporting the president. Over the last decades the Latin American IP has undergone an extraordinary change and growth, but its features remain understudied. Our research aims, first, to analyze the change and evolution of IP structures in the region; second, to explore what factors account for explaining differences across countries and along years in such evolution; third, to assess to what extent presidents use those structures as a strategic tools to improve their informational, administrative and control capacities, particularly in dealing with their cabinets and the institutional environment in which they act.

Contribution to Comparative Research
For a long time, a history of democratic and institutional instability in Latin America connected the study of presidentialism to the survival of presidential regimes (Linz 1990). However, after decades of democratic rule in the region, presidential scholars have become more concerned with themes that also interest their US counterparts, such as those dealing with managerial issues of governance. This more recent literature on presidentialism, particularly that which focuses on coalition experiences, sheds light on the “executive toolbox” that is available to the different heads of state for building legislative majorities (Raile, Pereira and Power 2011). Our analysis highlights a specific tool herein that previous studies have not yet explored: the strategic redesign of the bureaucratic structures of the presidential office, undertaken by the president. It suggests that presidents can use the making of structural changes in their office as a tool with which to manage their relations with the wider political environment in general, and with the cabinet in particular. These changes are resources that the president can use to complement or substitute other tools, such as agenda-setting power, pork-barrel, and ministerial nominations.

Research Design and Methods
Empirically, the study deals with both the size of the IP and with its internal complexity. We systematically collect data and compare them in different countries using statistical tools. The dataset “Institutional Presidency in Latin America 1984-2014” (PRILA) includes variables on presidential agencies, presidential cabinets, ministerial coalitions, legislative coalitions, political parties, economic indicators, presidential popularity, presidential resignations, among others. The selected sample of Latin American countries accounts for coalition (Brazil, Chile, Colombia), single-party (Argentina, Mexico), and mixed governments (Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay). Through case-studies, the project in turn analyses the impact of determinate types of presidential designs on presidential performance (particularly, on foreign policy design and implementation). A further goal in this new research stage is to set the basis for a cross-regional analysis on the development of the presidential institution.

Preliminary Results
Our comparative study has highlighted that the type of presidential government (single-party or coalition) is one of the most relevant factors explaining cross-country variation and changes in the presidential organization. Under coalition presidentialism presidents must share cabinet positions, negotiate, and manage relations with coalition partners in the cabinet, which constitutes an incentive for the development of a more complex IP. A further explanatory factors with great impact is the nature of the presidential agenda: the implementation of neoliberal policies in the 1990s also appeared as an incentive to grow a presidential centre.

This article presents the views of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the PEX-Network Editors.

Magna Inácio
Is an associate professor at the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. She is currently carrying out research on presidents and presidencies with focus on the dynamics of multiparty cabinets and their impact on executive–legislative relations and the internal organization of the Executive branch. Her research interests include coalition governments, the institutional presidency, the executive branch, and legislatures in Brazil and Latin America. She has co-edited the books “Legislativo Brasileiro em Perspectiva comparada” (with Lucio Rennó);” Elites Parlamentares na América Latina (with F.Anastasia, A.Mateos and M.Mendes) and published articles in several journals, such as Journal of Politics in Latin America; Brazilian Political Science Review; and America Latina Hoy.
Mariana Llanos
Is a Lead Research Fellow at the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies in Hamburg, Germany. Her research focuses on comparative political institutions in Latin America, particularly, on the countries of the Southern Cone. She has published numerous journal articles and book chapters on presidentialism, as well as on legislative, judicial, and presidential politics. She is the author of Privatization and Democracy in Argentina (Palgrave, 2002) and co-editor of several books, such as Presidential Breakdowns in Latin America (with L. Marsteintredet, Palgrave, 2010). Her most recent research interest concerns the development of the institutional presidency in Latin America. She is currently the Secretary General of the Latin American Association of Political Science.
Carolina Guerrero Valencia
Is a research fellow at the German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA) and PhD candidate at the University of Hamburg, Germany. Her dissertation analyzes the institution and political behavior of the First Ladies in Latin America. Her research interests focus on comparative politics, elites, formal and informal institutions, and women in politics.
Royce Carroll
Royce Carroll is Professor in Comparative Politics at the University of Essex. His research focuses on democratic institutions and the role of representation in the policy-making process, particularly legislative politics, political parties, coalitions, and ideology. His recent research focuses on political parties and the spatial analysis of preferences and ideology.