|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
153859
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Only in the mid-1990s did Brazil join the world-wide trend of states having diaspora engagement policies, and implemented specific programmes to address the needs and claims of its citizens abroad. In contrast to other Latin American countries, it did so following a low-visibility, technical approach led by consular offices, including very cautious attempts to organize emigrants and regulate their gradual access to migration policy-making. It also tied these outreach efforts to the building up of a global role in international affairs. This article analyses the politics and impact of these processes on foreign policy management, with special emphasis on the implications of these changes in terms of adapting policy instruments to a new notion of citizenship beyond borders and innovative techniques to manage populations abroad. It also investigates these issues in one major destination for Brazilians abroad: London, where Brazilians have lately become the largest Latin American community, but have faced serious obstacles to improving their resources for organization and mobilization. The findings suggest some discrepancies and tensions among officials' views and between policy design and actual results, thus illustrating a gap between foreign policy goals and implementation capacity at both the global and local levels. Thus, regarding the practice of foreign policy-making, the article provides novel information about recent institutional changes in state bureaucracies and the uncertainties and uneven impact of policy implementation. It also casts some doubts on Brazil's overall capacity to carry out a global strategy in this realm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
153856
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Brazil attracted international attention in the early 2000s as a promising emerging market, a rising power with increasing international leverage, and a key player (potentially, a leader) in international organizations and blocs. High expectations were set in the largest Latin American country, partly encouraged by the popularity of the then president, ‘Lula’ da Silva, who fostered international activism and longstanding regional and global ambitions. At the same time, as Soares de Lima and Hirst argue,1 efforts both to acquire greater international influence and to improve the country's record on poverty, inequality and political participation became facets of the same process. International expectations remained very high at the beginning of the current decade. However, the global economic crisis, shortcomings in the multilateral system, the falling of global commodity prices, slow national economic growth, corruption scandals, and social protests during Dilma Rousseff's interrupted administration (2011–2016) have cast serious doubts on those initial very positive forecasts.2 To date, it is not clear whether Brazil has been able to reconcile domestic practice and international foreign policy discourse and ambitions in difficult times; or, more concretely, whether and how, despite domestic instability and contestation, Brazil is currently able to effectively influence international negotiations and global governance mechanisms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
106197
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study explores when, why, and how the Ecuadorian state has implemented programs and policies aimed at reaching out to its nationals living abroad. The evidence shows an increasing activism on the part of the state that has intensified under Rafael Correa's administration and acquired some innovative traits; it has also translated into foreign policy actions that have placed Ecuador in a leadership role in the Andean region. The timing, motivation, and nature of those transnational policies do not exactly fit the assumptions and typologies of existing literature on the subject. The characteristics of this case, as well as some contradictions and tensions in policy content and implementation, are better explained by domestic political factors such as the nature and internal dynamics of the coalition in government, the political discourse that helped to sell and give shape to Correa's political project, and the serious institutional instability and fragility in which an ambitious new reform of the state has been launched.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|