{"id":{"repo_id":"fu-berlin","oai_identifier":"oai:refubium.fu-berlin.de:fub188/13568"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/fu-berlin/oai:refubium.fu-berlin.de:fub188/13568","repository":{"repo_id":"fu-berlin","name":"Freie Universität Berlin","base_url":"https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Brazilian Federalism as Polity, Politics and Beyond","abstract":"Many studies about federalism entirely focus on federalism as a polity, considering it as a static system of institutional rules and normative settings. William Rieker, the founding father of federalism, even thought in 1969 that “Federalism is at most an intervening and relatively unimportant variable”. Yet, it is without doubt that the institutional set-up of federalism plays an important role for the outcome of a policy. The common vision about federalism as an institutional set-up considers federalism seldom as a dynamic system of political relationships and networks. A focus on the political process leading to policy outcomes in federalism, as well as how the political interactions or politics are intertwined with federal institutions, will provide a much more comprehensive explanation about how policy outcomes are achieved. This is precisely what this dissertation is about. The main argument is that federalism needs a much more political reading to understand the policy outcomes it generates; federalism is much more than an institutional arrangement or a polity. Using the empirical case of Brazil and its northeastern states Ceará and Pernambuco for two, most-similar case studies in primary education, it is assumed that the way in which federal institutions form education policy and quality is greatly determined by political relations and networks of various actors conditioned by this federal framework. Presupposing an intertwining (and not separation in) of polity and politics-factors in federalism, the main hypothesis of this dissertation assumes that different quality outcomes in primary education (as measured by students’ performance) exist even in similar states in Brazil because the country’s federal framework does not exclude that political relationships have constraining or enabling effects on institutions. The dissertation investigates in seven chapters why and how different education quality is delivered in both cases, comparing how educational initiatives of both states in the time-frame 1995-2010 strengthened or weekend Brazil’s “collaborative” federal framework in education policy. The studied cases of the federal states of Ceará and Pernambuco show how each one responds to the challenges of a federal framework that is not sufficient to provide education quality in a universal way as proclaimed by the Brazilian Constitution. Depending on the specific context, the framework gives too much leeway to political actors (hereby including not only politicians and civil society organizations, but also employees of the public administration and state and municipal governments as such), opening many spaces for formal, informal and other types of behaviors lying in between. Both empirical cases reveal a different composition of political and institutional factors that explain educational outcomes and how these came about. At the same time, they reveal how closely intertwined institutional and political factors are, and that these can often not be thought independently from each other, contrary to what much research on federalism proposes.","abstract_html":"Many studies about federalism entirely focus on federalism as a polity, considering it as a static system of institutional rules and normative settings. William Rieker, the founding father of federalism, even thought in 1969 that “Federalism is at most an intervening and relatively unimportant variable”. Yet, it is without doubt that the institutional set-up of federalism plays an important role for the outcome of a policy. The common vision about federalism as an institutional set-up considers federalism seldom as a dynamic system of political relationships and networks. A focus on the political process leading to policy outcomes in federalism, as well as how the political interactions or politics are intertwined with federal institutions, will provide a much more comprehensive explanation about how policy outcomes are achieved. This is precisely what this dissertation is about. The main argument is that federalism needs a much