Administração e finanças públicas

Transnational Municipal Networks (TMNs) are increasing in size, scope and number on the global arena. They reflect a tendency for city governments to coordinate environmental action through networked forms of governance. In this article, we argue that a new generation of TMNs has entered the global scene to help cities steer their efforts to handle environmental issues. In contrast to the characteristics of older TMNs as public, inclusive, and self-governed, new-generation TMNs are influenced by private actors, they are exclusive, and employ enforcement mechanisms to secure the fulfilment of network goals. To underline the diversity of TMNs and thus better understand urban networked governance, we present a case study of the 100 Resilient Cities initiative covering its conduct in 2013–2019. Looking at its actor composition and membership terms, we identify a hybrid nature different from the one described in earlier literature on European TMNs primarily. This subscription to a hybrid form of governance calls for a larger discussion on the implications of this shift in governance type and on the extent to which hybridisation implies a shift of power from the public to the private sphere.

In this article we explore the idea of public accountability in the contemporary entrepreneurial governance of cities, which are influenced by market dependency and private sector involvement. We specifically focus on the fragmentation of public accountability through hybrid contractual landscapes of governance, in which the public and private sector actors interactively produce a diversity of instruments to ensure performance in service. This is in sharp contrast to the traditional vague norms and values appealed to by urban planning institutions, to safeguard the public interest. We argue that within these complex contractual governance environments public accountability is produced by public and private sector actors, through highly diverse sets of contractual relations and diverse control instruments that define responsibilities of diverse actors who are involved in a project within a market-dependent planning and policy making environment, which contains context-specific characteristics set by the specific rules of public-private collaboration. These complexities mean public accountability has become fragmented and largely reduced to performance control. Moreover, our understanding of contractual urban governance remains vague and unclear due to very limited empirical studies focusing on the actual technologies of contractual urban development. By deciphering the complex hybrid landscapes of contractual governance, with comparative empirical evidence from The Netherlands, UK and Brazil, we demonstrate how public accountability is assuming a more ‘contractual’ and unpredictable meaning in policy and plan implementation process.

Studies of financialization have highlighted how politics, particularly through the state, drives the increasing entanglement of financial actors and rationales in the production of urban space. This article shifts the angle to consider the challenges that uncertain politics pose for such entanglement. Looking beyond techno-calculative practices, it explores how finance works politically to sustain value extraction within fragmented regulatory landscapes. It does so through historical and ethnographic analysis of financial investment in urban water and sanitation provision in Brazil, drawing on fieldwork, interviews, and a new dataset on public-private contracts to interrogate how private water companies navigate politico-regulatory relations under financial investors like private equity. It shows that while these providers were quite engaged in local politics under their original owners (construction groups), under financial investors they sought to “escape” it by curbing ties to public officials, reducing the autonomy of local subsidiaries, and successfully lobbying for national standards on regulatory norms. It argues these centralizing efforts constituted forms of centripetal politics meant to enhance asset monitoring, increase regulatory legibility, and reduce political uncertainty. The findings illuminate how financial investors work across political scales to navigate political risk and sustain financial value, thus problematizing the conventional analytical focus on how finance capitalizes on local forms of entrepreneurial politics. Crucially, they reveal the need to treat institutional environments not simply as filters for financial investment but as objects of political contestation by financial actors. This allows for blurring the boundaries between finance and politics, and for politicizing finance.

Existing studies about the politics of southern cities, particularly Latin American cities, need to pay more attention to the political institutions behind urban governance. These institutions, additionally, were not created by design but are a product of intertwined historical processes. This article analyzes the main features and transformations of Latin American local governments, their politics, and governance, looked at from the angle of their historical formation. Mobilizing arguments from urban studies and political science usually developed apart, I start with the legacies of two intertwined historical processes—urbanization(s) and state formation(s)—to later observe their recent transformations since the recent return(s) to democracy. The reconstruction of these intertwined historical trajectories and of the effects of the present democratic period help to jointly explain the most important features of the politics of local governments in Latin America that influence their governance and actions—capacities, political grammars, actors, and coalitions—as well as their recent transformations.

Why do local governments produce redistributive urban policies, particularly in cities of the Global South? Present debates oscillate between highlighting these cities’ governmental problems or sustaining the enabling role of institutionalized social participation. From the standpoint of São Paulo, Brazil, this article shows a different picture. The trajectories of 27 redistributive urban programs follow a conflictive and incremental expansion and diversification of redistributive policies through time. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) techniques indicate that program creation usually happened in left-wing administrations. Most of them were maintained after government swings, although at lower pace, due mainly to the pressure of political competition, but also on account of multi-level politics and policy routinization. Even previously discontinued programs tended to reemerge later, due to the embeddedness of civil society actors in policy communities and multi-level politics. Therefore, trajectories were explained by a combination of partisan politics and median voter mechanisms with policy production processes and actors.

This article analyzes urban governance innovations in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, focusing on the role of these innovations within the wider political management strategy of the executive leader. These innovations, all of which utilize digital information and communication technologies, are important elements within a leadership and management strategy. The article explores the role of digital innovations within the broader strategy of the mayor’s use of managerial tools as means to strengthen control of the city’s governance. Though presented as an apolitical management style of “what works,” this form of management is also deployed to enforce contentious political decisions with substantial implications for the social fabric of the city. This article offers an analysis of the political role and implications of urban governance and public service innovations that are often presented and analyzed in purely instrumental and apolitical ways.

With globalization, the largest cities in the world have been growing in economic importance. And their local powers have often been enhanced as a result of decentralization reforms over the past two decades. In this context, cities—and particularly their mayors—have been reaching out to other cities and jurisdictions to pursue a variety of goals. One term for this process is “paradiplomacy,” but most of the literature on the subject gives little attention to the local political dynamics behind these initiatives. In this article, we explore these local dynamics through a comparison of two major cities, Toronto, Canada, and São Paulo, Brazil. The cases show that external initiatives, both in scope and direction, vary according to the political strategies of the elected mayors. These strategies are strongly affected by the local context and by the political logic of mayoral leadership.

O artigo discute o potencial de Brasília se inserir na rede mundial de cidades, considerando sua peculiar dinâmica socioeconômica. Consolida-se aqui, 54 anos após sua inauguração, uma cidade que vive constantes processos de mudança, mas que ainda se acha atrelada ao setor público, esfera que lhe dá sua identidade. A assimetria que se observa entre, de um lado, uma cidade racional que se rebate num desenho modernista e, de outro, uma cidade que cresce nas suas periferias de forma anárquica, reproduzindo modelos das demais cidades brasileiras, evidenciam uma estrutura social com enormes graus de desigualdade e de diferenciação. A dinâmica populacional do Distrito Federal e entorno ultrapassa cada vez mais as determinações e os estímulos oriundos do setor público, concentrados no seu Plano Piloto. Ao contextualizá-la na lógica contemporânea das cidades “globais”, na tentativa de diversificar a fonte de investimentos, Brasília procura oferecer vantagens comparativas frente a outras metrópoles que com ela concorrem. Nesse sentido, o artigo defende que a capital vive hoje uma etapa original na sua evolução, mesmo se a incompatibilidade aparente entre sua função política, que de certa forma restringe suas potencialidades, e as forças de mercado, a levam a modificar sua natureza original.