|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
153862
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Brazil's engagement in international development cooperation (IDC) is not new; however, governmental funding and interest in this agenda have grown since the adoption of the 1988 constitution, particularly during the mandates of the two Workers' Party (PT) presidents. Brazil's IDC refers to a broad range of practices including educational, scientific, financial, humanitarian and technical cooperation; in this article, we focus on Brazil's educational cooperation. Theoretically, the main argument advanced is that Brazil's official engagement in IDC can be considered as an expression of a ‘graduation dilemma’, the main concept around which this special themed section of the journal is organized. Historically, this article focuses on the period between 2003 and 2014, beginning with Lula da Silva's inauguration in his first presidential mandate and ending in the last year of Dilma Rousseff's first mandate. Empirically, we deal with the following questions: what is Brazil's contribution in the field of international development cooperation (IDC), particularly in respect of educational cooperation (IDC/ED)? And what are the norms and criteria driving Brazil's decisions in this field? This article is divided into three main sections: first, an overview of Brazil's IDC; second, a discussion of Brazilian IDC in the field of education; and third, a review of Brazil's educational cooperation with Portuguese-speaking African (PALOP) countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
153543
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Starting from the perspective that foreign policy is a public policy, this article discusses the conceptual and political implications of the new configuration of Brazilian foreign policy. Therefore, we abandon its automatic association with the cruder versions of realism and bring it to the field of politics, thus recognizing that its formulation and implementation fall into the dynamics of governmental choices which, in turn, stem from negotiations within coalitions, bargaining, disputes, and agreements between representatives of diverse interests. As a result, we remove foreign policy from a condition linked to inertial and supposedly self-evident and/or permanent national interests (which would be protected from injunctions of cyclical nature related to partisan politics) and undress it of features generally attributed to so-called state policies. Finally, we suggest ways for an innovative research agenda on the role of diplomatic agency, political institutions, and nonstate actors in Brazil’s foreign policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|