more political reading to understand the policy outcomes it generates; federalism is much more than an institutional arrangement or a polity. Using the empirical case of Brazil and its northeastern states Ceará and Pernambuco for two, most-similar case studies in primary education, it is assumed that the way in which federal institutions form education policy and quality is greatly determined by political relations and networks of various actors conditioned by this federal framework. Presupposing an intertwining (and not separation in) of polity and politics-factors in federalism, the main hypothesis of this dissertation assumes that different quality outcomes in primary education (as measured by students’ performance) exist even in similar states in Brazil because the country’s federal framework does not exclude that political relationships have constraining or enabling effects on institutions. The dissertation investigates in seven chapters why and how different education quality is delivered in both cases, comparing how educational initiatives of both states in the time-frame 1995-2010 strengthened or weekend Brazil’s “collaborative” federal framework in education policy. The studied cases of the federal states of Ceará and Pernambuco show how each one responds to the challenges of a federal framework that is not sufficient to provide education quality in a universal way as proclaimed by the Brazilian Constitution. Depending on the specific context, the framework gives too much leeway to political actors (hereby including not only politicians and civil society organizations, but also employees of the public administration and state and municipal governments as such), opening many spaces for formal, informal and other types of behaviors lying in between. Both empirical cases reveal a different composition of political and institutional factors that explain educational outcomes and how these came about. At the same time, they reveal how closely intertwined institutional and political factors are, and that these can often not be thought independently from each other, contrary to what much research on federalism proposes.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Boekle-Giuffrida, Bettina"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013","date_published":"2013","updated_at":"2026-08-21T16:44:52Z","subjects":["Federalism","subnational politics","Brazil","education quality","polity","politics, education policy","Latin America"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-17766"],"render_values":[{"text":"http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-17766","href":"http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-17766","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/13568","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"source_record":{"url":"https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/oai/request?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=dim&identifier=oai%3Arefubium.fu-berlin.de%3Afub188%2F13568","prefix":"dim"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Boekle-Giuffrida, Bettina"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2013"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["doc-type:doctoralThesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Federalism","subnational politics","Brazil","education quality","polity","politics, education policy","Latin America"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/13568","http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-17766"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN ENGLISH 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN GERMAN 14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 18 1\\. INTRODUCTION 19 1.1 Main Argument and Relevance of Dissertation 19 1.2 Existing Research Gaps and Contribution of this Dissertation 26 1.3 Chosen Country, Case Studies and Methodology 30 1.4 Presentation of Thesis Structure 32 2\\. THEORETICAL ORIENTATION 35 2.1 The Role of Institutions in General 35 2.2 The Study of Federalism 41 2.1.1 Riker’s Federalism and the Need to Look Beyond 41 2.1.2 Associating Federalism with the Discourse of Decentralization 44 2.1.3 Assumed Continuum and Dichotomies in Federalism 46 2.1.4 Federalism as a System of Political and Bargaining Relations 48 2.1.5 Interim Summary and Policy Implications 53 2.2 Actors, Networks and Clientelism in Federalism 54 2.2.1 The Relationship Between Institutions and Actors 54 2.2.2 Networks and Social Capital Theory 56 2.2.3 Networks and Clientelism 60 2.3 Informal Institutions, Social Practices and Networks 62 2.4 Accountability and Institutionally Envisioned Policy Outcomes 64 2.5 The Politics of Federalism and Education Policy: Groups of Actors 67 2.5.1 Federal, State and Municipal Bureaucracies 68 2.5.2 Parties 69 2.5.3 Civil Society Groups: Influence from Teachers' unions (and Parents) 72 2.6 Chapter Summary: Advocating for a Three-level Reading of Federalism 74 3\\. