La reforma de los Regímenes de Bienestar en Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, Brasil y Uruguay

  1. Manuel Sánchez de Dios 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Journal:
Política y sociedad

ISSN: 1130-8001,  1988-3129

Year of publication: 2015

Volume: 52

Issue: 3

Pages: 661-690

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/REV_POSO.2015.V52.N3.45377 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Política y sociedad

Abstract

The aim of this article is to analyze the social policy in Latin America in a context of emerging welfare states. To understand the changes one takes into consideration the theories about institutional reform and the transformations produced in the XX century and the beginning of the XXI to substitute a social security regime mainly based on segmentation of benefits and on programs to fight poverty by another with an institutional and redistributive nature. The paper pays attention in particular to the path of the most developed welfare states of Latin America: Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, Brasil y Uruguay

Bibliographic References

  • Barahona, M. , L. Güendel, y C. Castro (2007): “Social Policy and Social Reform “Costa Rican Style”: A Paradigmatic Case of Heterodoxy in the Context of a Peripheral Economy”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp. 327-277.
  • Barbeito, A. y L. Goldberg (2007): “Social Policy and Economic Regime in Argentina: Crisis and Retrenchment of Social Protection”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp.187-216.
  • Bonino, M., H. Kwon y A. Dutrey (2007): “Uruguay’s Social and Economic Challenges and Its Policy Responses”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp. 217-238.
  • Buchelli, M. et al. (2006): “El Acceso a la Jubilación o Pensión en Uruguay: ¿Cuántos y Quiénes lo Lograrían?”, Documentos de Trabajo 2006/01, Dpto. de Economía de la Fac. de CC. Sociales de la República de Uruguay.
  • Carrera, M. y R. Muñoz de Bustillo (2009): “El reto de la pobreza y la desigualdad en America Latina”, Sistema, 208-209, pp.73-95.
  • Carrera, M. y J.I. Antón (2008): “Las relaciones entre equidad y crecimiento y la nueva agenda para América Latina”, América Latina Hoy, 48, pp. 43-66.
  • CEPAL (2012): Panorama social de América Latina, Santiago de Chile, Naciones Unidas.
  • Draibe, S. (2007): “The Brazilian Developmental Welfare State: Rise and Perspectives”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp. 239- 281.
  • Draibe, S. y M. Riesco (2007): “Latin America: Modernizing and the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp. 21-116.
  • Eriksson, L. (2011): Rational Choice Theory. Potential and Limits, Londres, Palgrave and Macmillan.
  • Espina, A. (2008): “Modernización, estadios de desarrollo económico y regímenes de bienestar en América latina”, Documento de trabajo 28, Madrid, Fundación Carolina- CeALCI.
  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990): The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
  • Filgueira, F. (2007): “Cohesión, riesgo y arquitectura de protección social en América Latina”, Políticas sociales 135, CEPAL/Naciones Unidas.
  • Gough, I. et al. (2004): Insecurity and Welfare Regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America: Social Policy in Development Contexts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  • Gough, I. y G. Therborn (2010): “The Global Future of Welfare States”, en Francis Castles et al., The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 703-720.
  • Hall, P. A. (2012): “Historical Institutionalism in Rationalist and Sociological Perspective”, en James Mahoney y Kathleen Thelen (eds.), Explaining Institutional Change. Ambiguity, Agency and Power, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 204-224.
  • Hindmoor, A. (2006): Rational Choice, Londres, Palgrave.
  • Huber, E. (1998): “Options for Social Policy in Latin America: Neoliberal versus Social Democratic Models”, en Gosta Esping-Andersen (ed.), Welfare States in Transition, Londres, SAGE, pp. 141-192.
  • Huber, E. y J. Bogliaccini (2010): “Latin America”, en Francis Castles et al., The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 644-655.
  • Huber, E. y J.D. Stephens (2012): Democracy and the Left. Social Policy and Inequality in Latin America, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
  • Illanes, M.A. y M. Riesco (2007): “Developmentalism and Social Change in Chile”, en Manuel Riesco (ed.), Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD, pp. 378- 424.
  • Kurtz, M.J. (2002): “Uderstanding the Third World Welfare State after Neoliberalism”, Comparative Politics, 34 (3), pp. 293-313.
  • Levitsky, S. y M.V. Murillo (2008): “Argentina: from Kirchner to Kirchner”, Journal of Democracy, 19, pp.16-30.
  • Mahoney, J. y K. Thelen (2012): “A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change”, en James
  • Mahoney y Katheleen Thelen (eds.): Explaining Institutional Change. Ambiguity, Agency and Power, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-37.
  • Martinez Franzoni, J. (2007): “Regímenes del bienestar en América latina”, Documento de trabajo 11, Madrid, Fundación Carolina-CeALCI.
  • Milanovic, B. y R. Muñoz de Bustillo (2008): La desigualdad de la distribución de la renta en América Latina: situación, evolución y factores explicativos”, América Latina Hoy, 48, pp.15-42.
  • North, D.C. (1990): Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  • Mesa-Lago, C. (1983): “Social security and extreme poverty in Latin America”, Journal of Development Economics, 12, pp. 83-110.
  • Mesa-Lago, C. (2008): “Un reto de Iberoamérica en el siglo XXI: la extensión de la cobertura de la seguridad social”, América latina Hoy, 48, pp. 67-81.
  • Ostrom, E. (1995): “New Horizons in Institutional Analysis” , American Political Science Review, 89 (1), pp. 174-178.
  • Pierson, P. (2000): “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics”, American Political Science Review, 94 (2), pp. 251-267.
  • Pribble, J. (2013): Welfare and Party Politics in Latin America, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  • Riesco, M. (ed.) (2007): Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?, Londres, Palgrave, UNRISD.
  • Riesco, M. (2009): “Latin America. A New Developmental Welfare State Model in the Making?”, International Journal of Social Welfare, 18, pp. 22-36.
  • Sánchez de Dios, M. (2001): “Estudio comparado de path dependence del Estado de bienestar en los casos de USA Suecia y España”, Revista de Estudios Políticos, 12, pp. 95-128.
  • Sánchez de Dios, M. (2013): Política comparada, Madrid, Síntesis.
  • Shepsle, K.A. (2008): “Rational Choice Institutionalism”, en R.A.W. Rhodes, Sarah Binder y Bert A. Rockman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 23-38.
Data source: Dialnet