In Brazil, the first experiences and ideas about participatory democracy originated within the left, in the mid-1970s. Initially, there was a predominance of a more demanding position, based on the concept of “participation as emancipation”. Over time, however, this meaning was progressively attenuated, until reaching a proposal for participation of a more consultative nature. The conclusion comes from the doctoral thesis of social scientist Ana Claudia Chaves Teixeira, defended at the Institute of Philosophy and Human Sciences (IFCH) at Unicamp. The work, which was supervised by professor Luciana Tatagiba, was awarded the 2014 Capes Thesis Prize in the area of ​​Social Sciences.

According to Ana Claudia, the thesis sought to analyze the different forms of participation in society, in addition to that provided by voting. “The idea of ​​participatory democracy that I worked with is very broad and includes several mechanisms, such as plebiscites, referendums, councils, conferences, etc. The focus of the thesis is on the institutional channels of participation that were created over a period of 35 years, and which, despite being recognized by law and widely disseminated, are still little known by the general population”, she explains. The three and a half decades to which the researcher refers are between 1975 and 2010.

In the thesis, the social scientist divided this broad period into three smaller periods, each of them marked by a predominant vision of participation. An important point to note is that Ana Claudia proposes an analysis around the social imaginary built on the topic, with the aim of understanding why certain participatory models prevailed over others. “My concern was not to point out which models worked and which failed, but rather to understand how this imaginary, built within the left, served to implement some participatory experiences”, she explains.

According to the author of the thesis, studying the social imaginary is important because it is possible to understand how far the horizons go, that is, it allows us to identify how far people would like to go with their choices. “Imaginary, idealization or utopia ultimately serve to move individuals or groups”, she explains. Thus, initially, which lasted from 1975 to 1990, the predominant participatory model was based on the idea of ​​emancipation. In other words, supporters of this thought believed that participation would generate emancipation and, as a consequence, allow the construction of a new society.

This conception, notes the author of the thesis, was strongly inspired by the method developed by educator Paulo Freire, notably in the experience of adult education. Freire argued that everyone possesses knowledge and that education would be a strong instrument of transformation. “Small participatory experiences based on this model emerged in different parts of the country, through activities developed by base ecclesiastical communities [CEBs], PT base groups, neighborhood associations, workers committees and other organizations. At that moment, these experiences were quite fragmented”, says Ana Claudia.

The great laboratory for the actions carried out during the period, says the researcher, was the health sector, which contributed decisively to the institutionalization of several other public policies in later periods. One example was the work carried out by a group of public health doctors in the city of Montes Claros, in Minas Gerais. Professionals collaborated to create health councils, bodies through which the population could discuss and decide on the formulation of public policies for the sector. “The experience helped test the assumption that it wasn’t just doctors and nurses who understood health. The population also had knowledge in this field, mainly because they knew their needs better than anyone else”, points out the author of the thesis.

Also in São Paulo, in the same period, popular health councils took shape, initially implemented in neighborhoods located in the East Zone of the city. The idea was similar to that tried in Montes Claros. “These actions helped to consolidate the proposal to create a single health system with popular participation. In 1990, the law that established the SUS was enacted”, he notes. The first phase paved the way, so to speak, for a second moment of the experience of participatory democracy, carried out between 1990 and 2002.

This, according to the researcher, was mainly marked by the idea of ​​participation with deliberation. On the one hand, from the SUS, health councils were created at the municipal, state and federal levels. According to legislation, in all these instances, society's participation would have a deliberative character, although this did not always occur in practice. “In the thesis, I do not go into whether the system has worked or not, as I work with the imaginary dimension, with the desired world”, reaffirms Ana Claudia. Also noteworthy during this period were the experiences of the Participatory Budget, which was implemented in some Brazilian municipalities and later “exported” as an example of good municipal management practices. Through this mechanism, the public budget was discussed and, by decision of the population, part of it was applied to areas considered priorities.

The third and final period analyzed by the researcher goes from 2003 to 2010 and coincides with the eight years of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's government. “During this period, the emphasis on participation was much more related to what I classified as 'listening'. An important aspect that emerged at this stage was the multiplication of spaces. Several councils were created, such as those for the elderly, youth, LGBT, etc. In this way, the number of voices was expanded and new perspectives for participation were opened. Furthermore, new conferences were also defined, which contributed to the recognition of new subjects”, details the social scientist.

However, the deliberative character of these spaces has been diminished. Ana Claudia's interpretation of this experience is that the PT in the federal government had to deal, on the one hand, with social movements. These, obviously, needed to have their agendas covered to some extent. Thus, channels of dialogue and listening were opened. But, on the other hand, to guarantee governability, the government had to form alliances with different parties. “Because of the alliances to govern and pressure from lobbies from different sectors of society, the government was unable to transform all the demands of social movements into public policies. The result was that some requests were met and others were not. It is in this sense that I consider that participation in this period was based on listening, as the spaces stopped being deliberative and took on a markedly consultative character”.

Ana Claudia is keen to point out that the fact that the forms of participation have undergone transformations – and to a large extent have been attenuated – over the years does not mean that the demands contained in the first two models have completely disappeared. “On the contrary, the ideas of emancipation and deliberation continue to be present today, but they are no longer predominant”, she explains. The social scientist did not consider in her thesis the current period, marked by the government of President Dilma Rousseff, nor the demonstrations of June 2013. The researcher does not rule out that we may be experimenting with a fourth model of participation, but understands that this eventual new imaginary about participation can only be better analyzed in the future.

Ana Claudia notes, however, that proposals to hold a plebiscite or referendum to carry out political reform are in full discussion. Another important point under debate is the National Social Participation Policy (PNPS), whose decree signed by President Dilma Rousseff was recently overturned by the Chamber of Deputies on the grounds that it had “Bolivarian” inspiration, and that it would be an authoritarian way of passing over Congress. The Legislature, according to Ana Claudia, ignored that these participatory spaces already exist, and even a large part of them are regulated by law.

The president of the Senate, Renan Calheiros (PMDB-AL), went so far as to say that the matter would also be rejected by the House, for the same reasons. “The decree has nothing like that. The text only proposes organizing spaces, regulating public hearings and establishing certain flows between councils, conferences, etc. Because of the election, however, opposing arguments prevailed, even as a way of delegitimizing the president. The result, unfortunately, was the decree being overturned by the Chamber”, considers the researcher.

According to the social scientist, if on the one hand there is, these days, pressure for greater participation by society in decisions about Brazil's destiny, and the demonstrations in June 2013 are evidence of this, on the other hand the country has a Very conservative National Congress and little permeable to this popular contribution. “From the point of view of the political system, we live in an even worse situation than in the recent past”, points out the researcher, who used academic articles and texts written by left-wing activists, among others, as primary sources for her work. 

Part of the thesis was developed at Brown University, in the United States, where the researcher completed a sandwich doctorate. Regarding the fact that the research received the Capes Thesis Prize, Ana Claudia said she was initially surprised and then happy. “I was happy at Unicamp, which gave me all the conditions to study and where I did all my higher education. I was also very pleased to see a field of study still under construction in the social sciences, and little understood by society, have this type of recognition by academia”.

Publication

Thesis: “Beyond the vote: a narrative about participatory democracy in Brazil (1975-2010)”
Author: Ana Claudia Chaves Teixeira
Advisor: Luciana Tatagiba
Unity: Institute of Philosophy and Human Sciences (IFCH)