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 78 3.1 Most Comparative Case Study Design 78 3.2 Stages of Comparison 81 3.3 Reasoning for Selected Cases (Ceará and Pernambuco) 81 3.3.1 Socioeconomic Criteria 81 3.3.2 Education Criteria: Quality 82 3.4 Reasoning for Chosen Time Frame 84 3.5 The Combination of Quantitative and Qualitative Data 86 3.6 Collection of Material 87 3.6.1 Quantitative and Qualitative Data Collection 87 3.6.2 Sequence and Timing of Three Field Stages 88 3.6.3 Interview Guides and Their Use 89 3.7 Analysis of Material from Semi-Structured Expert Interviews 90 3.7.1 Analysis After Interviews 91 3.7.2 Analysis After Transcription According to Principles of Grounded Theory 91 4\\. BRAZILIAN EDUCATION QUALITY AND POWER RELATIONS IN A FEDERAL SYSTEM 94 4.1 Past and Current Challenges of Brazil’s Primary Education 95 4.1.1 A History of Unequal Distribution of Education 95 4.1.2 Progress Starting in the Mid-1990s 99 4.2 Legal Milestones and Implications: Constitution, National Education Law and FUNDEF 101 4.2.1 Political and Administrative Decentralization 101 4.2.2 Fiscal Decentralization 103 4.3 Interim Summary 108 4.4 Education Finances Today 110 4.5 Beyond Constitutional Transfers 112 4.5.1 Budget Amendments and Voluntary Transfers 112 4.5.2 Voluntary Transfers 113 4.6 Institutional and Political Factors of Federalism Determining Education Quality 113 4.7 Implications of and Alternatives to the Current Federal Arrangement 116 4.8 Central Actors and Their Interactions in the Primary Education System 120 4.8.1 Influence from the Federal Level 120 4.8.2 Influences from the State Level 126 4.8.3 Municipal Governments 129 4.8.4 Education Councils 132 4.8.5 Interactions with Nongovernmental and Private Sector-led Initiatives 134 4.8.6 Teachers' unions 136 4.9 Chapter Summary 138 5\\. POLICY AND POLITICS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN CEARÁ 142 5.1 Fiscal Income and Education Spending at State and Municipal Levels 143 5.2 Constitutional Education Funds: FUNDEF and Salário Educação 144 5.3 Beyond Constitutional Funds 146 5.3.1 Volunteer Transfers 146 5.3.2 Budget Amendments 147 5.4 Institutional Policies to Benefit the Quality of Primary Education 148 5.4.1 Coverage and Quality 148 5.4.2 The Long-lasting Impact of Jereissati’s Mudança (Change) Government in 1987 151 5.4.3 Ceará’s Education Sector Under Jereissati II: 1995–2002 153 5.4.4 Education Policy After 2002: Coping with the Post-Decentralization Reforms 155 5.5 Interim Summary 159 5.6 Political Networks in Ceará’s Education Sector 160 5.6.1 Political Competition and Party Networks with National Party Level 160 5.6.2 Networks and Interactions with Teachers' Unions 162 5.7 Polity-Enabling Policy Outcomes 165 5.7.1 Accountability During Policy Implementation 165 5.7.2 Information,Ttransparency and Availability of Statistics 169 5.8 Chapter Summary 170 6\\. POLICY AND POLITICS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN PERNAMBUCO 174 6.1 Fiscal Income and Education Spending at the State and Municipal Levels 174 6.2 Constitutional Education Funds: FUNDEF and Salário Educação 176 6.3 Beyond Constitutional Funds 177 6.3.1 Volunteer Transfers 177 6.3.2 Budget Amendments 178 6.4 Institutional Policies to Benefit the Quality of Primary Education 180 6.4.1 Coverage and Quality 180 6.4.2 Miguel Arraes’ Democratic Start 182 6.4.3 Pernambuco’s Education Sector Under Arraes II, 1995–1998 185 6.4.4 Education Policy After 1998: Discontinuities and Coping with Post-Decentralization Reforms 187 6.5 Interim Summary 193 6.6 Political Networks in Pernambuco’s Education Sector 194 6.6.1 Political Competition and Party Networks with National Party Level 194 6.6.2 Networks and Interactions with Teachers' Unions 195 6.7 Polity-Constraining Policy Outcomes 199 6.7.1 Accountability During Policy Implementation 199 6.7.2 Information, Transparency, and Availability of Statistics 205 6.8 Chapter Summary 206 7\\. CONCLUSION: THEORETICAL AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 209 7.1 Presentation of Empirical Findings from Cases in Comparison 210 7.1.1 Education Quality in Ceará and Pernambuco 210 7.1.2 Formal and Informal EducationTtransfers in Ceará and Pernambuco 211 7.1.3 Difference in Institutional State Policies in Ceará and Pernambuco 213 7.1.4 Political Competition, Party Networks and Networks with Teachers' Unions 215 7.1.5 A Three-level Reading of Federalism in Ceará and Pernambuco 217 7.2 Relevance of Empirical Results for Theoretical Discussion 218 7.2.1 Relevance for the Debate on Federalism as a Polity and Politics Framework 218 7.3 Policy Implications 220 BIBLIOGRAPHY 221 ANNEX 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES DURING THREE DIFFERENT FIELD STAGES 235 ANNEX 2: INTERVIEW GUIDELINES OF SEMISTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS 241 ANNEX 3: SELECTED HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS FOR BRAZILIAN REGIONS 250 ANNEX 4.1: FISCAL FINANCES OF CEARÁ AND PERNAMBUCO 251 Annex 4.2: Formal Education Transfers in Ceará and Pernambuco 252 ANNEX 5: POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS CEARÁ, PERNAMBUCO, AND FEDERAL LEVEL 255 ANNEX 6: EXECUTED BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE EDUCATION SECTOR IN CEARÁ AND PERNAMBUCO, 1998–2010 257 ANNEX 6: CURRICULUM VITAE BETTINA BIRKLE-GIUFFRIDA 299"]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Many studies about federalism entirely focus on federalism as a polity, considering it as a static system of institutional rules and normative settings. William Rieker, the founding father of federalism, even thought in 1969 that “Federalism is at most an intervening and relatively unimportant variable”. Yet, it is without doubt that the institutional set-up of federalism plays an important role for the outcome of a policy. The common vision about federalism as an institutional set-up considers federalism seldom as a dynamic system of political relationships and networks. A focus on the political process leading to policy outcomes in federalism, as well as how the political interactions or politics are intertwined with federal institutions, will provide a much more comprehensive explanation about how policy outcomes are achieved. This is precisely what this dissertation is about. The main argument is that federalism needs a much more political reading to understand the policy outcomes it generates; federalism is much more than an institutional arrangement or a polity. Using the empirical case of Brazil and its northeastern states Ceará and Pernambuco for two, most-similar case studies in primary education, it is assumed that the way in which federal institutions form education policy and quality is greatly determined by political relations and networks of various actors conditioned by this federal framework. Presupposing an intertwining (and not separation in) of polity and politics-factors in federalism, the main hypothesis of this dissertation assumes that different quality outcomes in primary education (as measured by students’ performance) exist even in similar states in Brazil because the country’s federal framework does not exclude that political relationships have constraining or enabling effects on institutions. The dissertation investigates in seven chapters why and how different education quality is delivered in both cases, comparing how educational initiatives of both states in the time-frame 1995-2010 strengthened or weekend Brazil’s “collaborative” federal framework in education policy. The studied cases of the federal states of Ceará and Pernambuco show how each one responds to the challenges of a federal framework that is not sufficient to provide education quality in a universal way as proclaimed by the Brazilian Constitution. Depending on the specific context, the framework gives too much leeway to political actors (hereby including not only politicians and civil society organizations, but also employees of the public administration and state and municipal governments as such), opening many spaces for formal, informal and other types of behaviors lying in between. Both empirical cases reveal a different composition of political and institutional factors that explain educational outcomes and how these came about. At the same time, they reveal how closely intertwined institutional and political factors are, and that these can often not be thought independently from each other, contrary to what much research on federalism proposes.","Viele Föderalismusstudien definieren Föderalismus als Polity, und eher als ein statisches System institutioneller Regeln und normativer Einstellungen. William Rieker, der Gründungsvater der Föderalismustheorie, dachte sogar im Jahr 1969, dass “Föderalismus höchstens eine intervenierende, und relativ unwichtige Variable” sei. Jedoch ist es zweifelsohne, dass die institutionelle Struktur des Föderalismus eine wichtige Rolle für Politikergebnisse spielt. Diese gängige wissenschaftliche Meinung über Föderalismus als institutionelle Struktur (polity) verdeckt den Blick auf Föderalismus als ein dynamisches System der politischen Beziehungen und Netzwerke (politics). Den Blick aber auf den politischen Prozess zu richten, und zu untersuchen, was genau zu Politikergebnissen in föderalen Systemen führt, und wie politische Wechselwirkungen von Politics mit den Institutionen des Föderalismus verflochten sind, wird zu einer viel umfassenderen Erklärung darüber führen, wie Politikergebnisse zustande kommen. Das ist das Thema dieser Dissertation. Ihr Hauptargument ist, dass Föderalismus eine viel politischere Lesart braucht, um Politikergebnisse innerhalb eines föderalen Systems zu verstehen; Föderalismus ist viel mehr als ein institutionelles Arrangement oder eine Polity. Anhand des empirischen Falles Brasiliens und seiner nordöstlichen Bundesstaaten Ceará und Pernambuco wird mit einer most-similar Fallstudie argumentiert, dass die Art und Weise, wie föderale Institutionen Bildungspolitik- und qualität hervor bringen, stark von politischen Beziehungen und Netzwerken verschiedener Akteure abhängt. In dem vorausgesetzt wird, dass eine Verflechtung (und nicht Trennung in) von Politics- und Polity- Faktoren im Föderalismus stattfindet, ist folgende die zentrale Hypothese dieser Dissertation: Unterschiedliche Qualität von Bildungsergebnissen im Primarschulbereich (gemessen anhand von Schülerleistungen) innerhalb Brasiliens kommt auch unter ähnlichen Voraussetzungen vor, weil es die föderale Bundesrahmengesetzgebung nicht ausschlieβt, dass politische Beziehungen eine einschränkende oder stärkende Wirkung auf Institutionen haben. Die Dissertation untersucht in sieben Kapitel, warum und wie unterschiedliche Bildungsqualität in beiden Fällen entsteht, und inwieweit die Bildungsinitiativen beider Bundesstaaten im Zeitraum von 1995 bis 2010 das “kollaborative Regime” der brasilianischen Rahmengesetzgebung im Bildungsbereich stärkt oder schwächt. Die untersuchten Fälle der Bundesländer Ceará und Pernambuco zeigen, wie jedes einzelne Bundesland mit den Herausforderungen der unzureichenden brasilianischen Rahmengesetzgebung umgeht, um dem universalen Bildungsanspruch der brasilianischen Verfassung gerecht zu werden. Je nach dem spezifischen Kontext räumt der brasilianische Rechtsrahmen politischen Akteure zu viel Spielraum ein (dies betrifft nicht nur Politiker und zivilgesellschaftliche Organisationen, sondern auch Mitarbeiter der öffentlichen Verwaltung auf bundessstaatlicher und kommunaler Ebene). Er lässt auch zu viel Spielraum für formale, informelle und andere Arten von Verhaltensweisen Beide empirischen Fälle zeigen eine unterschiedliche Zusammensetzung der politischen und institutionellen Faktoren auf, und wie diese Bildungsqualität beeinflussen. Gleichzeitig zeigen beide Fälle auch, wie eng verflochten und voneinder nicht unabhängig institutionelle und politische Faktoren sind - entgegen gesetzt gängiger theoretischer Annahmen der Föderalismusforschung."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Brazilian Federalism as Polity, Politics and Beyond"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Boekle-Giuffrida, Bettina"],"dc:date.issued":["2013"],"dc:description":["EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN ENGLISH 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN GERMAN 14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 18 1\\. INTRODUCTION 19 1.1 Main Argument and Relevance of Dissertation 19 1.2 Existing Research Gaps and Contribution of this Dissertation 26 1.3 Chosen Country, Case Studies and Methodology 30 1.4 Presentation of Thesis Structure 32 2\\. THEORETICAL ORIENTATION 35 2.1 The Role of Institutions in General 35 2.2 The Study of Federalism 41 2.1.1 Riker’s Federalism and the Need to Look Beyond 41 2.1.2 Associating Federalism with the Discourse of Decentralization 44 2.1.3 Assumed Continuum and Dichotomies in Federalism 46 2.1.4 Federalism as a System of Political and Bargaining Relations 48 2.1.5 Interim Summary and Policy Implications 53 2.2 Actors, Networks and Clientelism in Federalism 54 2.2.1 The Relationship Between Institutions and Actors 54 2.2.2 Networks and Social Capital Theory 56 2.2.3 Networks and Clientelism 60 2.3 Informal Institutions, Social Practices and Networks 62 2.4 Accountability and Institutionally Envisioned Policy Outcomes 64 2.5 The Politics of Federalism and Education Policy: Groups of Actors 67 2.5.1 Federal, State and Municipal Bureaucracies 68 2.5.2 Parties 69 2.5.3 Civil Society Groups: Influence from Teachers' unions (and Parents) 72 2.6 Chapter Summary: Advocating for a Three-level Reading of Federalism 74 3\\. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 78 3.1 Most Comparative Case Study Design 78 3.2 Stages of Comparison 81 3.3 Reasoning for Selected Cases (Ceará and Pernambuco) 81 3.3.1 Socioeconomic Criteria 81 3.3.2 Education Criteria: Quality 82 3.4 Reasoning for Chosen Time Frame 84 3.5 The Combination of Quantitative and Qualitative Data 86 3.6 Collection of Material 87 3.6.1 Quantitative and Qualitative Data Collection 87 3.6.2 Sequence and Timing of Three Field Stages 88 3.6.3 Interview Guides and Their Use 89 3.7 Analysis of Material from Semi-Structured Expert Interviews 90 3.7.1 Analysis After Interviews 91 3.7.2 Analysis After Transcription According to Principles of Grounded Theory 91 4\\. BRAZILIAN EDUCATION QUALITY AND POWER RELATIONS IN A FEDERAL SYSTEM 94 4.1 Past and Current Challenges of Brazil’s Primary Education 95 4.1.1 A History of Unequal Distribution of Education 95 4.1.2 Progress Starting in the Mid-1990s 99 4.2 Legal Milestones and Implications: Constitution, National Education Law and FUNDEF 101 4.2.1 Political and Administrative Decentralization 101 4.2.2 Fiscal Decentralization 103 4.3 Interim Summary 108 4.4 Education Finances Today 110 4.5 Beyond Constitutional Transfers 112 4.5.1 Budget Amendments and Voluntary Transfers 112 4.5.2 Voluntary Transfers 113 4.6 Institutional and Political Factors of Federalism Determining Education Quality 113 4.7 Implications of and Alternatives to the Current Federal Arrangement 116 4.8 Central Actors and Their Interactions in the Primary Education System 120 4.8.1 Influence from the Federal Level 120 4.8.2 Influences from the State Level 126 4.8.3 Municipal Governments 129 4.8.4 Education Councils 132 4.8.5 Interactions with Nongovernmental and Private Sector-led Initiatives 134 4.8.6 Teachers' unions 136 4.9 Chapter Summary 138 5\\. POLICY AND POLITICS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN CEARÁ 142 5.1 Fiscal Income and Education Spending at State and Municipal Levels 143 5.2 Constitutional Education Funds: FUNDEF and Salário Educação 144 5.3 Beyond Constitutional Funds 146 5.3.1 Volunteer Transfers 146 5.3.2 Budget Amendments 147 5.4 Institutional Policies to Benefit the Quality of Primary Education 148 5.4.1 Coverage and Quality 148 5.4.2 The Long-lasting Impact of Jereissati’s Mudança (Change) Government in 1987 151 5.4.3 Ceará’s Education Sector Under Jereissati II: 1995–2002 153 5.4.4 Education Policy After 2002: Coping with the Post-Decentralization Reforms 155 5.5 Interim Summary 159 5.6 Political Networks in Ceará’s Education Sector 160 5.6.1 Political Competition and Party Networks with National Party Level 160 5.6.2 Networks and Interactions with Teachers' Unions 162 5.7 Polity-Enabling Policy Outcomes 165 5.7.1 Accountability During Policy Implementation 165 5.7.2 Information,Ttransparency and Availability of Statistics 169 5.8 Chapter Summary 170 6\\. POLICY AND POLITICS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN PERNAMBUCO 174 6.1 Fiscal Income and Education Spending at the State and Municipal Levels 174 6.2 Constitutional Education Funds: FUNDEF and Salário Educação 176 6.3 Beyond Constitutional Funds 177 6.3.1 Volunteer Transfers 177 6.3.2 Budget Amendments 178 6.4 Institutional Policies to Benefit the Quality of Primary Education 180 6.4.1 Coverage and Quality 180 6.4.2 Miguel Arraes’ Democratic Start 182 6.4.3 Pernambuco’s Education Sector Under Arraes II, 1995–1998 185 6.4.4 Education Policy After 1998: Discontinuities and Coping with Post-Decentralization Reforms 187 6.5 Interim Summary 193 6.6 Political Networks in Pernambuco’s Education Sector 194 6.6.1 Political Competition and Party Networks with National Party Level 194 6.6.2 Networks and Interactions with Teachers' Unions 195 6.7 Polity-Constraining Policy Outcomes 199 6.7.1 Accountability During Policy Implementation 199 6.7.2 Information, Transparency, and Availability of Statistics 205 6.8 Chapter Summary 206 7\\. CONCLUSION: THEORETICAL AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 209 7.1 Presentation of Empirical Findings from Cases in Comparison 210 7.1.1 Education Quality in Ceará and Pernambuco 210 7.1.2 Formal and Informal EducationTtransfers in Ceará and Pernambuco 211 7.1.3 Difference in Institutional State Policies in Ceará and Pernambuco 213 7.1.4 Political Competition, Party Networks and Networks with Teachers' Unions 215 7.1.5 A Three-level Reading of Federalism in Ceará and Pernambuco 217 7.2 Relevance of Empirical Results for Theoretical Discussion 218 7.2.1 Relevance for the Debate on Federalism as a Polity and Politics Framework 218 7.3 Policy Implications 220 BIBLIOGRAPHY 221 ANNEX 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES DURING THREE DIFFERENT FIELD STAGES 235 ANNEX 2: INTERVIEW GUIDELINES OF SEMISTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS 241 ANNEX 3: SELECTED HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS FOR BRAZILIAN REGIONS 250 ANNEX 4.1: FISCAL FINANCES OF CEARÁ AND PERNAMBUCO 251 Annex 4.2: Formal Education Transfers in Ceará and Pernambuco 252 ANNEX 5: POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS CEARÁ, PERNAMBUCO, AND FEDERAL LEVEL 255 ANNEX 6: EXECUTED BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE EDUCATION SECTOR IN CEARÁ AND PERNAMBUCO, 1998–2010 257 ANNEX 6: CURRICULUM VITAE BETTINA BIRKLE-GIUFFRIDA 299"],"dc:description.abstract":["Many studies about federalism entirely focus on federalism as a polity, considering it as a static system of institutional rules and normative settings. William Rieker, the founding father of federalism, even thought in 1969 that “Federalism is at most an intervening and relatively unimportant variable”. Yet, it is without doubt that the institutional set-up of federalism plays an important role for the outcome of a policy. The common vision about federalism as an institutional set-up considers federalism seldom as a dynamic system of political relationships and networks. A focus on the political process leading to policy outcomes in federalism, as well as how the political interactions or politics are intertwined with federal institutions, will provide a much more comprehensive explanation about how policy outcomes are achieved. This is precisely what this dissertation is about. The main argument is that federalism needs a much more political reading to understand the policy outcomes it generates; federalism is much more than an institutional arrangement or a polity. Using the empirical case of Brazil and its northeastern states Ceará and Pernambuco for two, most-similar case studies in primary education, it is assumed that the way in which federal institutions form education policy and quality is greatly determined by political relations and networks of various actors conditioned by this federal framework. Presupposing an intertwining (and not separation in) of polity and politics-factors in federalism, the main hypothesis of this dissertation assumes that different quality outcomes in primary education (as measured by students’ performance) exist even in similar states in Brazil because the country’s federal framework does not exclude that political relationships have constraining or enabling effects on institutions. The dissertation investigates in seven chapters why and how different education quality is delivered in both cases, comparing how educational initiatives of both states in the time-frame 1995-2010 strengthened or weekend Brazil’s “collaborative” federal framework in education policy. The studied cases of the federal states of Ceará and Pernambuco show how each one responds to the challenges of a federal framework that is not sufficient to provide education quality in a universal way as proclaimed by the Brazilian Constitution. Depending on the specific context, the framework gives too much leeway to political actors (hereby including not only politicians and civil society organizations, but also employees of the public administration and state and municipal governments as such), opening many spaces for formal, informal and other types of behaviors lying in between. Both empirical cases reveal a different composition of political and institutional factors that explain educational outcomes and how these came about. At the same time, they reveal how closely intertwined institutional and political factors are, and that these can often not be thought independently from each other, contrary to what much research on federalism proposes.","Viele Föderalismusstudien definieren Föderalismus als Polity, und eher als ein statisches System institutioneller Regeln und normativer Einstellungen. William Rieker, der Gründungsvater der Föderalismustheorie, dachte sogar im Jahr 1969, dass “Föderalismus höchstens eine intervenierende, und relativ unwichtige Variable” sei. Jedoch ist es zweifelsohne, dass die institutionelle Struktur des Föderalismus eine wichtige Rolle für Politikergebnisse spielt. Diese gängige wissenschaftliche Meinung über Föderalismus als institutionelle Struktur (polity) verdeckt den Blick auf Föderalismus als ein dynamisches System der politischen Beziehungen und Netzwerke (politics). Den Blick aber auf den politischen Prozess zu richten, und zu untersuchen, was genau zu Politikergebnissen in föderalen Systemen führt, und wie politische Wechselwirkungen von Politics mit den Institutionen des Föderalismus verflochten sind, wird zu einer viel umfassenderen Erklärung darüber führen, wie Politikergebnisse zustande kommen. Das ist das Thema dieser Dissertation. Ihr Hauptargument ist, dass Föderalismus eine viel politischere Lesart braucht, um Politikergebnisse innerhalb eines föderalen Systems zu verstehen; Föderalismus ist viel mehr als ein institutionelles Arrangement oder eine Polity. Anhand des empirischen Falles Brasiliens und seiner nordöstlichen Bundesstaaten Ceará und Pernambuco wird mit einer most-similar Fallstudie argumentiert, dass die Art und Weise, wie föderale Institutionen Bildungspolitik- und qualität hervor bringen, stark von politischen Beziehungen und Netzwerken verschiedener Akteure abhängt. In dem vorausgesetzt wird, dass eine Verflechtung (und nicht Trennung in) von Politics- und Polity- Faktoren im Föderalismus stattfindet, ist folgende die zentrale Hypothese dieser Dissertation: Unterschiedliche Qualität von Bildungsergebnissen im Primarschulbereich (gemessen anhand von Schülerleistungen) innerhalb Brasiliens kommt auch unter ähnlichen Voraussetzungen vor, weil es die föderale Bundesrahmengesetzgebung nicht ausschlieβt, dass politische Beziehungen eine einschränkende oder stärkende Wirkung auf Institutionen haben. Die Dissertation untersucht in sieben Kapitel, warum und wie unterschiedliche Bildungsqualität in beiden Fällen entsteht, und inwieweit die Bildungsinitiativen beider Bundesstaaten im Zeitraum von 1995 bis 2010 das “kollaborative Regime” der brasilianischen Rahmengesetzgebung im Bildungsbereich stärkt oder schwächt. Die untersuchten Fälle der Bundesländer Ceará und Pernambuco zeigen, wie jedes einzelne Bundesland mit den Herausforderungen der unzureichenden brasilianischen Rahmengesetzgebung umgeht, um dem universalen Bildungsanspruch der brasilianischen Verfassung gerecht zu werden. Je nach dem spezifischen Kontext räumt der brasilianische Rechtsrahmen politischen Akteure zu viel Spielraum ein (dies betrifft nicht nur Politiker und zivilgesellschaftliche Organisationen, sondern auch Mitarbeiter der öffentlichen Verwaltung auf bundessstaatlicher und kommunaler Ebene). Er lässt auch zu viel Spielraum für formale, informelle und andere Arten von Verhaltensweisen Beide empirischen Fälle zeigen eine unterschiedliche Zusammensetzung der politischen und institutionellen Faktoren auf, und wie diese Bildungsqualität beeinflussen. Gleichzeitig zeigen beide Fälle auch, wie eng verflochten und voneinder nicht unabhängig institutionelle und politische Faktoren sind - entgegen gesetzt gängiger theoretischer Annahmen der Föderalismusforschung."],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/13568","http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-17766"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen"],"dc:subject":["Federalism","subnational politics","Brazil","education quality","polity","politics, education policy","Latin America"],"dc:title":["Brazilian Federalism as Polity, Politics and Beyond"],"dc:type":["doc-type:doctoralThesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-08-21T16:44:52Z"}